Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 192
  1. #101
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    Unless, of course, you simply want to say that the more the trails are used the more they degrade.
    This is exactly what I'm saying. I don't see how that works against us.

    And that, my friends, is exactly what the hikers and equestrians have been doing to us for years.
    Yes, and the early ebikers will say 'None of these 20KW ebikes!' and the 20KW ebikers will say 'No motos!' and the motos will say 'No storm trooper speeders!' until the trails are all freeway and one cannot go a quarter mile downhill without having to wait for a climber, and one cannot go anywhere near as fast downhill as they could before, knowing that someone may be coming up the climb at 15 MPH. Yes there are solutions to all these problems - DH only trails . . . more trails . . . but I don't think it'll be a fun process for a few years while this all gets sorted out.

    I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, I think I've said everything I can here. I respect B-Mike's, Axe's and others opinion on this, I hope I'm wrong and we can all have nice dirt long after rain on relatively lightly trafficked trails with uninterrupted flowy downhill perfection.

    I'm out [mic drop]

  2. #102
    Axe
    Axe is online now
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    This is a straw man argument. The answer is no, we shouldn't sit home, but, we shouldn't make it any easier.
    No, it was not a strawman argument. It was an analogy - regular bikes also do make it easier to go out and further. So do hiking boots. And horses - which everybody would agree are far more destructive than bikes.

    Any arguments of the type that restrictions should be only to the level so that the person making the argument is not affected are disingenuous.

    And why I can see the argument about regular motorbike noise and power somehow making trail experience worse for everybody else - even a tenuous argument at that - I can not see any clear evidence about silent, lower power electric assist bikes. I do not care about them because of cost, weight and hassle, but damn right I will use them once I can not pedal for a day anymore. There is no wholesale nature destruction and there is no annoyance to other trail users beyond their sense of righteousness.

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,157

    Pedal-Assisted bike spotted at Boggs - thoughts?

    Quote Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    No, it was not a strawman argument. It was an analogy - regular bikes also do make it easier to go out and further. So do hiking boots. And horses - which everybody would agree are far more destructive than bikes.

    Any arguments of the type that restrictions should be only to the level so that the person making the argument is not affected are disingenuous.

    And why I can see the argument about regular motorbike noise and power somehow making trail experience worse for everybody else - even a tenuous argument at that - I can not see any clear evidence about silent, lower power electric assist bikes. I do not care about them because of cost, weight and hassle, but damn right I will use them once I can not pedal for a day anymore. There is no wholesale nature destruction and there is no annoyance to other trail users beyond their sense of righteousness.
    You can ride an e-bike and I'll ride an electric dirt bike. http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/

    And we'll both be lazy and fat.

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    803
    Quote Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    There is no wholesale nature destruction and there is no annoyance to other trail users beyond their sense of righteousness.
    Since the degeneration in my hips will eventually keep me from swinging my legs over the top-tube of any bike, including an e-bike, I'll be demanding that I be allowed to run my e-ATV on all of the trails that I currently ride my bike on. As the only damage or irritant it'll produce is to other people's sense of righteousness, I'll expect your full support in my "right" right to ride anywhere, anytime I want on it and to modify the trails so that I can do so.

  5. #105
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,640
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    ddproctor, I think that the argument of increased numbers is weak, especially absent any factual data about the frequency of use of the two condition you present. Unless, of course, you simply want to say that the more the trails are used the more they degrade. In which case that works against us in terms of our future access to trips thus far denied to us.

    Or if you are talking about "earning your downhills", well, we've been there before and that gets us nowhere. For my part, I love the climb and simply riding up the hill doesn't have much meaning for me. So I guess I "earn" my climbs but so what. Not everyone has to ride that way.

    No, I think that this discussion has yet to hit on a fundamental understanding of this issue. As far as I can see most of the resistance boils down to just not liking the idea of power-assisted riding and coming up with reasons afterwards, reason to keep them off of "our" trails. And that, my friends, is exactly what the hikers and equestrians have been doing to us for years.
    Spot on, Mike!!

