Talk:Pedelec

This article seems to take it for granted that Directive 2002/24/EC somehow requires member states to treat pedelecs like pedal bikes. But all the Directive does is exclude low powered electric bikes from its ambit. It doesn't say anything about how member states should treat such bikes. It just exempts them from complying with EU safety standards. — Blue-Haired Lawyer ^t 10:55, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

The photo gives the impression Deutsche Bahn is offering pedelecs on a large scale.

But according to http://www.bahn.de/p/view/service/fahrrad/call_a_bike.shtml

"In Stuttgart und Aachen stehen Ihnen während der Radsaison außerdem Pedelecs zur Verfügung."
(meaning: During the bicycle season pedelecs are offered in Stuttgart and Aachen.)

the offer is only in two cities - according to http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Gro%C3%9F-_und_Mittelst%C3%A4dte_in_Deutschland of ranking by inhabitants no 6 and 29 resp.

Question is: Is this picture product placement for (the mainly non-pedelec) service "call-a-bike" by Deutsche Bahn or for the bikes of Riese und Müller?

Besides: For a lemma saying

"According to the National Bureau of Statistics in China more than 100 million e-bikes are on the road."

and

"... about 600,000 pedelecs on the road in Germany."

a photo from China should be more representative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.24.109.234 (talk) 22:49, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pedelec. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130328200435/http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/SafetyAndRules/SaferRiders/BikeRiders/PowerAssistedBicycles.htm to http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/SafetyAndRules/SaferRiders/BikeRiders/PowerAssistedBicycles.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:02, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pedelec. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130330101103/http://www.dolphin-ebike.ch/mainnav/story/ to http://www.dolphin-ebike.ch/mainnav/story/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121202064332/http://www.ziv-zweirad.de/public/pk_2012-ziv-praesentation_21-03-2012.pdf to http://www.ziv-zweirad.de/public/pk_2012-ziv-praesentation_21-03-2012.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

I have serious doubts about how the term Pedelec is generally understood. We seem to have a situation in which all bikes equipped with an electric motor are known as e-bikes. To distinguish between the two categories,i.e. the ones limited to 25 kmph and those limited to 45 km, the faster bikes are known as pedelecs or speed pedelecs. This is a case of the general public and maybe the manufacturers themselves ignoring legislative efforts and adopting other terminology. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 16:55, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Your comment is somewhat older, but just to be sure:

• E-Bike: any bike equipped with an electric motor no matter what method is used to engage the motor.

• Pedelec: any bike equipped with an electric motor which assists only while pedaling, in most countries only up to 25 km/h with max 250 watt continuous power

• S-Pedelec: any bike equipped with an electric motor which assists only while pedaling, in most countries only up to 45 km/h, usually with higher continuous power

thus all pedelecs are e-bikes, but not alle e-bikes are pedelecs

"Generally" however both pedelecs are also often called just e-bikes, as in many countries (e.g. Germany) other types of e-bikes are very uncommon. If that is "ignoring legislative efforts" ... I don't know. The efforts of the legislator are aimed at defining certain vehicle classes and their legal status, for which purpose they are designated. Whether the “vernacular” or the manufacturers adopt these designations or not is irrelevant to the legislator. Anyways - at least in Germany the term "pedelec" is quite common. Soulman (talk) 02:07, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

These two schematics are not informative and if they ever did convey any meaning, I would say they are now obsolete. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 17:13, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

The article has an advertorial tone and seems to advocate for "pedelecs." Phrases like "growth has been spectacular" are obvious hyperbole. Phrases like "should be classified as bicycles and not mopods" suggests the article is here to promote a particular position about pedelecs.136.219.6.75 (talk) 13:20, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

"However, any pedelec where the power assistance is triggered by merely turning wheels rather than pedal motion ... " What does this mean? S C Cheese (talk) 17:20, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

There have been cheap conversion kits with hub motors (especially at the front wheel), which had no pedal sensors. So basicall the motor did not "know" if the rider did pedal or not. Instead they assisted once the wheel was turning.

