readestreet

@jpb1227: Yup, exactly. That's the bigger issue.

@pistol2ne: I’m not sure what you mean, New Jersey is a large, politically diverse U.S. state, so legislation passed there reflects a segment of the general public. This regulation trend is gaining momentum in Florida, New Hampshire, New York and California to name a few. Yes, I'd expect many people who own class 1 ebikes to continue to use them legally or illegally. That dosn't undo the broader impact on others who aren't such a rebel like youself.

It’s already too late and I don’t think it was the fault of class 1 e-bikes. The public, lawmakers and even most cyclists don’t distinguish between class 1 and the super 8, Sauron, etc. e-motorcycles. See the recent laws in NJ that treated problems caused by already illegal e-motorcycles with massive restrictions on class 1, 2 and 3 e-bikes. Similar legislation being proposed in the Bay Area was meet with overwhelming support in the local CYCLING sub-Reddit with most comments complaining about e-motorcycle incidences as justification for the need for class 1, 2, 3 e-bike license plates, registrations and insurance. We don’t enforce laws on these already illegal e-motorcycles, yet we need to address issues they are causing with massive restrictions on class 1, 2, 3 e-bikes? If this is the level of discourse among the Bay Area cycling community, I feel we’ve already lost the battle for public support of e-bikes as a viable transportation alternative and recreational land access and this seems like the trend elsewhere in the US. And it was all the fault of these cheap, illegal, deceptively marked “e-bikes” coming here through Alibaba, DTC, non-“bike” industry channels.

Both of my Cycliq front and rear cameras died after a couple years of limited use and were constantly giving me problems, like like becoming non-responsive mid-ride. Support never addressed the issues and ultimately offered me 20% off new lights. Like I’d spend another $400 on that crap. If these actually work, I’d pay a lot more