    I think the anti-assist arguments are basically based in fear or aesthetics (electric assisted bikes offend me as a 'real' cyclist), with no actual data, or even real world anecdotes (which is not data, not even plural anecdotes). The other arguments fall into 'slippery slope' arguments. Well, if somebody has a 300W motor, the next guy will have a 600W motor, and the next guy (in an actual example given here) will have a 20 kilowatt motor! Dude, you just went from a few pounds of batteries and a light hub motor to the equivalent of a 700cc 26 horsepower gas motor. Tell me you just didn't slippery slope us to something completely unreasonable to strap to a bicycle just to add fear factor to your argument.

    I mean, really!!

    26 HP KAWASAKI LIQUID COOLED ENGINE FD731V-BS07

    And that pic floating around with the guy roosting up the dirt on the e-bike? Geez, people do that without the motor.

    And, what if the bike breaks down? How is that ANY different than any other bike break-down? ... broken chain, busted derailleurs, broken shock, taco'ed wheel, etc. We aren't talking about paraplegics suddenly going solo mountain biking in the most remote places here, having a breakdown and dying on the trail from exposure because of it... and HEY! LET'S BLAME THE BIKE!!! BAN THEM!!! I think we all know that it's a bad idea to go mountain biking solo somewhere very remote, with no means of calling for help, or where other passers-by won't see you.

    I mean, I know a guy who slipped a rear tire in a turn and ended up on the ground, breaking his hip. He couldn't move himself. If this happened out in the middle of nowhere, he would have been coyote food.

    See? That argument sounds like fear mongering rather than a real world problem that needs to be solved by laws and rules.

    All I'm saying is we need much better reasons to pass laws (or park rules) than 'it makes me feel icky-poo to see an electric assisted bike rider'.

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 8iking VIIking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    909

    Re: Pedal-Assisted bike spotted at Boggs - thoughts?

    I don't believe in allowing e-bikes on non-motorized trails for no other reason than I think it would open up the possibility of more powerful motorized bikes on the trails. Sure, it could start with a limit on power, but people are always trying to push their luck. Or just blatantly disobey the rules. As others stated, it'd be very difficult to enforce. How to most illegal trail users get busted? They get reported by other trail users. It's impossible to report someone for using an e-bike that's too powerful if you don't know it's too powerful.

    Also, how long would it be until some numbskull says to himself "hey, I saw a motor bike on this trail, I'm gonna bring my 125 tomorrow!" Don't overestimate people's intelligence, there really are people who think like that.

  7. #107
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,640
    Quote Originally Posted by 8iking VIIking View Post
    I don't believe in allowing e-bikes on non-motorized trails for no other reason than I think it would open up the possibility of more powerful motorized bikes on the trails. Sure, it could start with a limit on power, but people are always trying to push their luck. Or just blatantly disobey the rules. As others stated, it'd be very difficult to enforce. How to most illegal trail users get busted? They get reported by other trail users. It's impossible to report someone for using an e-bike that's too powerful if you don't know it's too powerful.

    Also, how long would it be until some numbskull says to himself "hey, I saw a motor bike on this trail, I'm gonna bring my 125 tomorrow!" Don't overestimate people's intelligence, there really are people who think like that.
    So, you're going with 'Slippery Slope'. Gotcha.

  8. #108
    FBI tested, NSA approved!
    Reputation: Forster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,161
    I think the ends of this argument are something like: On one hand making the trails accessible would increase support for them, however, folks who need motorized assistance may be less able to get themselves out of the woods if something breaks. On the other hand, if you allow e-bikes, what logic do you apply to the Whizzer rider to keep them off the trail? Whizzer motors are generally less expensive than E-bikes so if you try the "gas motors are too noisey/fast/impactive" argument you get the "don't keep me from the trail just because I'm mobility restricted and can't afford the more expensive alternative counter-argument.
    The most expensive bike in the world is still cheaper than the cheapest open heart surgery.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 8iking VIIking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    909

    Re: Pedal-Assisted bike spotted at Boggs - thoughts?

