12 mph is an odd speed to choose given legal e-bikes in Europe are limited to 15.5 mph for electrical assist. Might as well either make it 15.5 mph if the road is open or say something like 5 mph if it's a pedestrian zone.
By the way with 5 mph you wouldn't enforce it accurately as there are no speedos or speed cameras for bikes but it makes it clear if you are going 15 mph you are breaking it. That's what the have for the shared walk in Regent's Park for example.
They need a distinction between pedal assist and fully electric (motor) bike.
I live in Luxembourg and the infrastructure is not as good as the Netherlands. Majority of offenders (in my experience) are delivery guys and teenagers. Where teenagers simply don't care & do reckless things like passing on a big intersection at full speed on a red light, delivery guys do the same things for extra tips.
Some of the fat-tire electric bikes are really fast, I happen to chase them on Kirchberg cycle road. I sustained 40km/h average behind delivery guys and they were still faster, eventually dropping me. (I was on a road bike).
Simply put, anything above 250watts does not belong to cycle lane.Includes humans :j
> need a distinction between pedal assist and fully electric (motor) bike
The only meaningful difference is if there is a motor or not. If there is a motor, it gets a speedometer and you have to stop at stop signs and red lights and follow speed limits. If you are powering yourself, it’s a bit more understandable that you don’t want to stop and start at every intersection. (Though if you have a racing bike, I’d reattach the speedometer and speed-limit requirements.)
Teenagers do dangerous things on normal bicycles too. The nearest I have ever come to an accident with a bicycle while driving (in the UK) was a teenager shooting out at high speed across the road from behind a parked van. Having cyclists sharing space with pedestrians is made worse by ebikes (which are effectively mopeds or motorbikes) but is a real problem with pedal bikes too in some places.
Belgian view here. Flanders is slowly getting the Dutch cycling culture. E-bikes are forbidden from assisting above 25 km/h. You can go faster, but you will be providing the power yourself.
Something changed on the biking paths when e-bikes became the norm. Average speed went from 15 km/h to 25 km/h. This, combined with the heavyer weight of these bikes, created new dangers. A big ebike bike hitting a pedestrian routinely throws the pedestrian in the hospital and with life long damage. The fat bikes, some esteps and the food delivery people are worse. They tend to drive asocial, and are commonly illegally modified for higher speeds. The law is behind, and stupid politicians make it worse by stopping the police checking the bikes.
Meanwhile, bike paths are a lot busier, and if near pedestrians, things are getting dangerous by default. I've decided for myself to limit my speed to 20 km/h in the city centers or at schools, and commonly go even lower. 25 is only for the ebike 'highways' next to secondary roads.
I am pro stricter regulation and follow-up for my ebike. Belgium famously only implemented laws against drunk driving after an idiot killed a whole class at once. Let's not wait for an ebike equivalent. Better to do this calmly and thoughtfully now.
A pedal-assist e-bike with a 500 Watt motor and an easily bypassed speed governor looks like a bicycle, it is pedaled like a bicycle, and yet it is unsuitable for a bicycle lane or a path shared with pedestrians.
Pedal-assist feels to me like a complete red herring to the actual issues. It's often an arbitrary line but it doesn't make much difference to safety at all. (nor, IMO, do power limits, because it either limits cargo bikes or makes lighter bikes a lot less predictable: I would think an acceleration limit would be a more sensible option).
(build-in speed limits that are significantly below what the average cyclist can achieve by pedaling also seem kind of silly. IMO people might not bypass such limits as much if the limit was put at a more sensible level)
Not necessarily against the idea but 20kph is very slow. It would be super easy to accidentally go over the limit unless you have a cycling computer attached to the bike and constantly monitor your speed.
Cars are heavier, have longer stopping distances, poorer visibility and have speed measuring equipment installed.
20kph is not a difficult speed for an adult on a push bike on a flat surface, so we’re not just talking about ebikes where a mandatory speedometer could make sense
The issue should really be about kinetic energy and the likelihood of collisions.
