Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 401 to 500 of 563
  1. #401
    Motion activated
    Reputation: Steve71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,214
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    I doubt the ebikes suck downhill, they are just very different since they carry a low center of gravity for the weight and have a different feel than a DH bike.

    Honestly I would love to try one back to back with my DH rig at the Bike Park.
    That would be a fun test. One of the great things about a moto is being able to use the throttle to lift the front wheel. But an e-bike can't do that (or can they?) so it would end up feeling heavy. Pedaling DH isn't a big deal so what do you really gain? I guess acceleration out of corners? Probably really easy to over shoot jumps if the motor wasn't speed limited, like most are.
    Happiness is a warm 2 stroke.

  2. #402
    mtbr member
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Yep. But who's to say that mtb won't follow. MTB's already heavily influenced by moto.

    I've already voiced my complaints about dirt roadies and how they bring over uncivil behavior from the road side, riding in big groups and not properly following rules/etiquette which help maintain order. Do you really want to be so conservative that you stick to that image? Ebikes are like a moped, but with a cleaner motor to me, distinguishing them from scooters like Vespas and larger motor vehicles. I'd rather see the motors kept small and efficient.

    Gearboxes, DH tires, good suspension, durable frame and parts that are also *affordable*. I can only dream that a big respectable company like Shimano making some partnerships and make things happen. I already dumped $4k into my FS, and would be willing to trade that for an eBike that I'm not scared of cracking in a crash.



    I'd rather see motors confined to motorized only trails.

  3. #403
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by tiretracks View Post
    I'd rather see motors confined to motorized only trails.
    Such motor prejudice and hypocrisy. Motos and offroad vehicles have motors... ebikes must be the same.

    Wow, much same, so logic... dumb logic is fun. I'd like to see electric toothbrushes, refrigerators, fans/AC, power tools, washing machines, electric cars, etc. allowed to be confined to residences who have proper licensing. Others should be fine with regular toothbrushes, iceboxes, hand-fans, hand tools, hand washing basins, and bicycles. I use most of the latter, therefore I'm not lazy and it's the users of the former that are the problem, being so lazy and causing trouble for others and the environment! I don't want to share the world with them!

    Why would a fit rider want to e-MTB?-shibainuwowlogicfacepalm.jpg

  4. #404
    Motion activated
    Reputation: Steve71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,214
    Quote Originally Posted by tiretracks View Post
    I'd rather see motors confined to motorized only trails.
    The trouble is they ( < 750 watts / pedal assist) are not really suited to moto trails. They are way more MTB than moto.

    However, I believe the enviro nazi's will use e-bikes as an excuse to grab more land. So I don't support them on non-motorized trails. Not because I think they will cause problems with erosion or conflict etc. But because it gives ammo to the enemy. Anything that puts our access in jeopardy is BAD!
    Happiness is a warm 2 stroke.

  5. #405
    mtbr member
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Such motor prejudice and hypocrisy. Motos and offroad vehicles have motors... ebikes must be the same.

    Wow, much same, so logic... dumb logic is fun. I'd like to see electric toothbrushes, refrigerators, fans/AC, power tools, washing machines, electric cars, etc. allowed to be confined to residences who have proper licensing. Others should be fine with regular toothbrushes, iceboxes, hand-fans, hand tools, hand washing basins, and bicycles. The former are for the lazy, are not good for the environment, and cause trouble to other users.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ShibaInuWowLogicFacepalm.jpg 
Views:	28 
Size:	47.1 KB 
ID:	1132811





    With the wish list trending to be more like motorcycles push back should be expected. I would expect to see outright bannings as you guys up the quotient in the e motor race. And as an FYI, the preponderance of members here are fine with bicycles without motors. The rest of your straw man argument is simple nonsense.

  6. #406
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by tiretracks View Post
    With the wish list trending to be more like motorcycles push back should be expected. I would expect to see outright bannings as you guys up the quotient in the e motor race. And as an FYI, the preponderance of members here are fine with bicycles without motors. The rest of your straw man argument is simple nonsense.
    My wish list is for smart design that isn't overpriced nor foolishly fragile. Cars and motos that have been designed from the ground up result in being about the same since they already were made thinking out of the box, and other industry advances haven't opened up new opportunity to improve greatly on it in a price conscious way. If there were suddenly free energy invented introduced to the world, I bet cars would change drastically in a short matter of time. MTB, on the other hand, still works inside a fairly small box. Ever thought how to better interface the feet to the bike? Are the way pedals are connected to the crankarm ideal? Why not go wider on hub spacing up front? What's with the stubby head tubes on bikes, considering how much force is going through them? Anything still thinking in the box after such a singularity-type event would simply not survive. Adapt or die.

    I'm just hoping for anything to break this in-the-box thinking at this point. eBikes are just convenient, since they offer what I'm looking for, more durability and less demand for a rider that has months/years of riding boosting their pedaling/riding efficiency. Just like any other demand, I'm interested if I see a need, but I just want it to be sensibly designed. If there were something to make flossing easier invented, that was very affordable, I'd be interested in buying into it if it weren't a potential pollution problem. Out of the box thinking might be something like that Waterpik, rather than something that relies on a strand of waxed string.

  7. #407
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,568
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Such motor prejudice and hypocrisy. Motos and offroad vehicles have motors... ebikes must be the same.

    Wow, much same, so logic... dumb logic is fun. I'd like to see electric toothbrushes, refrigerators, fans/AC, power tools, washing machines, electric cars, etc. allowed to be confined to residences who have proper licensing. Others should be fine with regular toothbrushes, iceboxes, hand-fans, hand tools, hand washing basins, and bicycles. I use most of the latter, therefore I'm not lazy and it's the users of the former that are the problem, being so lazy and causing trouble for others and the environment! I don't want to share the world with them!

