What qualifies as an e-bike? CA bill aims to cut through confusion over e-motos
On California streets and online, nearly every electric two-wheeler has been called an “e-bike” — even when it isn’t.
A California bill would cut through the confusion between legal electric bicycles and high-powered electric motorcycles by prohibiting manufacturers from marketing faster electric vehicles as e-bikes while creating new labeling requirements and improving crash reporting.
Senate Bill 1167, introduced by Sen. Catherine Blakespear, D-Encinitas, would clarify which vehicles qualify as electric bicycles under California’s three classes and require faster, more powerful vehicles — frequently called e-motos — to be classified and marketed as mopeds or motor-driven cycles.
“The thing that’s being sold to parents and to kids is sometimes, or frequently, not an e-bike. It’s actually an e-moto or a motorcycle,” Blakespear said. “So kids are riding on things that are over-powered for their age and experience with the road, and are just flat out illegal.”
Supporters say the measure also would establish clearer safety and labeling standards and improve crash reporting, addressing a longstanding problem in which many different types of electric vehicles have been recorded simply as “e-bikes.”
Facing little opposition, the bill is set to appear before the Assembly Committee on Appropriations after the Legislature reconvenes from its summer break Aug. 3.
What is and isn’t an e-bike?
Legal electric bicycles fall into three categories in California.
Class 1 bikes provide pedal assistance up to 20 mph. Class 2 bikes include a throttle but stop providing assistance at 20 mph. Class 3 bikes provide pedal assistance up to 28 mph and require riders to be at least 16 years old.
Sales of the devices skyrocketed nationwide during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Not every electric ride is an e-bike
California law draws a clear line between legal e-bikes and faster electric vehicles based on how they provide power and their maximum assisted speed. Electric motorcycles, often called e-motos, and stand-up scooters follow different rules, including licensing, registration and where they may legally operate.
- Pedals
- Yes
- Throttle
- No
- Assistance
- Pedal-assist
- Top speed
- 20 mph
- Motor limit
- 750 watts
- Min. age to ride
- None
- Helmet req.
- If under 18
- Driver’s license
- No
- Registration
- No
- Pedals
- Yes
- Throttle
- Yes
- Assistance
- Throttle-assist
- Top speed
- 20 mph
- Motor limit
- 750 watts
- Min. age to ride
- None
- Helmet req.
- If under 18
- Driver’s license
- No
- Registration
- No
- Pedals
- Yes
- Throttle
- No*
- Assistance
- Pedal-assist*
- Top speed
- 28 mph
- Motor limit
- 750 watts
- Min. age to ride
- 16 years old
- Helmet req.
- For all riders
- Driver’s license
- No
- Registration
- No
- Pedals
- No
- Throttle
- Yes
- Assistance
- No
- Top speed
- Varies
- Motor limit
- >750 watts
- Min. age to ride
- 16 with license
- Helmet req.
- For all riders
- Driver’s license
- Yes
- Registration
- Yes†
- Pedals
- No
- Throttle
- Yes
- Assistance
- No
- Top speed
- Varies
- Motor limit
- N/A
- Min. age to ride
- 16 years old
- Helmet req.
- For all riders
- Driver’s license
- Yes
- Registration
- No
* California law defines Class 3 as pedal-assist. Some manufacturers sell Class 3 bikes with throttles limited to 20 mph, but the defining feature is pedal assistance up to 28 mph. † The DMV requires Off-Highway Vehicle registration; riders must possess a driver’s license.
Sources: California Department of Justice, Department of Motor Vehicles
Graphic: DANIEL HUNT • dhunt@sacbee.com
Between 2019 and 2022, U.S. sales nearly quadrupled from just under 290,000 to 1.1 million, according to the Light Electric Vehicle Association. In 2022, electric bikes outsold electric vehicles. About 1.1 million e-bikes were sold, compared with about 800,000 electric vehicles, according to Kelley Blue Book.
While electric bicycles can be more expensive than traditional bicycles, the roughly $1,000 to $6,000 cost of a mid-range e-bike is still more affordable than most vehicles. They also do not require gasoline, insurance or a license.
“E-bikes present an incredible opportunity for people to replace car trips, not only for environmental and health reasons but for them to save money,” said Kendra Ramsey, executive director of the California Bicycle Coalition, which is co-sponsoring SB 1167.
Ramsey, who lives in midtown Sacramento, said she often uses an e-bike to pick up her 3-year-old from school across downtown. The trip, she said, is faster by e-bike than by car.
