Who removed the limiter matters to me, you can think differently, but I'm not budging on this. Your link does claim that it is big business, but admits there are no figures for how many bikes are modified with these kits. Because no one is giving any numbers, I'm the one saying it could be 1 friend installing kits and removing limiters from 6 people in the whole Netherlands.

All I want is the numbers, because until then "people just pay a guy who knows a guy to remove the limiter" just rubs me the wrong way if it might as well be "companies illegally sell limitless bikes anyway".

I concede, they know when the bike is seized. But what I meant is that they could be unaware when they buy it, or at least claim that.

And if my translation is accurate, this other source also doesn't answer if they alter the bike by getting someone to tune it, or if they were illegal to drive the moment they got their hands on the bike. It claims more than half were modified, but the cited report just says that they were faster than allowed. Bad headline!

Again, you said people buy a lawful vehicle and just know a guy that removes limiters. That is something I have trouble believing. I say, it's far more likely that Amazon will sell a bike that naturally goes faster, like the 20mph ones that are legal right now in California, to anyone, and regions with stricter rules for e-bikes have people who don't know or don't care.

This distinction is important to me, because it shifts the blame from big manufacturers and warehouse corporations who knowingly sell illegal bikes to thousands, to some backyard garage that helped like 6 friends get more power. If the goal is to make our streets safer, going after the thousands will do way more. If truly half of people know someone to remove or remove their limiters themselves, it would be a different story, but all these sources say is that half of used fat bikes are illegal.

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?

Class 1 isn't getting licenses.

Class 3 isn't slowed down.

Great headline, I wonder why people are confused about if the e-bike they buy is illegal or not.

Read the article, please.

Class 1 e-bikes stay without license.

Class 2 and 3 get licenses,

Class 1 and 2 are slowed down to 16 mph (25kmh), currently 20 mph (32 kmh)

Class 1 is analogous to EU pedelecs - you need to pedal for assist. Class 2 has a throttle instead. Class 3 is for higher speeds and children are not allowed to drive them.

What further category do you want?

Certified "didn't read the article" moment, those things are already mandated in California.

I always hear this, but do they really?

The way you are describing it makes it seem like it happens on a very different scale to e-bike sales in general. Any source on how many people tune their bikes?

You mean like into 3 classes of e-bikes? Like California already does? With these rules specifically applying to some of these classes and not to others, as it says in the article?

Like what do you want more? These rules would make Class 1 exactly like in the EU pedelecs (with more wattage).

That lousy plant ain't doing shit to clean the air. You need like 100 gallons of algae for 1 adult, what is half a litre of a plant species going to do that also wastes energy on supporting tissue?

Not that I am in one, but I'm sure there must be a communist party somewhere in the world that is doing fine on a local level. I can't imagine how those even could become dictatorships with the powers of a mayor alone, surely those count?

This specific perfume department:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIHmZ_eurcw&t=33s

While my knee-jerk reaction was that they're going to over regulate, all those changes are already in effect in the EU and it didn't destroy the e-bike market there. So I guess California will manage.

Class 2 and 3 requiring license plates makes sense to me.

And class 1 would be pedelecs in the EU, where they are capped at 250 Watt and 25 kmh. Class 1 being capped at 750 Watt and 16mph (25kmh) seems okay, might be inconvenient with how much further apart everything is over there, but reaction times are the same all over the globe.

I personally don't even drive the full 25kmh, in the city I'm capped by the manual cyclists in front, which I don't need to overtake. And outside I'm too worried about my battery to go full power. I will say, cargo bikes in particular could use a higher powered motor than the 250 Watts we have here, but I have no idea what a good cap would be.