Thoughts on differences in motorized bicycles, pedal only bikes, and the law

MaxPower

MaxPower

New Member
Here are the differences I see in motorized bikes, bicycles and the law:

1. MB's (gas) make noise. There is not much you can do about noise other than turn it off. Some think they should be outlawed simply because of this. I have a robin-subaru 4 stroke that's very quiet and I still get complaints from people on bike lanes. I just point out the noisy cars that they share the road with. (P.S. don't cruse on sidewalks! It’s not safe for pedestrians or you when cars pull out in front of you.)

2. MB's have a higher average speed. I think this is more important to application of law and where people associate with moped/motorcycle. "Most" pedal only bikes don't average over 20mph and is why there is not a speed law for pedal only bikes. You can't sustain the speeds on "most" pedal only bicycles that you can on "most" MB's. The driver needs more experience/training at these higher average speeds and this is where some think a driver’s license should be required. The MB also needs to be of a higher quality to handle the higher average speeds. High end road bikes are expensive because they can handle these speeds. So should MB's. There are not many equipment requirements for pedal only bikes because "most" people are not going MB fast. "Most" MB's ARE going fast and is where some think registration, title, license and insurance should be required. You can’t get insurance on a MB that's not built safe.

I'm torn on this issue. I don't want to be regulated (I pride myself on safety) but I do want regulation if there a bunch of bozos that disregard safety. I'm lucky that MB's are not that popular where I live in Arizona and I’m free to be as safe and un-bothered bothered by cops. If I get a bunch of stupid people in town on MB's (and pedal only bikes too for that matter) then I would want to have the restrictions imposed. It would likely ruin my hobby. I would not register my bike and wouldn't ride to obey the law. It's a weird situation, MB's become popular because it's unregulated but the popularity causes law and makes it unpopular. I want it to be popular to share my experiences but don't want the regulation to destroy the fun of it.
 
Re: Thoughts on differences in MB's, pedal only bikes, and the law

If you live somewhere with steep hills then going up the hills will be real slow and going down them will be real fast.

So to make time you get going down hill as fast as you can so you will have some speed to get up the next hill.

If you live some where flat then it's a whole different story.

I live around hills. Granny gears take care of getting up them.

Good wheels, brakes, tires, frame, etc takes care of getting down the hills. :)
 
Re: Thoughts on differences in MB's, pedal only bikes, and the law

I thought of another difference that I think applies. Motorized bikes carry volatile liquids and is a source of hazards material. It's a bit of a stretch but you could possible catch someone or something on fire in an accident.
 
Re: Thoughts on differences in MB's, pedal only bikes, and the law

There is and has been a long motorized bike/moped tradition in some countries on the European continent. The French postal system at one time employed a couple thousand Cyclemaster motorized bikes for daily mail delivery. They also have a long relationship bicycles and a rich heritage with motorcycles. The point is, they seemed to be able keep categories separate and acceptable between human powered, low speed motor-assist and full powered vehicles.

I see problems when the lines get blurred between the two latter categories.
 
Re: Thoughts on differences in MB's, pedal only bikes, and the law

MaxPower said:
Here are the differences I see in motorized bikes, bicycles and the law:

1. MB's (gas) make noise. There is not much you can do about noise other than turn it off. Some think they should be outlawed simply because of this. I have a robin-subaru 4 stroke that's very quiet and I still get complaints from people on bike lanes. I just point out the noisy cars that they share the road with. (P.S. don't cruse on sidewalks! It’s not safe for pedestrians or you when cars pull out in front of you.)

2. MB's have a higher average speed. I think this is more important to application of law and where people associate with moped/motorcycle. "Most" pedal only bikes don't average over 20mph and is why there is not a speed law for pedal only bikes. You can't sustain the speeds on "most" pedal only bicycles that you can on "most" MB's. The driver needs more experience/training at these higher average speeds and this is where some think a driver’s license should be required. The MB also needs to be of a higher quality to handle the higher average speeds. High end road bikes are expensive because they can handle these speeds. So should MB's. There are not many equipment requirements for pedal only bikes because "most" people are not going MB fast. "Most" MB's ARE going fast and is where some think registration, title, license and insurance should be required. You can’t get insurance on a MB that's not built safe.

I'm torn on this issue. I don't want to be regulated (I pride myself on safety) but I do want regulation if there a bunch of bozos that disregard safety. I'm lucky that MB's are not that popular where I live in Arizona and I’m free to be as safe and un-bothered bothered by cops. If I get a bunch of stupid people in town on MB's (and pedal only bikes too for that matter) then I would want to have the restrictions imposed. It would likely ruin my hobby. I would not register my bike and wouldn't ride to obey the law. It's a weird situation, MB's become popular because it's unregulated but the popularity causes law and makes it unpopular. I want it to be popular to share my experiences but don't want the regulation to destroy the fun of it.
Click to expand...
Hey MAX,
I am mostly found on the "other" site, And we have discussed this issue in depth. A lot of California and Florida MB'rs have chimed in on this.
My personal view is that it should be regulated for the simple reason that there are a lot, and I do mean A LOT, of idiots out there that would only serve to get MB's outlaw'd. I think Az. went through a big deal not to long ago with spookytooth cycles and others to get MB's legalized and regulated there. Most of the regulations are, in Ca. anyway, are just common sense. Helmet, 30mph limit, No sidewalks, ect. So regulations are not ALWAYS a bad thing. They are more for the STOOPID to TRY to keep them from doing STOOPID things.
Thanks,
Fatdaddy Red.
 
Re: Thoughts on differences in MB's, pedal only bikes, and the law

I am opposed to regulation and suspect of any attempt to infringe upon our freedom and the liberty to exercise it.

Over the last 40 years I might have traveled a million miles on two wheels without use of a helmet.
Of course that would include any number of crashes, as someone might expect.

IMO helmets deprive an operator of precise hearing and vision of his surroundings. I have found both to be valuable assets in defensive operating.

Speed regulation enforced upon a sub-standard class of marginal personal conveyances seems reasonable to me in the interest of public safety.

IMO, licensing schemes serve no valid purpose beneficial to the public.

AFAIK, 'Disturbing the Peace' rates as a criminal event in all states, and subjects the offender to arrest and possible fines and incarceration.
IMO, a peace officer could easily deal with any errant MAB operator with a citation under that heading.

What we don't need is more laws, regulation, fees, & taxation.

Best
rc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top