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ShibaInuWowLogicFacepalm.jpg 
Views:	28 
Size:	47.1 KB 
ID:	1132811
    I would be willing to share with all the motorized stuff. I like my electric toothbrush. Once you put a MOTOR on a bike, it is not a bicycle anymore. It is something else. Bikes don't have motors. And in MA, no motorized vehicles( for the most part) allowed on multi use trails. Not going to get an ebike anytime. At least not for off road. I'm a reasonably fit rider.

  8. #408
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,568
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    My wish list is for smart design that isn't overpriced nor foolishly fragile. Cars and motos that have been designed from the ground up result in being about the same since they already were made thinking out of the box, and other industry advances haven't opened up new opportunity to improve greatly on it in a price conscious way. If there were suddenly free energy invented introduced to the world, I bet cars would change drastically in a short matter of time. MTB, on the other hand, still works inside a fairly small box. Ever thought how to better interface the feet to the bike? Are the way pedals are connected to the crankarm ideal? Why not go wider on hub spacing up front? What's with the stubby head tubes on bikes, considering how much force is going through them? Anything still thinking in the box after such a singularity-type event would simply not survive. Adapt or die.

    I'm just hoping for anything to break this in-the-box thinking at this point. eBikes are just convenient, since they offer what I'm looking for, more durability and less demand for a rider that has months/years of riding boosting their pedaling/riding efficiency. Just like any other demand, I'm interested if I see a need, but I just want it to be sensibly designed. If there were something to make flossing easier invented, that was very affordable, I'd be interested in buying into it if it weren't a potential pollution problem. Out of the box thinking might be something like that Waterpik, rather than something that relies on a strand of waxed string.
    Adding a motor is not boosting your pedaling efficiency. Its just adding a motor. Thinking like Lance?

  9. #409
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    I would be willing to share with all the motorized stuff. I like my electric toothbrush. Once you put a MOTOR on a bike, it is not a bicycle anymore. It is something else. Bikes don't have motors. And in MA, no motorized vehicles( for the most part) allowed on multi use trails. Not going to get an ebike anytime. At least not for off road. I'm a reasonably fit rider.
    Motors didn't change any other the listed things either. They all serve the same purpose as the unmotorized version. You are creating classification that is creating segregation, since you don't want laws affecting them to also affect you. That's fine. Just drop the stupid logic that motors alone make it something it's not. Electric is totally different. Have you seen the electric concept vehicles for pavement travel? No real piping required for breathing and exhaust, no need for gear box, etc. Far less oil, grease, fuel to possibly contaminate things in case of a leak. It's something other than a typical car, but it fulfills the same purpose.

    Why would a fit rider want to e-MTB?-hirikofold.jpg

    Affordable full fairing recumbent ebikes might be in the future thanks to some investments here. Quit shitposting on stuff you're prejudiced against.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    eBikes are just convenient, since they offer what I'm looking for, more durability and less demand for a rider that has months/years of riding boosting their pedaling/riding efficiency.
    Adding a motor is not boosting your pedaling efficiency. Its just adding a motor. Thinking like Lance?
    How did you get that idea? An ebike does not require a rider that has boosted their efficiency through years of riding.

    I can twist words too. I know your type pridefully likes to say you're 90+% of the reason why a bike's fast. The bike's fast because of the rider. Well, doesn't that make you a tool? Since you're being used by the bike to go fast? It ain't gonna be as fast under me. On the other hand, an engineered bike, rather than an engineered rider, is the tool when it's doing most of the work, leveraging my input to get a much greater output. I use a hammer to smash something, you use your fist with a padded glove to smash something. If it doesn't smash with your fist, you train up weeks/months to make it happen. So proud, much glory... yea, I'll pass on that culture that you older folks thought up.

  10. #410
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by tiretracks View Post
    I'd rather see motors confined to motorized only trails.
    BREAKING NEWS HERE!!! I would have never guessed since all you do is bash in the ebike forum

  11. #411
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    7,105
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Adding a motor is not boosting your pedaling efficiency. Its just adding a motor.
    Look at it this way. If, instead of electric motors, you had bikes that had petrol engines that put out the same sort of power as an eBike, would you want those on your trails? eBikes are just low powered motorbikes, which are things that have been around for a while. It's the stealthy power that makes them different.

    I was at Glentress trail centre on Saturday and saw eBikes there for the first time. Five of them. One old man on an eBike almost crashed into me when his bike 'ran away' from him, his words. Straight after that he ran up a banking and fell off. He clearly couldn't ride a bike very well at all and couldn't control the eBike very well yet here he was, high up a hill in a trail centre. I'd be very surprised if he made it back down without crashing. Without the eBike there is no way he would've been up there, and he shouldn't have been up there.

    A short while after that, while I was puffing up the difficult climb to Spooky Wood, three guys half my age blew past me on eBikes. I was working very hard but the play-station generation were chatting away as they 'climbed' the hill. You lazy.... I would love to be twenty-five again but you? Instead of pushing yourself, developing your strength and fitness, you just want to push a button for your thrills.

    Incidentally. I noticed that the steep climbs, the turns especially, were rutted in a way I've not seen before. I've been to Glentress many times and this trail damage on the climbs is new and eBikes are the only thing I can think of that might cause it.

  12. #412
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    924
    S71; since you are riding on private land, look at the Stealth Fighter and Hi-power cycles. Also, FYI, a battery-powered MC just won some kind or Red Bull MX drag race against 250 cc ICE bikes. This is for information only since none of it applies to anything but private land and possibly some MC-type areas. Of course, bikes are more expensive now than they should be which isn't surprising for a relatively new product. A friend is looking for a MC chassis to install big front and rear hub motors in for use on his private property.

  13. #413
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by fos'l View Post
    A friend is looking for a MC chassis to install big front and rear hub motors in for use on his private property.
    Mid-drive is where it's at, IMO.

  14. #414
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Incidentally. I noticed that the steep climbs, the turns especially, were rutted in a way I've not seen before. I've been to Glentress many times and this trail damage on the climbs is new and eBikes are the only thing I can think of that might cause it.
    Damage originating from going in the uphill direction?

