Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday August 05, @05:30PM   Printer-friendly
from the Porsche-electric-boogaloo dept.

Porsche's new companies are all about electric bikes:

In the future, you may come across a lot more two-wheeled Porsches on the streets. The luxury automaker has launched two new joint ventures with Dutch company Ponooc Investment B.V., and they're both all about electric bikes. Porsche eBike Performance GmbH is based in Ottobrunn near Munich and will develop components, including motors and batteries. Anything it creates will then be used by P2 eBike GmbH, the second joint venture based in Stuttgart, to manufacture Porsche-branded e-bikes for consumers that the company plyans to launch starting in the middle of the decade. 

Porsche is far from a newcomer in the e-bike space. In 2021, it debuted two electric bikes inspired by the Taycan and were made to complement the Cross Turismo, which has a rear carrier. Those bikes, however, along with their motors and gear shifting systems, were manufactured by Japanese bicycle industry giant Shimano. With one company developing parts and another working on the consumer bikes themselves, the upcoming products the joint ventures will release will be all (or at least mostly) Porsche.

The components business will use the e-bike drive systems develop by Fazua, a company Porsche recently acquired, as noted by Electrek. However, it will also develop e-bike systems under the Porsche brand name — it will even sell the technology it designs to other brands. As with anything Porsche, the bikes under the new ventures will most likely not come cheap: Its Taycan-inspired bikes, for instance, set buyers back at least $8,500 at launch, with the sports model selling for prices that start at $10,700.


Original Submission

 
This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by legont on Sunday August 07, @04:49AM (3 children)

    by legont (4179) on Sunday August 07, @04:49AM (#1265386)

    The point is short - license and insurance.
    We all agree that bicycles don't need either. Motorcycles regardless of engine type need both.
    Now, electric "community" wants to cheat the game.

    --
    "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday August 08, @03:05PM (2 children)

    by Immerman (3985) on Monday August 08, @03:05PM (#1265549)

    Cheating? I suppose it depends on what you mean.

    I'm fully on board with treating bikes with a motor assist that doesn't let them go faster than under pedal power continuing to be treated as a bike. You could argue the EU's 15mph assist limit is more reasonable in that respect.

    I'm also fully on board with user-removable limiters (it's *my* bike!), though that does mean there are some "cheaters" who remove the limiter without taking the required steps to comply with the law.

    Frankly though, I doubt either case applies to the "not-quite-a-motorcycle" bikes a lot of these companies are beginning to sell.

    Ebikes are subdivided into four classes in the US, and if you have a motor more powerful than 1hp (750W) only the highest class potentially applies:
    1,2 - 20mph limit -- generally treated as bikes
    3 - 28mph assist-limit, less than 1hp -- legal requirements vary with jurisdiction, generally treated as (or similar to) a moped
    4 - 28mph assist-limit, 1hp and up -- legal off-road only, usually requires registration and licensing, and often banned from public land. So, pretty close to dirt-bike rules.

    All the quasi-motorcycles are at best eligible for class 4. If they don't have speed limiters they don't even qualify as mopeds, and must be registered as motorcycles to be street legal.

    • (Score: 2) by legont on Tuesday August 09, @12:59AM (1 child)

      by legont (4179) on Tuesday August 09, @12:59AM (#1265634)

      Well, my point was a bit simpler, I guess. I do bike a lot and I do ride a motorcycle. I believe that motorcycles belong to the road while bikes could go anywhere with reasonable precautions.
      Now we have this electric power that could change both of them substantially. I am not a purist and I am over 60 so I do want a bicycle that helps me a bit over hills I used to go over by myself. However I definitely do not want my motorcycle types on the same path.
      How to regulate this exactly is the question, but the idea, I believe, is clear enough.

      --
      "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
      • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday August 09, @04:04AM

        by Immerman (3985) on Tuesday August 09, @04:04AM (#1265659)

        Yeah, I suppose there's still a legal grey area in terms of what is acceptable on trails isn't there?

        I do lean towards treating class 3 and 4 as mopeds/motorcycles by default - e.g. presumed prohibited from bike-friendly trails unless otherwise noted, where class 1 and 2 are presumed to be permitted.

        The fact that there's not always much visual difference presents a problem to easily identifying violators who aren't caught in the act (or by enough probable cause for a bike inspection), but I'm not sure how big a problem that really is compared to jurisdictions just not having established rules.