With cycles (including e-bikes), the rider is exposed and is likely to get hurt during a collision and this provides a feedback loop so that experienced riders are likely to take care and be very attentive. Cars don't have this feedback loop and are also orders of magnitude heavier, so it's really a different situation.
It's bizarre to require a slower speed limit for a much lighter vehicle, when logic dictates that cars should have the much slower speed limit.
> We should congratulate cyclist on becoming fully fledged (oppressed) road users.
I find it mind blowing that ~42% of all cycling deaths are men aged 70+.
It obviously confounds fragility with participation but, still, it must mean that people continue to use bikes -- I'm guessing increasingly e-bikes -- well into their old age.
I think that if you as 60+ person cannot bike without support your brain is probably also not fit enough anymore for the speed you are going to ride at. So, I advice older people not to use an e-bike. I am not going to use one. Maybe a trike is a safe option at speeds not exceeding 10km/h.
I wonder how many of those are just heart attacks triggered by the exertion. A member of my family died that way (though they were not that old, and were relatively fit)
As the article says: this is not a general speed limit but an experimental speed limit for an apparently very crowded area where many kids cycle to school.
As someone whose 'normal biking speed' ist typically 30+ km/h on suitable bike lanes, I have no problems with speed limits at critical choke points.
Ah, this bit of crucial context seems to be missing from the entire rest of the discussion. Also makes what otherwise sounds like an uncharacteristically bike-hostile move actually seem fairly reasonable.
Tho tbf one still hopes that they come up with an infrastructure solution that makes it unnecessary in the long run.
> “This is all about cyclists on motorised bicycles, so I should think you would do something about motorised cyclists. Make a rule for them and not for all cyclists.”
There's a certain sub strain of cyclists that want absolutely no rules for them.
In a just world, cyclists would have more freedom than cars, but pedestrians would have most of all. But walking through European cities with large cycling cultures can be dangerous, too, especially for children and the elderly. Too often, cyclists will completely ignore stop signs and stop lights, or go at full speed on the sidewalks.
And because I know someone is going to retort that car drivers break traffic laws, too: drivers acting dangerously shouldn't excuse cyclists.
What that woman you quoted said definitely resonates with me. I cycle a lot and the rise of e-bikes has definitely made my experience worse. Those bikes are capable of inficting a lot more damage yet I find that the average skill level of e-bike riders tends to be lower than that of the general cycling population. IMO not a great combination.
I don't like to think of it in terms of freedom. Everyone has the same freedom to use public highways. The difference is responsibility. If you decide to use a bicycle you have a bit more responsibility than if you walk because they can go faster. If you decide to use a motor vehicle then it should come with a huge amount of extra responsibility. Ultimately you have the added responsibility of ensuring the safety and freedoms of those more vulnerable road users. So it's not "less freedom", it's "greater responsibility".
The problem is that there are effective mechanisms for punishing irresponsible drivers (and motor cyclists), but none (at least here in the UK) for punishing irresponsible cyclists.
The other problem is that cyclists often share space with pedestrians. I see cyclists on the pavement all the time (mostly illegally - and without consequences), I never see a car driving on the pavement (some park on the pavement, which is annoying).
Most fatbikes have a much more powerful motor than a regular e-bike, and can be used without pedaling at all. They are listed as 250W, but it's actually a software-limited 750W motor. Local vendors provide unlock instructions along with the bike.
It's just a motorcycle in disguise. Then, to make matters worse, they weigh 30-40KG + two 12-year-olds on top - that, combined with reckless riding, can do a lot more damage than a boring cycling incident.
I mean ordinary as non-electric. I know what an electric fatbike can do of course. The article makes it ambiguous as it's talking about the common limit for all cyclists.
People drive fatbikes from solely selfish reasons. They want something heavier and larger than others, they want others to give way and be afraid of collision.
