The San Francisco Bicycle Coalition weighed in with a pointed response, arguing that the state should be making it easier, not harder, to own and use e-bikes. Their senior organizer echoed the sentiment shared by many riders: the real confusion and danger comes from people not being able to tell the difference between a legal e-bike and an electric moped, not from the bikes themselves.
Brett Thurber, co-owner of a San Francisco e-bike shop, raised a practical industry concern about AB 1557. Restricting California’s speed limits below what manufacturers currently build for the U.S. market could push companies to skip California customers entirely, shrinking the supply available to local shops and consumers.
Hold on, it does not say why those bikes were seized. It does not say anything on if they had no limiter, a thottle or if they were manufactured to go faster. But that is what I’m asking about, is the manufacturer/importer breaking the law or is it the consumer? Well, the consumer is either way for using it, but they could be just unaware. You know what I mean, it is different if you deliberately mess with the electronics to go faster.
The VVN spokesperson saying “the limiter can easily be removed” doesn’t convince me either, is that a huge problem or an edge case?
Is there any credible source on around half of fat-bikes have their limiters removed?
It kinda does. The roller benches they mention are the way they test it. If they go too fast they are illegal, either by not having the limiter in the first place or having it removed. Both happens, like I mentioned before.
Original article in Dutch.
This mentions they are fined €310 the first time and it is only seized the second time they get caught. So yeah, I’m pretty sure they know.
And here is the source for the more than half claim, although a small sample size.