Quite uncommon today. Unfortunately the whole article describes the situation of about 10-12 years ago. Since then laws and technic both developed a lot and so the article is - while not really incorrect - giving a false impression about pedelecs today. Soulman (talk) 01:09, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Although the article is not directly wrong, it reflects the situation more than ten years ago. A lot has happened since then, both in terms of legislation and technology. In my opinion, it is also questionable whether, for example, complete Austrian legal texts need to be quoted, or whether a summary is not sufficient here. Many details are no longer correct: for example, it is now quite difficult to tune pedelecs illegally, and tuned pedelecs cannot be legalized by subsequent “registration”, as the article in the “Netherlands” section implies. Technical details are hardly up to date: e.g. NiCd and even NiMH batteries have not been used for years in any e-bikes, (be it pedelec or other) and the broad explanations of the advantages and disadvantages of certain types batteries are a crude mixture of overly detailed considerations that are not specific to pedelecs (“should not be charged in frosty temperatures”) and empty phrases: “When evaluating pedelec batteries, it makes sense to consider not only the capacity, but also criteria such as durability, memory effect, charging time, weight, safety and environmental protection.” This is more or less meaningless because today you generally buy a ready-made pedelec and have no influence on the type of battery installed. I would start to make this article at least a bit more up to date - BUT that would shorten it a lot, thus I would just delete a lot of outdated or irrelevant stuff. Opinions? Soulman (talk) 01:44, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps should be merged - please comment at Talk:Electric bicycle#What to do about overlap with Pedelec? Chidgk1 (talk) 07:49, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Also native English speakers hardly say “pedelec” in my experience Chidgk1 (talk) 08:14, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

I have since reflected on your proposals and think they are in principle correct, as are Soulmans remarks. However as the Pedelec article exists I would like to keep it in order to describe specific pedelec-technology and legal requirements. And at the same time update it and remove too much redundancy to Electric bicycle. Have started and will continue, and thanks for thanks! Theosch (talk) 09:40, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

@Theosch Thanks for updating, but please don’t forget to cite (or remove uncited info) and then remove the “more cites needed” from the top of the article, as it has been there for a while now Chidgk1 (talk) 11:52, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

I added text and references and removed uncited info. I think you are demanding too many cites and reverted your edit in History where you removed every unsited sentence. I added a few more but think too many cites cause clutter especially when the text is common knowledge, easily seachable, or in this case part of a large blanket reference. I also think I have improved the article considerably to reflect pedelec-specifics and moved unspecifics to Electric Bicycles and thereby lessend redundancies. I hope you can now live with the two articles unmerged. Theosch (talk) 17:01, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

@Theosch I can see you have done a lot of work so thanks for that. But I also think you have set yourself too difficult a task, partly because the word “pedelec” is so little used nowadays in English that it is too hard to find up to date cites.

I still think that if this article was merged into a more widely read article all your hard work would be much better appreciated. Chidgk1 (talk) 04:57, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Some of the paragraphs are very short so I have no objection if you wish to combine them and just have one cite at the end of the paragraph if it covers all the info Chidgk1 (talk) 05:04, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Chidgk1 for 3 comments. Although usage of the term "pedelec" is much less than "e-bike", it is used, also uniquely in "S-pedelec", and a more understandable term and easier to search for than "EPAC" od "EAPC".

As Pedelec exists, I find it easier to work on pedelec-specifics here, in spite of some redundancy, than in Electric Bicycle, which would become too long.

I will have to find out more about optimal citing as this is a universal issue. I am grateful for your attention as only correct citing can prevent the increasing danger of false statements. On the other hand, false or erroneous cites (e.g. from Research_paper_mills) are also a danger, and not citable personal knowledge is also a consideration, so that plausibility checks are perhaps more valuable than a large number of cites with limited usefulness. Theosch (talk) 10:20, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

As you can see from the above discussion and edit history @Theosch and I disagree. Chidgk1 (talk) 04:51, 6 December 2025 (UTC)