Some of the draw of the devices is their accessibility. They allow people to travel longer distances with less physical effort. E-bikes also make cycling more accessible to older adults and people with health limitations.
As the sales of these legal devices have surged so, too, have purchases of vehicles that resemble, or are marketed as, e-bikes but perform more like motorcycles.
E-motos and electric dirt bikes can reach higher speeds and rely entirely on throttle power — making them illegal on public roads and bike paths. While they differ from e-bikes, they may be marketed or constructed to confuse buyers into thinking they are legal, said Matt Moore, general policy counsel for PeopleForBikes, a national advocacy and industry trade association.
Some companies put non-functioning pedals on an e-moto to make it look more like an e-bike, Moore said. Others claimed their vehicles could travel at legal speeds when they “actually had a motor or speed capability far in excess of what’s allowed,” Moore said. Some manufacturers simply labeled a product an “e-bike,” even though it did not meet the requirements.
Social media only compounds the problem, showing children riding the souped-up vehicles on streets.
“So these were, I think I would say, intentional strategies to sell these vehicles that were much faster than electric bicycles in the guise of electric bicycles,” he said.
Consumer protections
Blakespear said, at its core, SB 1167 is a consumer protection and public safety bill: “The point is to ensure that these bicycle-looking devices are actually classified, marketed and labeled accurately.”
The bill would classify electric vehicles as mopeds, motor-driven cycles or one of California’s three classes of e-bikes, depending on their design and performance.
Motor-driven cycles are already defined in the vehicle code but currently apply only to gas-powered vehicles. The bill would expand the definition to include highway-use electric motorcycles with motors up to 3.75 kilowatts, or about 5 horsepower.
Mopeds, which are also in the vehicle code, would include two- or three-wheel vehicles that can travel up to 30 mph with an electric motor of less than 3 kilowatts or an internal combustion engine that produces less than 4 horsepower. The bill also clarifies that only those powered by liquid fuel, such as gasoline, require a muffler.
The bill also would eliminate the outdated term “motorized bicycles” from the vehicle code, a change supporters say would further reduce confusion with e-bikes.
Under the legislation, mopeds and motor-driven cycles would be required to have vehicle identification numbers and safety certification. The bill also specifies that motorcycles, mopeds, motorized scooters, pocket bikes and off-highway vehicles cannot be marketed or sold as e-bikes.
E-bikes currently require a label identifying key information about the device, including its top assisted speed, motor wattage and whether it is Class 1, 2 or 3. Under the bill, the label would also need to include the brand name and name of the manufacturer, importer or distributor. A similar certification label would be necessary for mopeds and motor-driven cycles and. The rules for selling e-bike classification labels also would become stricter.
Law enforcement officers also would be required to record those label details after crashes involving the vehicles, a change supporters say would produce more accurate crash data. Many high-powered electric vehicles have been lumped together with legal e-bikes in police and hospital records, making it difficult to distinguish between them when evaluating injuries and crashes, according to previous Bee reporting.
.png "9k=-pbx (2).png")
Preserving the e-bike
This year, at least nine bills related to electric bicycles were introduced in the Legislature. Fewer than half have seen committee votes since the beginning of June.
For example, Assembly Bill 1942 would have required Class 2 and Class 3 e-bikes to be registered with the Department of Motor Vehicles before stalling in committee.
Blakespear said SB 1167 differs from many of those proposals because it focuses on consumer protections rather than restricting access to legal e-bikes.
A range of jurisdictions and organizations support the bill, including the cities of Irvine and Calabasas and the East Bay Regional Park District. The amended measure has passed four committees and the Senate unanimously.
One organization, the Motorcycle Industry Council, opposes the bill. In a July bill analysis, the trade association said it disagreed with limiting the term “e-bike” because it is “widely used as common vernacular across both the motorcycle and bicycle industries.”
Many other states have passed e-bike legislation similar to SB 1167, including Utah in 2024. PeopleForBikes’ Moore, who keeps track of the bicycle marketplace, said he has seen less misleading advertising since states such as Connecticut, Illinois and Colorado adopted stricter guidelines for what is and is not an e-bike.
Ramsey of the bicycle coalition said the term “e-bike” has not been “adequately protected” from misuse for years.
“There’s a definition for legal e-bikes, but the term e-bike hasn’t been protected to only mean that definition,” she said, “until this bill.