    Quote Originally Posted by pimpbot View Post
    So, you're going with 'Slippery Slope'. Gotcha.
    More or less, yeah. I don't like the idea of jeopardizing our future trail use to please a small fringe group. Aren't there plenty of other off highway trails for them to use?

  10. #110
    Delirious Tuck
    Reputation: thefriar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,302
    Some of these are the same arguments we advocates hear hikers and equestrians and non-recreationists throw at us... "More use, erosion creators, more illegal trails, concentrated use, idiots that aren't self-sufficient"... I think Mike is going that direction. Its valid.

    IMHO:

    E-bikes aren't human powered, they use electricity to drive a motor (doesn't matter if it assists or drives on its own, there IS a motor there powering the system). Its binary.

    Worst case scenario/eventuality:
    1. Someone with an ebike crashes into another trail user, injury results.
    2. The lawsuit goes against the deep pockets of the land manager.
    3. Damages awarded because technically the bike has an electric motor and was permitted or negligently permitted on those trails (i.e. land manager didn't follow their own enforcement of motorized restriction and associated risk mgmt plans).
    4. Damages carry cost and require mitigating risk of future occurrence.
    5. No clear way to regulate bikes and ebikes.
    6. Restrict/ban both as no way to ensure or mitigate "appropriate" judgement/enforcement of risk mitigants that protect from negligence/liability.

    Side Benefit to Land Manager: Decreased risk of future economic penalty & lower go forward operating costs due to lower usage driving down maintenance requirements, insurance premiums, and user conflict.

    Human powered is one of the big reasons we have a seat at the access table. Hikers, Equestrians, and Mt.Bikers all rely on sweat and pain to get us from point A to point B... on some level there is respect for each other's athletic prowess.

    Perception is reality. Unfortunately. [I'm focused on non-motorized/human powered only trails and systems].

    It's not a slippery slope, its an eventuality and that perception makes it a reality to MTB advocates and other human powered user groups that partner with or antagonize MTB advocates.

    So, its better to be clear and establish the position very clearly that Mt. Bikes are non-motorized and belong on non-motorized/human powered trails. Ebikes, since they have a motor do not have a place on said trails.

    I'm not against Ebikes organizing for their own advocacy. But the burden, like MTB has done before them, should be on them to develop the research, risk mitigation, trail design, volunteer time & $ donations that benefit other trail users. Otherwise, they risk losing access for not just themselves, but for all bikes, and that is untenable.

    From the advocacy trenches in NIMBY rich CT ~TF

  11. #111
    mtb'er
    Reputation: Empty_Beer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,862
    The harder it is to discern between a human powered mountain bike and a motorized mountain bike, the closer we will all get lumped in with the MX'ers and their rules and regulations (much to the glee of anti-MTB activists) and I believe this will affect access for wheels on non-motorized trails. I hope I'm wrong.

  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,157

    Pedal-Assisted bike spotted at Boggs - thoughts?

    "some level there is respect for each other's athletic prowess"

    Does this apply to the baby whales I've seen on horses?

    All kidding aside, human powered transport is the key here - if we start allowing powered bikes, then we might as well allow 4x4s.

  13. #113
    FBI tested, NSA approved!
    Reputation: Forster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Empty_Beer View Post
    The harder it is to discern between a human powered mountain bike and a motorized mountain bike, the closer we will all get lumped in with the MX'ers and their rules and regulations (much to the glee of anti-MTB activists) and I believe this will affect access for wheels on non-motorized trails. I hope I'm wrong.
    Ooh, I think you've got the solution. Let E-Bikes ride anywhere MX'rs ride. They get access to trails and we don't have to deal with them. They're less damaging to trails than motorcycles.
    The most expensive bike in the world is still cheaper than the cheapest open heart surgery.

  14. #114
    Axe
    Axe is online now
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,550

    Pedal-Assisted bike spotted at Boggs - thoughts?

    Quote Originally Posted by thefriar View Post
    E-bikes aren't human powered
    Neither are horses. Or mule trains in wilderness.