    It's tough getting the new generation outdoors. A lot of overweight types at work. Only a handful of truly fit looking people (they stand out). A TON of fashionistas. A sadly low number of modest upright healthy-looking people, with some class.

  15. #415
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Look at it this way. If, instead of electric motors, you had bikes that had petrol engines that put out the same sort of power as an eBike, would you want those on your trails? eBikes are just low powered motorbikes, which are things that have been around for a while. It's the stealthy power that makes them different.

    I was at Glentress trail centre on Saturday and saw eBikes there for the first time. Five of them. One old man on an eBike almost crashed into me when his bike 'ran away' from him, his words. Straight after that he ran up a banking and fell off. He clearly couldn't ride a bike very well at all and couldn't control the eBike very well yet here he was, high up a hill in a trail centre. I'd be very surprised if he made it back down without crashing. Without the eBike there is no way he would've been up there, and he shouldn't have been up there.

    A short while after that, while I was puffing up the difficult climb to Spooky Wood, three guys half my age blew past me on eBikes. I was working very hard but the play-station generation were chatting away as they 'climbed' the hill. You lazy.... I would love to be twenty-five again but you? Instead of pushing yourself, developing your strength and fitness, you just want to push a button for your thrills.

    Incidentally. I noticed that the steep climbs, the turns especially, were rutted in a way I've not seen before. I've been to Glentress many times and this trail damage on the climbs is new and eBikes are the only thing I can think of that might cause it.
    You people are ridiculous - Once again a hiker can say someone on a regular bike should not have been somewhere that they got in over their heads. I am sure no one has ever crashed on a MTB on a place that was over their skill level

    And the first time you see all of 5 ebikes they must be the reason of trail damage. Lets see - more grip, fatter tires does not mean more trail damage!

  16. #416
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    7,105
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Damage originating from going in the uphill direction?
    Yes. Grooves cut into the trail. I've never seen that on these climbs before and I don't see how human-powered bikes could do it. You just couldn't put enough power down.

  17. #417
    Motion activated
    Reputation: Steve71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,214
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Yes. Grooves cut into the trail. I've never seen that on these climbs before and I don't see how human-powered bikes could do it. You just couldn't put enough power down.
    Unless it's a one way trail, it's most likely from locking up the rear tire when going DH.
    Happiness is a warm 2 stroke.

  18. #418
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    7,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve71 View Post
    Unless it's a one way trail, it's most likely from locking up the rear tire when going DH.
    It is a one-way trail. All trails at Glentress are.

  19. #419
    mtbr member
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by Bmiller71 View Post
    BREAKING NEWS HERE!!! I would have never guessed since all you do is bash in the ebike forum



    Someone needs to do it.

  20. #420
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    924
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Mid-drive is where it's at, IMO.
    I agree for relatively low-power systems; for extreme power hub is better IMO, if for no other reason than less wear on the drivetrain.

  21. #421
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by fos'l View Post
    I agree for relatively low-power systems; for extreme power hub is better IMO, if for no other reason than less wear on the drivetrain.
    Never thought about drivetrain wear at 2000+W. I just thought that was ridiculous to begin with, considering the durability of current mtb components. So you're looking for 1000+W hubs front and rear? Well, I see why you want to keep it on his property... that seems like it'd make for a funny "hold my beer" video.

  22. #422
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,565
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Such motor prejudice and hypocrisy. Motos and offroad vehicles have motors... ebikes must be the same.

    Wow, much same, so logic... dumb logic is fun.

    Electric bikes and bicycles both have pedals so they must both be the same. Dumb logic is fun?


    Quote Originally Posted by tiretracks View Post
    I'd rather see motors confined to motorized only trails.
    While I do agree with your sentiment I think there's room for a mix. I've advocated here since the beginning that officially separating bicycles from e-bikes and evaluating appropriate uses for trails on an individual basis is the most fair for everyone but most of the e-bike junkies here seem to think that's just hate mail.

    Shoot, almost forgot to address the op. A fit rider might ride an e-bike because they want to.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  23. #423
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    924
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Never thought about drivetrain wear at 2000+W. I just thought that was ridiculous to begin with, considering the durability of current mtb components. So you're looking for 1000+W hubs front and rear? Well, I see why you want to keep it on his property... that seems like it'd make for a funny "hold my beer" video.
    NOT ME, but some individuals are pushing up to 25 kw or so (haven't studied the upper limits, so that's a guess); look at endless sphere for the extremes.

  24. #424
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    924
    JB, that's the only reason that I've had so far; it's a fun diversion (FOR ME, maybe not others). However, it's been interesting reading the other viable uses for them. Sadly (not really), my wife likes to suffer and won't ride one, so I slog along (happily) on one of my MTB's with her. Only ride the "e-creature" when alone or with other "cheaters" (not poachers, cheaters).

  25. #425
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,588
    Quote Originally Posted by fos'l View Post
    I agree for relatively low-power systems; for extreme power hub is better IMO, if for no other reason than less wear on the drivetrain.
    BTW look up "un-sprung weight"; big hub motors are really bad in this regard if the bike/moto has suspension. For extreme power just ride a moto. They do make some really nice electric motorcycles.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  26. #426
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    413
    Who's advocating that ebikes should be bikes? There's already been half a dozen states that made ebike classifications to deal with them. Anyone trying to say they're something else, moto or bike, is trying to con you. These laws are paving the way, green lighting the manufacturing of legal ebikes that fit the mold. A 250W motor pedelec worry you? It's like being afraid of all spiders and snakes since some are venomous, and crying for their extermination as a species, when the 8000+W monstrosities are spawned.

    Wonder what a fit rider on an ebike would behave like. Would you worry that their behavior would be socially acceptable or not? I personally wouldn't be able to tell, though considering all the toxicity, I'd bet on them eventually turning in a jerk, being shaped by how others treat them.

  27. #427
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,565
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Who's advocating that ebikes should be bikes?
    Specialized? Giant? Trek?

    I'm not going to delve into specifics but the trend seems to be pushing towards classifying certain type of electric bikes (type 1,2 etc.) as being legally the same thing as a bicycle, and therefore unless otherwise stated are automatically allowed on any trail that a mountain bike is allowed on. I don't claim to be a genius but it seems pretty obvious that the end game is mostly about money, those manufacturers are absolutely chomping at the bit on this one because the market potential is wide open.


    Note that I've nothing against electric bikes or people who ride them, I'd ride one and I'm pretty fit. Because fun.

    (also note the "on topic" clause^^^)
    I brake for stinkbugs

  28. #428
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    924
    JPW, exactly correct based on my conversations with the individuals who lobbied for the laws in CA, UT and NC. Their intent was bike paths and lanes only. If any group is trying to get them on trails (other than individual e-riders), it's the manufacturers.

  29. #429
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,440
    Quote Originally Posted by fos'l View Post
    JPW, exactly correct based on my conversations with the individuals who lobbied for the laws in CA, UT and NC. Their intent was bike paths and lanes only. If any group is trying to get them on trails (other than individual e-riders), it's the manufacturers.
    Agreed, it's all the manufacturers, retailers and the lobbyists they give money to. There isn't any groundswell of citizen ebike riders or ebike advocacy groups behind any of it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Steve71 View Post
    Interesting POV. How is it possible that a dirt bike weighting ~250 pounds can descend well, but a 50-60lb ebike can't. I'm not saying you're wrong, it's an honest question.

    I ride MTB's and dirt bikes and am interested in a powerful ebike for riding on my property with my kids. But if they sux, then I'll not waste the time and money.
    In my extremely unscientific experience chasing motos down single track, on a downhill, an equally skilled mtb rider can easily out ride a moto because it's shorter wheelbase and lighter weight makes if far more nimble and it can brake waaay later going into turns. On the flats and climbing obviously, the tables get turned. I'd guess that switching back and forth between mtb and ebike you'd feel the difference in weight, but I can't imagine you wouldn't get used to it and change your riding style to accommodate it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve71 View Post
    Which is my biggest fear, given how $$ they are. It'll be the 25,000 watt e-moto that weighs 100-120lb that will be the best of both worlds. That's probably still a decade away.
    All it takes is money: https://endless-sphere.com/forums/vi...2cdf397a796d5a


    Quote Originally Posted by andytiedye View Post
    At least 2 of us were talking about doing this on our own land.

    I don't think we are the only ones.
    Good for you? Since it's your land you can do anything you'd like.

  30. #430
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,568
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Who's advocating that ebikes should be bikes? There's already been half a dozen states that made ebike classifications to deal with them. Anyone trying to say they're something else, moto or bike, is trying to con you. These laws are paving the way, green lighting the manufacturing of legal ebikes that fit the mold. A 250W motor pedelec worry you? It's like being afraid of all spiders and snakes since some are venomous, and crying for their extermination as a species, when the 8000+W monstrosities are spawned.

    Wonder what a fit rider on an ebike would behave like. Would you worry that their behavior would be socially acceptable or not? I personally wouldn't be able to tell, though considering all the toxicity, I'd bet on them eventually turning in a jerk, being shaped by how others treat them.
    Its not the 250 pedelec that worry me. 250, 750, 2,000. How to tell by looking? You can't. After market mods and controller fixes are already here. The American need for speed and power, yah that won't happen.

  31. #431
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,568
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Motors didn't change any other the listed things either. They all serve the same purpose as the unmotorized version. You are creating classification that is creating segregation, since you don't want laws affecting them to also affect you. That's fine. Just drop the stupid logic that motors alone make it something it's not. Electric is totally different. Have you seen the electric concept vehicles for pavement travel? No real piping required for breathing and exhaust, no need for gear box, etc. Far less oil, grease, fuel to possibly contaminate things in case of a leak. It's something other than a typical car, but it fulfills the same purpose.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	HirikoFold.jpg 
Views:	28 
Size:	72.5 KB 
ID:	1132815

    Affordable full fairing recumbent ebikes might be in the future thanks to some investments here. Quit shitposting on stuff you're prejudiced against.



    How did you get that idea? An ebike does not require a rider that has boosted their efficiency through years of riding.

    I can twist words too. I know your type pridefully likes to say you're 90+% of the reason why a bike's fast. The bike's fast because of the rider. Well, doesn't that make you a tool? Since you're being used by the bike to go fast? It ain't gonna be as fast under me. On the other hand, an engineered bike, rather than an engineered rider, is the tool when it's doing most of the work, leveraging my input to get a much greater output. I use a hammer to smash something, you use your fist with a padded glove to smash something. If it doesn't smash with your fist, you train up weeks/months to make it happen. So proud, much glory... yea, I'll pass on that culture that you older folks thought up.
    Bikes are human powered. E bikes are something different. Disagreeing with those facts? Ever seen signs, " No Motorized Vehicles" ? Pretty clear. Electric cars, great. E bikes for commuting, awesome. But off subject here. My bike doesn't go anywhere unless I'm pedaling. So 100% of the power. No need for artificial power for me. I use coffee and bacon for speed and distance. It's too far, too steep, too hard, I have kids, not enough time? Yada, yada. Seems like a younger persons sense of whining and entitlement. Some things are meant to be challenging, difficult and human powered only. Do you take a chairlift when you go hiking? Or complain that hiking is too hard, takes too long and you don't have enough time? Being a fit rider, won't see me ever on an e bikes in the woods. Guess its a mater of perspective. I like mt biking under my own power, in the woods. A quiet getaway in nature. And not trying to pedal a really heavy bike. Can you even loft the front tire up and over anything? Would be a non starter here in MA. Logs and ledges everywhere. And last time I checked, this was the e bike forum, not the pro e bike forum. Dude. Older folks. Hmmm. The ones who started the mt bike movement, made the bikes, created' some " of the trails. Forged relationships with the land managers to get and keep mt bike access? The ones who show up for trail meetings, trail work days, meet with stake holders and dig dirt every season. I take pride in that culture. So the younger crowd" assuming you?" just shows up and thinks access and the trails were always here? Hmmm. I realize many of the riding areas/trails were hiking and moto made. Upkeep, bridges, reroutes and drainage don't get done by forest gnomes. Thats me. Your welcome. How many trail days have you done in say the last 2 seasons?

  32. #432
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,376
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Motors didn't change any other the listed things either. They all serve the same purpose as the unmotorized version. You are creating classification that is creating segregation, since you don't want laws affecting them to also affect you. That's fine. Just drop the stupid logic that motors alone make it something it's not. Electric is totally different. Have you seen the electric concept vehicles for pavement travel? No real piping required for breathing and exhaust, no need for gear box, etc. Far less oil, grease, fuel to possibly contaminate things in case of a leak. It's something other than a typical car, but it fulfills the same purpose.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	HirikoFold.jpg 
Views:	28 
Size:	72.5 KB 
ID:	1132815

    Affordable full fairing recumbent ebikes might be in the future thanks to some investments here. Quit shitposting on stuff you're prejudiced against.



    How did you get that idea? An ebike does not require a rider that has boosted their efficiency through years of riding.

    I can twist words too. I know your type pridefully likes to say you're 90+% of the reason why a bike's fast. The bike's fast because of the rider. Well, doesn't that make you a tool? Since you're being used by the bike to go fast? It ain't gonna be as fast under me. On the other hand, an engineered bike, rather than an engineered rider, is the tool when it's doing most of the work, leveraging my input to get a much greater output. I use a hammer to smash something, you use your fist with a padded glove to smash something. If it doesn't smash with your fist, you train up weeks/months to make it happen. So proud, much glory... yea, I'll pass on that culture that you older folks thought up.
    Do you see any difference between these two boats? Would you allow them everywhere together? Do you see any problems with both on the same lake?





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  33. #433
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    My bike doesn't go anywhere unless I'm pedaling. So 100% of the power.
    Your bike never goes downhill? Bikes are "potential energy" powered much of the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Some things are meant to be challenging, difficult and human powered only.
    Bicycles are not one of those things. Until recently, it was largely impractical to do otherwise. Bicycles, throughout most of their history, were devices intended to make things easier, not to be "challenging, difficult and human powered only". You are completely on the wrong side of this argument and you only present it because it suits your point of view. Bicycles thoughout the world are, to this day, a tool to make work easier, not a recreational toy for you to define narrowly.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Do you take a chairlift when you go hiking?
    Many cyclists do as part of their rides!

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Being a fit rider, won't see me ever on an e bikes in the woods.
    Being an arrogant a-hole about it means I hope to never see you in the woods at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    And last time I checked, this was the e bike forum, not the pro e bike forum. Dude. Older folks. Hmmm. The ones who started the mt bike movement, made the bikes, created' some " of the trails. Forged relationships with the land managers to get and keep mt bike access? The ones who show up for trail meetings, trail work days, meet with stake holders and dig dirt every season. I take pride in that culture.
    Those are many different things and I doubt you really understand many of them. I'm certain your don't speak for them.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    So the younger crowd" assuming you?" just shows up and thinks access and the trails were always here? Hmmm. I realize many of the riding areas/trails were hiking and moto made.
    I don't think you do. Most trail systems were made by motor vehicles. You pretend they are due to efforts of heroes and that those heroes are privileged to define how bikes should be used.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Upkeep, bridges, reroutes and drainage don't get done by forest gnomes. Thats me. Your welcome. How many trail days have you done in say the last 2 seasons?
    You are talking about public land, you are not entitled to say who rides a trail simply because you worked on it. If you don't like it then quit doing it. Good riddance. The community would be better off without such entitled, judgmental, and wrong-minded attitudes. Public lands are for the enjoyment of all, not just you and your "difficult" bikes which you are so good at riding.

    It's ironic that these very arguments that were used against mountain bikers not long ago are now used by mountain bikers against their closest relatives.

  34. #434
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    Do you see any difference between these two boats? Would you allow them everywhere together? Do you see any problems with both on the same lake?





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Those two boats coexist on lakes all over my state. There is no problem with it. There is an expectation that people operate their vehicles responsibly. I find it interesting that the assumption is that e-bike riders cannot while MTB riders always do. My impress is that the opposite is far more true.

  35. #435
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,586
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    Motors didn't change any other the listed things either. They all serve the same purpose as the unmotorized version. You are creating classification that is creating segregation, since you don't want laws affecting them to also affect you. That's fine. Just drop the stupid logic that motors alone make it something it's not.
    I get your point, but regardless of whether you get all MTBR to agree that the 'motor/non-motor' designation is arbitrary, the presence of the motor alone will be the single, most effective counter argument used by HIKERS/EQUESTRIANS in places like Marin (where it has already been used in council meetings.)

    Any segregation/designations we make here: fast ebikes (with no cutoffs), slow ebikes (with cutoffs), powerful ebikes (>1000w), non-powerful ebikes (<750w), throttle bikes, pedal assist bikes . . . no matter how practical they seem to be, will be completely irrelevant when the legal and policy battles are fought out, because all those things are customizable and none of them are reliably distinguishable by a Ranger on the trail. The motor itself is the only reliable, single, solid, binary identifier which can be used to restrict access for e-bikes but still protect access regular bikes. I see only one of these two outcomes in coming years:

    A) Ebikes are segregated from regular bikes based solely on their motor, and regular bikes retain access
    B) All bikes and e-bikes lose access

    Just watch the videos in this thread, there is an ebike in the background and they jump back and forth between bashing all bikes and decrying ebike access for the disabled. Once non-ADA are riding 1000W throttle assist ebkes around, do you really think stuffy old parks councils and the HOHAs will differentiate between bad ebikes, good ebikes, and regular bikes?

  36. #436
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,586
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Those two boats coexist on lakes all over my state. There is no problem with it. There is an expectation that people operate their vehicles responsibly. I find it interesting that the assumption is that e-bike riders cannot while MTB riders always do. My impress is that the opposite is far more true.
    Good luck with that argument in council meetings full of HOHAs.