Nah, its almost for sure xenophobic and classist. I think fat bikes are the best thing that happened to amsterdam because all the scooters disappeared. All the poor people that used to ride scooters are now riding fat bikes. Its better for their health and their wallet. Yes they tend to be a bit less educated and socialised, but they were like that when they drove scooters as well. Banning fat bikes is gesture politics.
Your suggestion would completely kill e-bikes, I don't think that is a good idea. Above a certain speed limit they should need to ride on the regular road though.
On a regular e-bike you don't get up to 25km/h without putting in the effort. If their mental capacities are that far gone, they won't be able to go that fast anyway. They'll top out at 20km/h or something.
12mph seems very slow, but I suppose you can still cycle in the carriageway if you're a decent cyclist?
Really we need to ban motorised vehicles that go above 12mph. They are not bicycles and should not be in cycleways. I feel there is a big difference between someone who is able to pedal at higher speeds and someone who is just using a motor vehicle.
The question is, would I be allowed to use the road instead, if I go anywhere between 45kph to 60kph, as I tend to do on road-/gravelbikes on flat grounds, without too much head wind?
Thinking about it I even do 45kph with an old 3-speed rear hub and coaster brake, mudguards, dynamo, porter, basket, from 1985 when in Hamburg.
This makes no sense for me. Maybe don't declare bike lanes as such, if they are unfit for the purpose?
Cycling culture and infrastructure in Dutch cities is unique. Shame that it's wrecked by assholes who want something bigger and faster, or drive outright electric motorbikes.
I life on a big street intersection with traffic lights in a city. Every year I can observe at least one cyclist crash with a car. Mostly because they just ignore the traffic lights completely.
As cyclist you learn that traffic rules are not for you, because when you ignore them, normally nothing happens. When you want to safe lives, you need to register bikes and punish cyclists that ignore traffic rules. Otherwise the physics will do it, with much harder punishment.
I cycle at 14mph average on a normal pedal bicycle.. they can fuck right off the with this. We are not all fat fucks on electric scooters pretending to be bicycles
In most countries people use bicycles as some form of leisure travel but Dutch cycling is a need for speed!
Tourist tip if you are ever in Amsterdam: check the ferry next to the train station during rush hour. It is the equivalent of Shibuya crossing only for cyclists. Pure madness but somehow it all works like clockwork.
12 mph is an odd speed to choose given legal e-bikes in Europe are limited to 15.5 mph for electrical assist. Might as well either make it 15.5 mph if the road is open or say something like 5 mph if it's a pedestrian zone.
By the way with 5 mph you wouldn't enforce it accurately as there are no speedos or speed cameras for bikes but it makes it clear if you are going 15 mph you are breaking it. That's what the have for the shared walk in Regent's Park for example.
They need a distinction between pedal assist and fully electric (motor) bike.
I live in Luxembourg and the infrastructure is not as good as the Netherlands. Majority of offenders (in my experience) are delivery guys and teenagers. Where teenagers simply don't care & do reckless things like passing on a big intersection at full speed on a red light, delivery guys do the same things for extra tips.
Some of the fat-tire electric bikes are really fast, I happen to chase them on Kirchberg cycle road. I sustained 40km/h average behind delivery guys and they were still faster, eventually dropping me. (I was on a road bike).
Simply put, anything above 250watts does not belong to cycle lane.Includes humans :j
> need a distinction between pedal assist and fully electric (motor) bike
The only meaningful difference is if there is a motor or not. If there is a motor, it gets a speedometer and you have to stop at stop signs and red lights and follow speed limits. If you are powering yourself, it’s a bit more understandable that you don’t want to stop and start at every intersection. (Though if you have a racing bike, I’d reattach the speedometer and speed-limit requirements.)