    Comparing assisted bikes to 4x4 is preposterous. They are not comparable in any way whatsoever. You can not tell an e- bike when it rides by you.

  15. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    47
    Assisted bikes (e.g. pedal and get moar powar added, max speed of XYZ) don't bother me much. Twist grip--yeah, they're just motorcycles.
    What's the diff? Engagement of the rider. I see this in the city, twist grip people pay as little attention as car drivers often and just kinda go because it's the least effort thing to do. (Vs. kinda like bicycles darting between cars because they don't want to stop--but in that case they're often hyper-attentive).
    Maybe I'm wrong here. But I see no reason to shut them out at first, but certainly enagement with the riders is useful.

    I also think there should be way more off road motorcycle areas near population centers!

  16. #116
    Unpredictable
    Reputation: Ridnparadise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,808
    I'm not in the US, but regardless, introducing more rules, conflict and competition for land space and recognition is never a solution. It just complicates things - and on and on it goes.

    What is pretty obvious around here is that when riders encounter other trail users, a happy exchange is likely. We know the trails are MTB specific. They don't have a clue, or care because they like being in the bush; no different to us really. Sometimes a walker, runner or dog will get in the way and it can be a pi$$er. No more though than a rider to rider encounter in rad terrain.

    I don't see e-bikes changing the primary rules of looking ahead and being able to control your vehicle at all times. No-one wants a collision with anything. Sometimes that is forgotten.

    My counsel would be to let it ride and see what happens. MTB has a pro-active history and has more clout than motorised transport on trails. It will probably be better in the long run to have the assisted bike brigade on side with MTB against the evils of equestrian and the sierra club style, perpetually morally outraged, green advocates who pose a greater threat to MTB and most of humanity than any gaggle of e-bikers.

  17. #117
    I like mtn biking, too
    Reputation: shredchic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,225
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    No, I think that this discussion has yet to hit on a fundamental understanding of this issue. As far as I can see most of the resistance boils down to just not liking the idea of power-assisted riding and coming up with reasons afterwards, reason to keep them off of "our" trails. And that, my friends, is exactly what the hikers and equestrians have been doing to us for years.
    I understand that some arguments we make against ebikes can sound a lot like the arguments made against us by anti-mtb folks. But the current arguments carefully crafted by mtb advocates to help land managers and the public understand that mountain bikers are not in fact, the devil's spawn, include:

    1) it is a human-powered activity
    2) it promotes a healthy lifestyle
    3) one can reference studies that demonstrate that the difference in the environmental impact of mountain biking vs. hiking is insignificant. https://www.imba.com/resources/resea...best-practices

    All of these above arguments no longer apply once we start lumping ourselves in the same category as ebikes. I am not arguing that Ebikes should be banned from all trails, but they are already not included in most multi-use designations for good reason. They can, however, be ridden wherever motorcycles can ride, such as Downieville, Corral, etc.
    Never use your face as a brake pad.
    -Jake Watson

  18. #118
    Junior flyer
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,499
    ^^ Well said, Julie. I can't believe it took 117 posts for somebody to connect (3) dots.

    Maybe next we can tackle the difference between peddle and pedal. Or why professional soccer players--grown-ass men--are obsessed with flopping. And how could an 11-year old girl possibly give professional golfers a run for their money? It's full-on, Princess Bride inconceivable!
    Last edited by dirtvert; 06-20-2014 at 12:57 PM.
    Why?

    Because we like the taste of freedom; because we like the smell of danger. ~ E. Abbey

  19. #119
    bike whore
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    118
    What he said.
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    ddproctor, I think that the argument of increased numbers is weak, especially absent any factual data about the frequency of use of the two condition you present. Unless, of course, you simply want to say that the more the trails are used the more they degrade. In which case that works against us in terms of our future access to trips thus far denied to us.

    Or if you are talking about "earning your downhills", well, we've been there before and that gets us nowhere. For my part, I love the climb and simply riding up the hill doesn't have much meaning for me. So I guess I "earn" my climbs but so what. Not everyone has to ride that way.