  37. #437
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Good luck with that argument in council meetings full of HOHAs.
    You can't argue with stupid people, without a doubt. You make a perfectly valid observation on an inane comment like that one and this is the response you get. Look no further than this very thread.

    The enemies of e-bikes are other cyclists. Need to stop pretending otherwise.

  38. #438
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    You can't argue with stupid people, without a doubt. You make a perfectly valid observation on an inane comment like that one and this is the response you get. Look no further than this very thread.

    The enemies of e-bikes are other cyclists. Need to stop pretending otherwise.
    You can't argue with stupid people, but you can dare them to do something that tests what they believe in, as long as you set it up for them conveniently.

    In this case, bet the stupid people that they can't demonstrate how to ride an ebike in a manner that they find is unacceptable, for whatever reason they have against them, providing the ebike to them and some trail which they don't call their backyard (in case they're some NIMBY). Free food and beer helps encourage them to show up.

  39. #439
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post
    You can't argue with stupid people, but you can dare them to do something that tests what they believe in, as long as you set it up for them conveniently.

    In this case, bet the stupid people that they can't demonstrate how to ride an ebike in a manner that they find is unacceptable, for whatever reason they have against them, providing the ebike to them and some trail which they don't call their backyard (in case they're some NIMBY). Free food and beer helps encourage them to show up.


    Stop trying to belittle people into accepting the inbred 3rd cousins of mountain bikes.

  40. #440
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,568
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Your bike never goes downhill? Bikes are "potential energy" powered much of the time.


    Bicycles are not one of those things. Until recently, it was largely impractical to do otherwise. Bicycles, throughout most of their history, were devices intended to make things easier, not to be "challenging, difficult and human powered only". You are completely on the wrong side of this argument and you only present it because it suits your point of view. Bicycles thoughout the world are, to this day, a tool to make work easier, not a recreational toy for you to define narrowly.


    Many cyclists do as part of their rides!


    Being an arrogant a-hole about it means I hope to never see you in the woods at all.


    Those are many different things and I doubt you really understand many of them. I'm certain your don't speak for them.


    I don't think you do. Most trail systems were made by motor vehicles. You pretend they are due to efforts of heroes and that those heroes are privileged to define how bikes should be used.


    You are talking about public land, you are not entitled to say who rides a trail simply because you worked on it. If you don't like it then quit doing it. Good riddance. The community would be better off without such entitled, judgmental, and wrong-minded attitudes. Public lands are for the enjoyment of all, not just you and your "difficult" bikes which you are so good at riding.

    It's ironic that these very arguments that were used against mountain bikers not long ago are now used by mountain bikers against their closest relatives.
    Where to start. Sure my bike goes downhill, coasting. No power used. Most trails systems were I ride were not made by motors here in New England. Try Game trails and hiking trails, Earliest dirt bikes? 50's or 60's? Or trails made by the the CCC during the works progress administration, some history for you. I have no say about public land, only follow the rules( no motor vehicles) set by the managers. Democracy? Don't like the rules? Vote to change them. Here in MA , not all riding areas are public, many are conservation ares, land trusts and reservations as well as open space as defined by state and town bylaws. No motors allowed. I like working on trails, great riding opportunities. I also hike, birdwatch and walk with the dog. Wrong minded, entitled, judgmental, hmmmm. Seems to be you with a big chip on your shoulder. And which community would this be? One of multi use trail users for all to share following the rules set by the land managers? Or the "community" of e motorcycles thinking that they have full access and rights just because it looks like a bike? Hmmm. Time will tell. Good luck with getting access. And you are in shape? And you ride with a motor because? Back to the OP's question. Way, way back.

  41. #441
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,586
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    You can't argue with stupid people, without a doubt. You make a perfectly valid observation on an inane comment like that one and this is the response you get. Look no further than this very thread.
    Let's give the boat analogy serious consideration:


    Lakes and most boating waterways allow two dimensional movement and have good sightlines, allowing faster vehicles to avoid slower vehicles. This is much different from twisty singletrack in a wooded area. Another argument against your boating analogy would be that there are many lakes/reservoirs/waterways where no motorized boats are allowed, often because they are smaller, or reserved for non motorized users, or have delicate ecology, etc. That's analogous to e-bikes on multi-use singletrack.

    Secondly, humans are extremely averse to ANY collisions of their vehicles for various reasons. For whatever reason, that fear of collision doesn't extend to bikes the same way. When driving your boat, you steer wide of others and behave very cautiously. When riding single track, for whatever reason, something is different and we often take more risk. Ebikes enable more of that risk, due to faster closing speeds for uphill riders and higher sustained speeds on flat. Typical ebike advertisement emphasizes the more risk-taking aspects of ebike riding.

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    The enemies of e-bikes are other cyclists. Need to stop pretending otherwise.
    The cycling community needs to police itself on this before someone else does. Most of the opposition here is based on real practical reasons why Ebikes will have an overall negative effect on access and trails/environment/erosion.

    I have no objection to ebikes on 4wd roads, OHV trails. Take it to Northstar, ride the lifts if you want, no issues here because that doesn't pose any threat to access or do any worse trail damage than DH bikes already do. If ebikers want to petition their local authorities to allow e-bike only trails I'm totally cool with that too, they are welcome to do that.

    But beyond that, can't support it. I'll speak up against it before my bike gets lumped in with yours. If you think that means I'm an 'enemy of ebikes' I'm perfectly fine being called that, the comment is not derision to me.

  42. #442
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by baddest grandpa View Post
    Stop trying to belittle people into accepting the inbred 3rd cousins of mountain bikes.
    These are among the stupid people I am referring to, zooey. You should know they will easily demonstrate something they find "is unacceptable". The failure is assuming that what they find unacceptable is important.

  43. #443
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    some history for you.
    SOME history. Some cherry-picked history.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    I have no say about public land, only follow the rules( no motor vehicles) set by the managers.
    E-bikes are not motor vehicles.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Democracy? Don't like the rules? Vote to change them.
    We don't have direct elections of rules, generally speaking, nor do we want that.

    But, of course, this isn't your strategy at all. Your course is to brag on the superiority of your form of recreation, criticize others', and lobby to ban those inferior forms from having access to your entitlements. Sure, that engages a form of democracy...that we don't want.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    No motors allowed.
    The tired old drum keeps getting beaten. It's a sure sign of a closed mind.

    E-bikes are not motor vehicles, they are a new form that is not fully addressed by existing definitions. They are essentially bicycles with some minor differences. Some areas recognize this but others don't. The problem that needs to get fixed is people referring to them as "motor vehicles". People like you. As I've said before, the enemy of e-bikes is cyclists, not hikers. Now that you've got yours, screw everyone else. Just like the equestrian attitude that MTB fought against.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Wrong minded, entitled, judgmental, hmmmm. Seems to be you with a big chip on your shoulder.
    Yes, I do. It annoys me to no end that people would deny others the same access to public resource that they enjoy. This is precisely what you argue. Trail riders suffered this discrimination not long ago and now they dish it out. You are a hypocrite.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    One of multi use trail users for all to share following the rules set by the land managers?
    As a mountain biker, this would not be your side two decades ago, it only suits you now since in many places the antiquated "rules of land managers" have old language misapplied to a new kind of bicycle. It's an argument of convenience for you, nothing more. Trail riders are well known to violate these very rules when it suits them, there are even terms for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Or the "community" of e motorcycles thinking that they have full access and rights just because it looks like a bike?
    An absurd characterization of an e-bike, most of which ARE bikes that have been converted. Furthermore, once again you stoop to the ridiculous mislabeling of e-bikes as "motorcycles" to encourage prejudice. E-bikes are bicycles, just the kind not "elite" enough for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Good luck with getting access. And you are in shape? And you ride with a motor because? Back to the OP's question. Way, way back.
    I am not trying to "get access", my state defines e-bikes suitably already. I am simply arguing with your narrow-mindedness. I do not own an e-MTB and have never ridden one. I do care that those that do, or might, have the same access to recreation that I do and that if I choose to ride one in the future that I don't have to deal with a mass of stupidity like yours. I ride an e-bike commuter because my commute is very hilly. I think it is fantastic.

    I do find it interesting, though., that you assume my agenda.

  44. #444
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Lakes and most boating waterways allow two dimensional movement and have good sightlines, allowing faster vehicles to avoid slower vehicles. This is much different from twisty singletrack in a wooded area.
    Then we should ban speed differential since that's the root cause. There is no evidence that e-bikes cause a greater differential than other trail bikes. We should ban fast riders on conventional MTBs to address this. Seriously. Sorry, does that hurt your enjoyment? How does that feel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Another argument against your boating analogy...
    I don't know who the "your" refers to or why you would choose that word...it's a crappy analogy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    ...would be that there are many lakes/reservoirs/waterways where no motorized boats are allowed, often because they are smaller, or reserved for non motorized users, or have delicate ecology, etc. That's analogous to e-bikes on multi-use singletrack.
    No, it's analogous to banning all bicycles on some trails. You are suggesting that there are trails for which bicycles are suitable and e-bikes are not. What evidence supports that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Secondly, humans are extremely averse to ANY collisions of their vehicles for various reasons. For whatever reason, that fear of collision doesn't extend to bikes the same way. When driving your boat, you steer wide of others and behave very cautiously. When riding single track, for whatever reason, something is different and we often take more risk. Ebikes enable more of that risk, due to faster closing speeds for uphill riders and higher sustained speeds on flat. Typical ebike advertisement emphasizes the more risk-taking aspects of ebike riding.
    A truly absurd argument. Typical trail riding advertisement emphasizes "the more risk-taking aspects" far more than e-bikes do, what there is of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    The cycling community needs to police itself on this before someone else does. Most of the opposition here is based on real practical reasons why Ebikes will have an overall negative effect on access and trails/environment/erosion.
    This assumes that e-bikes need policing, that cyclists are entitled to do it, and that there is evidence that e-bikes have the "overall negative effect" you claim. None of these things are defendable, they are simply entitlement and prejudice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    I have no objection to ebikes on 4wd roads, OHV trails. Take it to Northstar, ride the lifts if you want, no issues here because that doesn't pose any threat to access...
    And there it is. This is at the core of cyclist's hate of e-bikes. I want mine and would rather kill you than suffer any risk to my enjoyment at your hand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    ...or do any worse trail damage than DH bikes already do.
    No evidence that e-bikes do more trail damage than any other bike does. No need for the "DH" qualifier.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    If ebikers want to petition their local authorities to allow e-bike only trails I'm totally cool with that too, they are welcome to do that.
    Gee, thanks. So generous of you to offer that e-bikes work to exclude themselves from the cycling community. Reminds me of the "marriage equality" argument, we're all free to marry the opposite sex...

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    But beyond that, can't support it. I'll speak up against it before my bike gets lumped in with yours. If you think that means I'm an 'enemy of ebikes' I'm perfectly fine being called that, the comment is not derision to me.
    Nope, and being called racist wasn't a term of derision to many once upon a time. Doesn't make you right, just shows you are pleased to feel you are in the majority.

  45. #445
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,565
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    And there it is. This is at the core of cyclist's hate of e-bikes. I want mine and would rather kill you than suffer any risk to my enjoyment at your hand.
    craigj, king of multi-quotes and wild exaggerations.


    *A fit rider might ride an electric bike because they can't hang with their fitter friends.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  46. #446
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,438
    "Would rather kill you"!??! Where on earth did you get that?

    As everyone here has pointed out repeatedly, we just want e-bikes considered their own class of vehicle on trails. If DIY monsterbikes become a problem, then the disconnect between normal bikes and e-bikes will already be in place so the blanket ban won't catch anyone else. That simple.