Teenagers do dangerous things on normal bicycles too. The nearest I have ever come to an accident with a bicycle while driving (in the UK) was a teenager shooting out at high speed across the road from behind a parked van. Having cyclists sharing space with pedestrians is made worse by ebikes (which are effectively mopeds or motorbikes) but is a real problem with pedal bikes too in some places.
[dead]
Belgian view here. Flanders is slowly getting the Dutch cycling culture. E-bikes are forbidden from assisting above 25 km/h. You can go faster, but you will be providing the power yourself.
Something changed on the biking paths when e-bikes became the norm. Average speed went from 15 km/h to 25 km/h. This, combined with the heavyer weight of these bikes, created new dangers. A big ebike bike hitting a pedestrian routinely throws the pedestrian in the hospital and with life long damage. The fat bikes, some esteps and the food delivery people are worse. They tend to drive asocial, and are commonly illegally modified for higher speeds. The law is behind, and stupid politicians make it worse by stopping the police checking the bikes.
Meanwhile, bike paths are a lot busier, and if near pedestrians, things are getting dangerous by default. I've decided for myself to limit my speed to 20 km/h in the city centers or at schools, and commonly go even lower. 25 is only for the ebike 'highways' next to secondary roads.
I am pro stricter regulation and follow-up for my ebike. Belgium famously only implemented laws against drunk driving after an idiot killed a whole class at once. Let's not wait for an ebike equivalent. Better to do this calmly and thoughtfully now.
The boundary between a bicycle and a motorbike has completely dissapeared.
That boundary needs to be recovered, and then rules will make sense again, until then, any effort is futile.
> The boundary between a bicycle and a motorbike has completely dissapeared.
Not really. The first motorbikes were bicycles with engines attached. Many current electric motorcycles are bicycles with electric motors attached.
If it has a throttle and does not require pedal assist, it is a motorcycle.
A pedal-assist e-bike with a 500 Watt motor and an easily bypassed speed governor looks like a bicycle, it is pedaled like a bicycle, and yet it is unsuitable for a bicycle lane or a path shared with pedestrians.
Pedal-assist feels to me like a complete red herring to the actual issues. It's often an arbitrary line but it doesn't make much difference to safety at all. (nor, IMO, do power limits, because it either limits cargo bikes or makes lighter bikes a lot less predictable: I would think an acceleration limit would be a more sensible option).
(build-in speed limits that are significantly below what the average cyclist can achieve by pedaling also seem kind of silly. IMO people might not bypass such limits as much if the limit was put at a more sensible level)
What's even the point of pedal-assisted bicycles, other than gaming the system and exploiting some legal quirks?
Neither they are fast, powerful, or have reasonable range, yet are already too heavy to pedal only.
I think it's pretty clear what is a bicycle. Bicycles don't have engines.
Do you? At least the german law not. Looks like the law in the nederlands too.
German law is created for litigation not for clarification.
You talk about the civil law.
Not necessarily against the idea but 20kph is very slow. It would be super easy to accidentally go over the limit unless you have a cycling computer attached to the bike and constantly monitor your speed.
The exact same argument can be made for cars.
Doesn't stop the government wasting half my Saturday and stealing £100 every couple of years.
We should congratulate cyclist on becoming fully fledged (oppressed) road users.
Cars are heavier, have longer stopping distances, poorer visibility and have speed measuring equipment installed.
20kph is not a difficult speed for an adult on a push bike on a flat surface, so we’re not just talking about ebikes where a mandatory speedometer could make sense
Drivers kill and severely injure people at rates higher than all other violent crime combined.
https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240086517?hl=en-...
The issue should really be about kinetic energy and the likelihood of collisions.
With cycles (including e-bikes), the rider is exposed and is likely to get hurt during a collision and this provides a feedback loop so that experienced riders are likely to take care and be very attentive. Cars don't have this feedback loop and are also orders of magnitude heavier, so it's really a different situation.
It's bizarre to require a slower speed limit for a much lighter vehicle, when logic dictates that cars should have the much slower speed limit.