    No, I think that this discussion has yet to hit on a fundamental understanding of this issue. As far as I can see most of the resistance boils down to just not liking the idea of power-assisted riding and coming up with reasons afterwards, reason to keep them off of "our" trails. And that, my friends, is exactly what the hikers and equestrians have been doing to us for years.

  20. #120
    It's about showing up.
    Reputation: Berkeley Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,262
    Today in the Contra Costa Times is an article on the Harley Davidson full-sized electric motorcycle that goes 0-60 in 4 seconds:

    "Some people may get on it thinking 'golf cart,'" lead engineer Jeff Richlen said, "and they get off thing, 'rocket ship'".

    AGAIN:

    What is the real intention of refusing motorized access? What qualities do they express that make them a problem? How does that relate to bikes?
    I don't rattle.

  21. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    153
    All of the anti-pedal assisted bike comments reminds me the intolerance from the horse people. Who cares if kom's, if someone wants to cheat it, they can.

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8
    Sadly This could lead to a whole bunch of people taking to the trails who are not in good enough shape to ride them otherwise. I would make an exception to elderly or someone with a disability as in ADA. Not someone who through neglect or lack of interest has not developed sufficient coordination and strength to enable them to pedal a bicycle. Introducing this onto a bicycle trail is opening the door to other forms of powered bicycles. It will also encourage those who put not a ha'peth of effort or money into the building or maintenance of trail system. Not only will the trails be destroyed anything that is difficult will be remove for safety reasons. Let the electric bicycles go ahead and play on the nicly manicured grass at the local park or on paved bike trail where they can enjoy a coffee shop on every corner and never get dirty

  23. #123
    I just wanna go fast...
    Reputation: bdamschen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,512
    Quote Originally Posted by huntermos View Post
    The only thing that makes this contraption a "bike" is that it has peddles. In every other way it is a moto. It has the power and torque to do some serious trail damage, and there's no way it should be allowed on non-motorized trails. Looks like it can roost up the trail as good as any other moto can, (dude even says how cool it is that he can "power out of the berms with it") and I'm pretty sure that every other trail user would NOT be stoked to have these things flying up on them at 50+ mph, especially without the usual loud noise of a traditional moto to warn them...
    Attachment 902050Attachment 902051Attachment 902052Attachment 902053

    Keep them on trails open to motorized use only.

    Even worse, look at what this dude is doing to the trail!
    Pedal-Assisted bike spotted at Boggs - thoughts?-p4pb3296664.jpg

    ...oh wait, he's on a normal mountain bike. Maybe we should ban them too because a few guys are gnarly enough to throw a roost with them.

  24. #124
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Quote Originally Posted by bdamschen View Post
    Even worse, look at what this dude is doing to the trail!
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p4pb3296664.jpg 
Views:	33 
Size:	101.9 KB 
ID:	902482

    ...oh wait, he's on a normal mountain bike. Maybe we should ban them too because a few guys are gnarly enough to throw a roost with them.
    That looks like a race course to me.
    When the chicks at school see how gay we are, they're gonna be all over us.

  25. #125
    I like mtn biking, too
    Reputation: shredchic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,225
    Quote Originally Posted by Berkeley Mike View Post
    What is the real intention of refusing motorized access? What qualities do they express that make them a problem? How does that relate to bikes?
    You honestly can't come up with any reason why it might make things problematic for us if we have to become advocates for motorized bikes on existing multi-use trails in the bay area?
    Never use your face as a brake pad.
    -Jake Watson

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Bike Thief last spotted in Marin...
    By CHUM in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-31-2013, 03:23 PM
  2. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-26-2013, 06:16 PM
  3. New Lift-Assisted Mountain Bike Park, Asheville, NC
    By 26West BikePark in forum Southeast - GA, TN, AL, FL
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 05-24-2012, 01:09 PM
  4. Stolen bike spotted..please help me recover 9k!
    By eragirl in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-28-2012, 08:29 PM
  5. Forte Campus Pedal Thoughts?
    By DrewQ1 in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-27-2011, 03:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •