On Choosing the Right Motor and Having Our Cross-Country EV Classified as a Bicycle

I think you made the right choice with the motor and controller, but not with the chain drive. I am not an expert, but I read somewhere that a toothed rubber belt (like a timing belt) is much more efficient than a chain. Suggest you check it out. I suppose that the chain was chosen to make gear changing easy and admit that it would be a challenge to use a similar system with a belt. But if the belt was relatively narrow it might be accomplished.

Good Luck on a very interesting challenge.

@ Roy_H ; The thought was probably durability with the chain, plus the universally available part.

@ Roy_H the following response is from Pierce Hoover, thank you for your comment:
Belt drives are gaining popularity among mountain bikers for the exact reasons you described. However, we were unable to source appropriate belt lengths for some of the non-standard spans on our multi-sprocket drive system. As a result, we decided to stick with the time-proven chain system, which could be easily replaced or repaired with a few standard tools. There were a number of similar compromises made during the build process, and quite often, ideas that started with leading-edge concepts and materials was scaled back to a simpler, more conventional technology for reasons including a proven service history, ease of repair, cost and time to completion. If we ever decide to do something like this again, maybe we can get some grant money and a few bright engineering grad students, then go nuts on all sorts of futuristic concepts. This time around, our goal was simply to make it coast to coast on our self-imposed power limitations.

Thought I would pass these links on, I believe this is what Roy_H was describing for anyone that might be interested.

www.fennerdrives.com/high_performance_composite_vbelts/nut_supt_home.aspx

www.fennerdrives.com/high_performance_composite_vbelts/powertwist_home.aspx

According to Federal Bicycle Law HR 727 a `low-speed electric bicycle' means a two or three-wheeled vehicle with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less
than 750 watts (1 h.p.).

How are you getting around this law?

A "clean" chain compared to any type of belt is about 15 % more efficient regarding roller friction. Belts are nice and light but can't compete. 15% is a lot when referring to minimal HP/High Torque as in this case and most bike applications. A tandem bicycle has about 150 ft./lbs. of torque, equivalent to many cars.
New generation cogged belts do work quite well on commuter type bike where low maintenance, light weight and increased longevity are an advantage.
BTW: A dirty chain can knock 15% efficiency right off.

First, I love your ideas, your ride. I'm president of the Illinois Electric Vehicle club and last summer we hosted thegreenriders.org as well as Tom Weiss on his rideforrenewables.com -- if you are able to take a diversion north to Champaign-Urbana Illinois, we'll put you up for the night, do a ride exchange, etc as well as find you a route back down to St. Louis (though I understand that this would be a pretty big detour).

However, regarding the portion of your blog where you state:

"Federal and state transportation laws don’t differentiate between two-, three-, or four-wheeled vehicles when defining a bicycle"

In fact many states DO differentiate between two, three and four wheeled vehicles with pedals (with and without electric motor assist):

For instance, in my home state of Illinois, there is no such thing as a 3-wheeled bicycle -- unless it has a motor on it. The regular bicycle law in Illinois requires "two wheels in tandem":

(625 ILCS 5/1‑106) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 1‑106)
Sec. 1‑106. Bicycle. Every device propelled by human power upon which any person may ride, having two tandem wheels except scooters and similar devices.
(Source: P.A. 85‑951.)

Now whether that is a maximum of two wheels, and they must be in tandem (one behind the other) or whether it can be one set "in tandem" and then countless more wheels (which would cover your 4-wheeler) is an interpretation and therefore for a court to hear arguments... but at least an argument could be made (though it is against standard concept of "bicycle" as well as UCI's -- the world bicycling governing body - racing/aka Tour de France).

Now of course you CAN get three wheels with two "in tandem" if you ride a regular bicycle with a tag-a-long for a child...

The Illinois electric bicycle code (625 ILCS 5/1‑140.10 -- www.illinois.edu/goto/ivc)is reliant on Section 38 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 2085) which as you can see here does NOT include four-wheeled vehicles:

www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00002085----000-.html#b

Now to the important part: What this means for you (in Illinois and other states that base their definition on 15 U.S.C Sec. 2085): Your vehicle has no legal road rights as it is neither a bicycle nor an eBike (or even an NEV). While it is highly unlikely that you'll be pulled over, it does mean that if you get into an accident and regardless of fault a good opposing barrister can make a pretty solid argument that you never should've been on the road in the first place, and therefore their client is not at fault/culpable.

Note that I am not a lawyer, just a layman who has become very interested in legislation concerning weird little vehicles, as I've driven a Twike for the past 4 years (www.illinois.edu/goto/twike), one of the original human-electric hybrid vehicles as well as participated in the Automotive XPRIZE with the manufactures of the Twike in their next-gen vehicle, the TW4XP.

Now as you're sponsored by PopSci and GE, then perhaps they'd be kind enough to lend you their general consul to review my jailhouse lawyering...