What Cycling Is And What It Is Not

Image courtesy of Des Moines Street Collective

 The latest episode of the "Guitar Ted Podcast" has elicited possibly the strongest and the most commentary we have ever received after an episode. Some of the comments are the positive reinforcement types which one might expect fans of the podcast to return to us. However; a few have been centered around this issue which pervades cycling today. The question concerning eBikes and what is an eBike and what is not an eBike. 

The image here from the Des Moines Street Collective's social media earlier in this year is typical of the messaging which is being portrayed by much of the cycling advocacy and some brands as well. This is guidance for governments - both state and city - to help them formulate laws and ordinances. It is also there as a purported educational tool for cyclists, although I would offer that those who need to hear this message will never do so because they do not care to listen. 

That's a whole 'nuther nut to crack and discuss. 

What I feel is missing here is really more about a question I do not see being asked and an answer would go a long way, I think, in helping anyone make sense of this madness. The question? "What is cycling, and what is not cycling? 

In a sense, that is what the poster above is trying to answer. E-bike? Cycling. E-Moto? Not cycling. Pretty straightforward.....or is it? 

I would focus on the rider, not the machine. Cycling involves participation on the rider's part. In other words, cycling is pedaling.  If you do not have to pedal, it is not cycling and is something else. What you call "the something else" - moto, moped, just being a passenger - That's up to you, and frankly, I do not care what you call it. It is NOT cycling. That is what is important here. 

This shouldn't be vague, because e-scooters are not cycling. 

Anything which allows the rider to not pedal at all at any time is not a bicycle. Period, end of story. Those devices should be regulated and enforcement of rules and ordinances could be very simply enforced. An officer sees you just sitting, standing, or otherwise being moved without pedaling? Ticket. Citation. Maybe even confiscation. 

As a cyclist I can see the difference when I am out riding. I do not need to see what the machine is, I just have to observe what the rider is doing, or not doing. Now, you may say, "What about a normal bicycle and coasting? Fair question.

As I said, as a cyclist, I can see when a bicycle should be pedaled. Obviously up a hill is one such instance. But it also doesn't take a genius observer to see when an object is coasting further than it should be on flatter terrain. Speed is also a factor in this. A little training for officials - who have to make judgement calls on other vehicles already - shouldn't be all that difficult to communicate. To my mind, "cycling action" needs to occur or the device is not a bicycle.

So now all the so-called "pedal assist" bikes would be okay. Those must be pedaled to move the vehicle and its rider down a trail. There is pedaling going on. Scooters, e-motos, throttle equipped bikes? No-go. These are what would be - essentially - banned from the privileges actual cyclists enjoy. Those vehicles should require licenses and insurance.  And while we're at it, so should side-by-sides and ATV's..... But that is another issue. 

But the point is, enough with the three-class nonsense, enough with trying to decipher one machine from another. If the device does not REQUIRE pedaling to move, it is not a bicycle or a tricycle. 

Related Article: How New York City Is Proposing To Deal With Micro-Mobility Issues.  (Bicycle Retailer and Industry News)