> We should congratulate cyclist on becoming fully fledged (oppressed) road users.
As a matter of record, the first modern roads were built specifically for and by cyclists: https://www.cyclinguk.org/cycle/roads-built-cars
I find it mind blowing that ~42% of all cycling deaths are men aged 70+.
It obviously confounds fragility with participation but, still, it must mean that people continue to use bikes -- I'm guessing increasingly e-bikes -- well into their old age.
(42% is 118/281 in the report.)
I think that if you as 60+ person cannot bike without support your brain is probably also not fit enough anymore for the speed you are going to ride at. So, I advice older people not to use an e-bike. I am not going to use one. Maybe a trike is a safe option at speeds not exceeding 10km/h.
I wonder how many of those are just heart attacks triggered by the exertion. A member of my family died that way (though they were not that old, and were relatively fit)
20 km/h is nothing. On a bike lane you should be allowed to go normal biking speed
As the article says: this is not a general speed limit but an experimental speed limit for an apparently very crowded area where many kids cycle to school. As someone whose 'normal biking speed' ist typically 30+ km/h on suitable bike lanes, I have no problems with speed limits at critical choke points.
Ah, this bit of crucial context seems to be missing from the entire rest of the discussion. Also makes what otherwise sounds like an uncharacteristically bike-hostile move actually seem fairly reasonable.
Tho tbf one still hopes that they come up with an infrastructure solution that makes it unnecessary in the long run.
> “This is all about cyclists on motorised bicycles, so I should think you would do something about motorised cyclists. Make a rule for them and not for all cyclists.”
There's a certain sub strain of cyclists that want absolutely no rules for them.
In a just world, cyclists would have more freedom than cars, but pedestrians would have most of all. But walking through European cities with large cycling cultures can be dangerous, too, especially for children and the elderly. Too often, cyclists will completely ignore stop signs and stop lights, or go at full speed on the sidewalks.
And because I know someone is going to retort that car drivers break traffic laws, too: drivers acting dangerously shouldn't excuse cyclists.
What that woman you quoted said definitely resonates with me. I cycle a lot and the rise of e-bikes has definitely made my experience worse. Those bikes are capable of inficting a lot more damage yet I find that the average skill level of e-bike riders tends to be lower than that of the general cycling population. IMO not a great combination.
Sure, but just like with cars, e-bikes being more dangerous doesn't mean cyclists also don't need to have rules to follow.
I don't like to think of it in terms of freedom. Everyone has the same freedom to use public highways. The difference is responsibility. If you decide to use a bicycle you have a bit more responsibility than if you walk because they can go faster. If you decide to use a motor vehicle then it should come with a huge amount of extra responsibility. Ultimately you have the added responsibility of ensuring the safety and freedoms of those more vulnerable road users. So it's not "less freedom", it's "greater responsibility".
The problem is that there are effective mechanisms for punishing irresponsible drivers (and motor cyclists), but none (at least here in the UK) for punishing irresponsible cyclists.
The other problem is that cyclists often share space with pedestrians. I see cyclists on the pavement all the time (mostly illegally - and without consequences), I never see a car driving on the pavement (some park on the pavement, which is annoying).
> The other problem is that cyclists often share space with pedestrians
The solution to this is better cycling infrastructure to separate them, not making cycling less useful by setting ridiculously low speed limits.
>Amsterdam and Enschede are banning wide-tyre fat bikes from some central locations or parks
What's the reason? Ordinary fatbikes aren't fast, and e-bikes are fast in any case.
> Ordinary fatbikes aren't fast
Most fatbikes have a much more powerful motor than a regular e-bike, and can be used without pedaling at all. They are listed as 250W, but it's actually a software-limited 750W motor. Local vendors provide unlock instructions along with the bike.
