.
.
.
Generate 15 catchy Hashtags all in a row from this content, and please provide the hashtag and nothing else:
- Ban the sale of tampering kits EU-wide. They should be removed from online marketplaces, repeat sellers should face coordinated enforcement, and buyers should get clear warnings about what happens if they modify a bike.
- Build a European evidence base on how non-compliant e-bikes affect road safety and the economy.
- Enforce market surveillance rules properly and consistently, including for online sales. ECI wants online marketplaces classed as “economic operators” with “direct joint liability” for selling tampering kits and illegal e-bikes. It also wants every imported product to have an EU-based representative who can be held responsible.
- Fund local enforcement. Police and trading standards-type bodies need the training and technical kit to spot a tuned bike.
ECI points to France as the model. French law already bans modifying an e-bike’s speed limiter, with penalties of up to a year in prison and a €30,000 fine, and ECI says a French ban on selling tuning kits has “reduced drastically” the problem.
A lot of this is really about online shopping. The manifesto says 4.6 billion low-value parcels entered the EU in 2024, 91% of them from China. That’s nearly double the 2023 figure. Many were sold by sellers outside the EU with nobody in Europe answerable for whether they comply with the rules.
The bit that affects your bike
The industry isn’t only pointing at other people. ECI members have also renewed a 2021 self-commitment against tampering. A new position paper sets out, for the first time, what “state of the art” anti-tampering protection actually means, and it’s quite specific.
The measures it expects manufacturers to build in include:
- cryptographically signed firmware that can’t be rolled back to an older version
- the motor, battery and controller checking each other are genuine parts
- speed sensor readings cross-checked against cadence and motor speed
- tamper-proof logs of any changes to settings
If a system does detect tampering, the paper suggests a “proportionate” response, such as logging a fault code or cutting the assistance.
It also lists what doesn’t meet the bar:
- short PINs, default passwords, or unprotected Bluetooth or USB access
- app, display or web account settings that let riders push speed, power or torque past the legal limits
- unlocks through button combinations, hidden menus or factory codes
- motors that rely on a single speed signal without checking it, which a magnet or dongle can fool
- protection that only works because nobody knows how it’s done
In other words, the hidden ‘dealer mode’ may be on borrowed time.
“The 2021 commitment established that this industry does not accept tampering. We are taking it a step further with our related Position Paper. It gives manufacturers a concrete benchmark to design against, and it gives authorities and standardisation bodies a reference point for assessing whether a system is genuinely protected or just appears to be.”
Paul Walsh, CEO, European Cycling Industries
The paper is also blunt about motor makers. It says they “must actively participate” because they have the technical ability and the money to fix the problem.
What about repairs?
Riders will want to know whether locked-down systems mean only a main dealer can touch their bike. The paper says only the system maker, the bike brand or someone they’ve authorised should be able to change compliance-related settings. It also says anti-tampering measures must stay “fully compatible with legitimate maintenance, diagnostics, repair” and independent expertise. It proposes time-limited service permissions that can be withdrawn, rather than a permanent unlock. How that works for independent workshops is something to watch.
Why it matters in the UK
Britain isn’t in the EU, but the bikes we buy are largely designed for the European market. Many of the brands and motor makers involved in ECI sell here too. If firmware and hardware get locked down for Europe, UK bikes will very likely get the same treatment.
The UK is having a similar debate of its own. Carlisle MP Julie Minns introduced a Ten Minute Rule bill in January to ban the marketing and sale of non-compliant e-bikes and conversion kits. It passed its first reading but has yet to be given a date for its second reading, so it’s not going anywhere fast. Minns is still pushing, though: in July she asked Transport ministers what they’re doing about illegal conversion kits.
ECI’s paper also arrives as the main e-bike standard, EN 15194, is being fast-tracked to align with the EU Machinery Regulation. That includes cybersecurity requirements that could be used against tampering, and the update is expected in Q4 2026. A deeper revision with stronger anti-tampering measures is underway as well.
You can read the manifesto, position paper and self-commitment on the ECI website.
The self-commitment doesn’t name any signatories, so we asked ECI which bike brands and motor makers have signed up, whether there’s a timeline for the new measures, and whether there’s any data behind the “increasing incidence of tampering”.
ECI communications officer Istvan Koles told us that “all ECI-member manufacturers have agreed with the self-commitment”. He said the state-of-the-art measures were compiled by member manufacturers in ECI’s working group, but he couldn’t give “any company specific timeline” for rolling them out. So there’s no list of names, and no dates for when your next bike might be harder to tune.
ECI’s website does list its members, though, which gives a fair idea of who’s signed up. Four drive system makers are on the list: Bosch, Shimano, Yamaha and Bafang. So are SRAM and Honda. The bike brands include Trek, Specialized, Giant, Pon Bike Group and Accell, along with Decathlon.
Brose, TQ, Fazua, DJI and Mahle aren’t on the list, so as far as we can tell they haven’t signed up. Amazon is a member, which is interesting given the manifesto wants online marketplaces held jointly liable for selling tampering kits.
The UK’s own trade body, the Bicycle Association of GB, is also a member, so the self-commitment has a British foot in the door even if EU law doesn’t.
On data, Koles said ECI is running a data-gathering exercise with its manufacturer members. It has seen “the first, non-public data sets” on how far tampering affects its members’ fleets, and it plans to keep going to understand the full scale of the problem. That’s why the manifesto’s second demand is for the European Commission and member states to set up a coordinated system for collecting data on non-compliant e-bikes and tampering kits.
Source link
Summarize this content to 1000 words:
Ban the sale of tampering kits EU-wide. They should be removed from online marketplaces, repeat sellers should face coordinated enforcement, and buyers should get clear warnings about what happens if they modify a bike.
Build a European evidence base on how non-compliant e-bikes affect road safety and the economy.
Enforce market surveillance rules properly and consistently, including for online sales. ECI wants online marketplaces classed as “economic operators” with “direct joint liability” for selling tampering kits and illegal e-bikes. It also wants every imported product to have an EU-based representative who can be held responsible.
Fund local enforcement. Police and trading standards-type bodies need the training and technical kit to spot a tuned bike.
ECI points to France as the model. French law already bans modifying an e-bike’s speed limiter, with penalties of up to a year in prison and a €30,000 fine, and ECI says a French ban on selling tuning kits has “reduced drastically” the problem.
A lot of this is really about online shopping. The manifesto says 4.6 billion low-value parcels entered the EU in 2024, 91% of them from China. That’s nearly double the 2023 figure. Many were sold by sellers outside the EU with nobody in Europe answerable for whether they comply with the rules.
The bit that affects your bike
The industry isn’t only pointing at other people. ECI members have also renewed a 2021 self-commitment against tampering. A new position paper sets out, for the first time, what “state of the art” anti-tampering protection actually means, and it’s quite specific.
The measures it expects manufacturers to build in include:
cryptographically signed firmware that can’t be rolled back to an older version
the motor, battery and controller checking each other are genuine parts
speed sensor readings cross-checked against cadence and motor speed
tamper-proof logs of any changes to settings
If a system does detect tampering, the paper suggests a “proportionate” response, such as logging a fault code or cutting the assistance.
It also lists what doesn’t meet the bar:
short PINs, default passwords, or unprotected Bluetooth or USB access
app, display or web account settings that let riders push speed, power or torque past the legal limits
unlocks through button combinations, hidden menus or factory codes
motors that rely on a single speed signal without checking it, which a magnet or dongle can fool
protection that only works because nobody knows how it’s done
In other words, the hidden ‘dealer mode’ may be on borrowed time.
“The 2021 commitment established that this industry does not accept tampering. We are taking it a step further with our related Position Paper. It gives manufacturers a concrete benchmark to design against, and it gives authorities and standardisation bodies a reference point for assessing whether a system is genuinely protected or just appears to be.”
Paul Walsh, CEO, European Cycling Industries
The paper is also blunt about motor makers. It says they “must actively participate” because they have the technical ability and the money to fix the problem.
What about repairs?
Riders will want to know whether locked-down systems mean only a main dealer can touch their bike. The paper says only the system maker, the bike brand or someone they’ve authorised should be able to change compliance-related settings. It also says anti-tampering measures must stay “fully compatible with legitimate maintenance, diagnostics, repair” and independent expertise. It proposes time-limited service permissions that can be withdrawn, rather than a permanent unlock. How that works for independent workshops is something to watch.
Why it matters in the UK
Britain isn’t in the EU, but the bikes we buy are largely designed for the European market. Many of the brands and motor makers involved in ECI sell here too. If firmware and hardware get locked down for Europe, UK bikes will very likely get the same treatment.
The UK is having a similar debate of its own. Carlisle MP Julie Minns introduced a Ten Minute Rule bill in January to ban the marketing and sale of non-compliant e-bikes and conversion kits. It passed its first reading but has yet to be given a date for its second reading, so it’s not going anywhere fast. Minns is still pushing, though: in July she asked Transport ministers what they’re doing about illegal conversion kits.
ECI’s paper also arrives as the main e-bike standard, EN 15194, is being fast-tracked to align with the EU Machinery Regulation. That includes cybersecurity requirements that could be used against tampering, and the update is expected in Q4 2026. A deeper revision with stronger anti-tampering measures is underway as well.
You can read the manifesto, position paper and self-commitment on the ECI website.
The self-commitment doesn’t name any signatories, so we asked ECI which bike brands and motor makers have signed up, whether there’s a timeline for the new measures, and whether there’s any data behind the “increasing incidence of tampering”.
ECI communications officer Istvan Koles told us that “all ECI-member manufacturers have agreed with the self-commitment”. He said the state-of-the-art measures were compiled by member manufacturers in ECI’s working group, but he couldn’t give “any company specific timeline” for rolling them out. So there’s no list of names, and no dates for when your next bike might be harder to tune.
ECI’s website does list its members, though, which gives a fair idea of who’s signed up. Four drive system makers are on the list: Bosch, Shimano, Yamaha and Bafang. So are SRAM and Honda. The bike brands include Trek, Specialized, Giant, Pon Bike Group and Accell, along with Decathlon.
Brose, TQ, Fazua, DJI and Mahle aren’t on the list, so as far as we can tell they haven’t signed up. Amazon is a member, which is interesting given the manifesto wants online marketplaces held jointly liable for selling tampering kits.
The UK’s own trade body, the Bicycle Association of GB, is also a member, so the self-commitment has a British foot in the door even if EU law doesn’t.
On data, Koles said ECI is running a data-gathering exercise with its manufacturer members. It has seen “the first, non-public data sets” on how far tampering affects its members’ fleets, and it plans to keep going to understand the full scale of the problem. That’s why the manifesto’s second demand is for the European Commission and member states to set up a coordinated system for collecting data on non-compliant e-bikes and tampering kits.