Instead of the 25km/h legal limit, they can go 40-50km/h: https://v8fatbike.com/how-to-unlock-ouxi-v8-speed-limit/
It's just a motorcycle in disguise. Then, to make matters worse, they weigh 30-40KG + two 12-year-olds on top - that, combined with reckless riding, can do a lot more damage than a boring cycling incident.
I mean ordinary as non-electric. I know what an electric fatbike can do of course. The article makes it ambiguous as it's talking about the common limit for all cyclists.
Ah, there is no such a thing in Amsterdam (you might be thinking of MTB bikes with fat tires?). They’re all electric.
People drive fatbikes from solely selfish reasons. They want something heavier and larger than others, they want others to give way and be afraid of collision.
The reason is that the fat bikes are widely popular with young delinquents, typically of the immigrant kind.
They have the absolute worst reputation around Amsterdam.
You could’ve said what you said except the “immigrant kind” bit. I see enough Dutch assholes on fat bikes just as well. No need to be xenophobic here.
There is zero phobia involved, just facts. I imagine you count second generation immigrants as Dutch assholes ?
And don't get me wrong, I am not a huge fan of Dutch people. But I am even less of a fan of macho Moroccan kids.
Nah, its almost for sure xenophobic and classist. I think fat bikes are the best thing that happened to amsterdam because all the scooters disappeared. All the poor people that used to ride scooters are now riding fat bikes. Its better for their health and their wallet. Yes they tend to be a bit less educated and socialised, but they were like that when they drove scooters as well. Banning fat bikes is gesture politics.
They drive fatbikes instead of road scooters, of the 25kmh limit ones eligible for cycling lanes?
[dead]
They should just limit electric bikes to 15km/h.
If you want to go faster, pedal yourself.
This solves two problems:
- Cool kids aren't cool anymore, biking on their now slow ass fatbikes
- Old people who's mental faculties can't keep up with 25km/h anymore dont end up in so many traffic accidents.
Your suggestion would completely kill e-bikes, I don't think that is a good idea. Above a certain speed limit they should need to ride on the regular road though. On a regular e-bike you don't get up to 25km/h without putting in the effort. If their mental capacities are that far gone, they won't be able to go that fast anyway. They'll top out at 20km/h or something.
[dead]
12mph seems very slow, but I suppose you can still cycle in the carriageway if you're a decent cyclist?
Really we need to ban motorised vehicles that go above 12mph. They are not bicycles and should not be in cycleways. I feel there is a big difference between someone who is able to pedal at higher speeds and someone who is just using a motor vehicle.
Cycling on the road is only allowed where there are no bike lanes, which is very rare.
Deceleration for the nation!
The question is, would I be allowed to use the road instead, if I go anywhere between 45kph to 60kph, as I tend to do on road-/gravelbikes on flat grounds, without too much head wind?
Thinking about it I even do 45kph with an old 3-speed rear hub and coaster brake, mudguards, dynamo, porter, basket, from 1985 when in Hamburg.
This makes no sense for me. Maybe don't declare bike lanes as such, if they are unfit for the purpose?
Cycling culture and infrastructure in Dutch cities is unique. Shame that it's wrecked by assholes who want something bigger and faster, or drive outright electric motorbikes.
I life on a big street intersection with traffic lights in a city. Every year I can observe at least one cyclist crash with a car. Mostly because they just ignore the traffic lights completely. As cyclist you learn that traffic rules are not for you, because when you ignore them, normally nothing happens. When you want to safe lives, you need to register bikes and punish cyclists that ignore traffic rules. Otherwise the physics will do it, with much harder punishment.
I cycle at 14mph average on a normal pedal bicycle.. they can fuck right off the with this. We are not all fat fucks on electric scooters pretending to be bicycles
In most countries people use bicycles as some form of leisure travel but Dutch cycling is a need for speed!
Tourist tip if you are ever in Amsterdam: check the ferry next to the train station during rush hour. It is the equivalent of Shibuya crossing only for cyclists. Pure madness but somehow it all works like clockwork.