    -Walt

  47. #447
    chasing simplicity
    Reputation: MattMay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    611
    Another answer to the OP (remember that?): to compete at Sea Otter Classic.
    I know what it's like to be dead. "To Die & Live In LA."

  48. #448
    mtbr member
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    These are among the stupid people I am referring to, zooey. You should know they will easily demonstrate something they find "is unacceptable". The failure is assuming that what they find unacceptable is important.




    Why then should "we" find what you find acceptable important?

  49. #449
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,586
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Then we should ban speed differential since that's the root cause. There is no evidence that e-bikes cause a greater differential than other trail bikes.
    We do, we have speed limits on trails all over. But that doesn't stop hikers from using these arguments to get us banned.

    Secondly, if there was a way to truly limit ebikes to wattages and speeds, I'd be more on your side. But its not possible. A 1500w throttle assist bike will be less and less distinguishable from any other ebike soon, and throttles are easily concealed, wattages easily exceed the sticker on the bike, and speed cutoffs are easily removed with dongles.

    Even if we could limit trail use to 750w pedalec with speed cutoff: On a typical multi-use trail with a 15mph speed limit the closing speed for an uphill and a downhill rider is 15mph +, say for some moderate slope, 3-6mph for the uphill rider, or about 20 MPH. With an ebike able to 10-15mph up these same hills, that's a closing speed of 20-25mph. So the speed limit for all bikes would have to be reduced to 10mph to maintain the same level of safety, just so a few can ride with their motors. Thanks ebikes!!!!!

    What evidence are you looking for on this? A scientific study from a research institution that shows that ebike riders, who's bikes can cruise on flats faster and climb hills faster, actually use them to go faster? Sheesh.

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    No, it's analogous to banning all bicycles on some trails. You are suggesting that there are trails for which bicycles are suitable and e-bikes are not. What evidence supports that?
    We started with a post comparing a speed boat and a sail boat. You said they cohabitate on waterways without issue all the time. I replied that there are many waterways which allow only human-powered, wind-powered watercraft, and swimming, due to their size, and/or ecology - akin to the many trails which allow only bikes and hikers, especially single-track with tight corners and poor sightlines. I would not want powerboats on many of those waterways. I would not want ebikes on these singletrack because once a 250w or 750w bike is allowed, its too easy for someone to bring 1000w or 1500w bike.

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    A truly absurd argument. Typical trail riding advertisement emphasizes "the more risk-taking aspects" far more than e-bikes do, what there is of it.
    Agree, let's not make it easier for the skid-kiddie and wannabe moto-x types to jump into the mix as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    This assumes that e-bikes need policing, that cyclists are entitled to do it ...
    It is you who wants the new entitlement, not me. You need bikers support to do it - if you can't get avid cyclists to join your cause, how will you get HOHAs and the park council members who listen to them?

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    I want mine and would rather kill you than suffer any risk to my enjoyment at your hand. ...
    Kill you? Not sure where that's coming from - If that's related to the suggestion to use 4wd and OHV, there are two points:

    1) This probably depends on where you live, in Tahoe National Forest we routinely ride 4wd and OHV roads/trails without any issue. Pretty low density areas though.
    2) It's sort of a hypocritical point: You say there is no evidence that e-bikes cause any speed differential or safety issue, but then when ebikes are put in a position of a hiker: on a trail with bigger vehicles capable of higher speeds, somehow that's me condemning you to death?

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    No evidence that e-bikes do more trail damage than any other bike does. No need for the "DH" qualifier.
    In videos like this you can see the extra power enables a lot of more aggressive riding off-trail, places where a trail bike wouldn't be very practical ... this one has lots of roosting and off-trail use. You might say these are all non-conforming bikes - but 1000w or 1500w bikes are indistinguishable from 750w bikes for a typical law enforcement officer, and it will get worse as motors and batteries get more compact. Stickers mean nothing since you can easily by a dongle which modifies your speed or wattage limits. Throttles can be easily hidden.





    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    And there it is. This is at the core of cyclist's hate of e-bikes. .. Nope, and being called racist wasn't a term of derision to many once upon a time. Doesn't make you right, just shows you are pleased to feel you are in the majority.
    Comparing your cause to the fight against racism and LGBT rights demeans both of those movements. We don't choose our race, and I believe we don't choose our sexual orientation either. You on the other hand are fighting for the privilege to take an expensive toy anywhere you want. Go march on Washington for access rights for your $1500-$3000 bike and see how that looks on CNN.

  50. #450
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    886
    As once again we go skidding off the topic and into the poison oak..

    Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk

  51. #451
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,438
    To take the boat analogy a step further:
    -Navigable waterways and the ocean = paved auto roads.
    -Big lakes and reservoirs = OHV/moto/jeep trails/doubletrack.
    -Small lakes/rivers/creeks with lots of swimmers, kayakers, SUP people, sunfish, etc = singletrack.

    I think that's actually a fairly good analogy, and you can see how high power/high speed stuff doesn't fit in well as the space shrinks and user density increases.

    -Walt

  52. #452
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,586
    Yes exactly.

  53. #453
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    "Would rather kill you"!??! Where on earth did you get that?
    poetic license, Walt. Not to be taken literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    As everyone here has pointed out repeatedly, we just want e-bikes considered their own class of vehicle on trails. If DIY monsterbikes become a problem...
    But here is the disconnect. You want e-bikes isolated because of "monster bikes". How does that make sense? Do you ban cars from roads because of dragsters?

    You justify a blanket ban on e-bikes because of a specific kind of bike that you speculate will cause a problem. In fact, you proactively work to isolate and ban e-bikes out of this fear. It is wrong-minded and selfish.

    There will always be bad actors. There are certainly plenty among trail riders now. The argument that we should ban mountain biking entirely was precisely this one. It was wrong then and wrong now. e-bikes are bikes and the bike community should embrace them. Deal with problematic riders the same way you do now. Step up.

  54. #454
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    564
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post

    There will always be bad actors. There are certainly plenty among trail riders now. The argument that we should ban mountain biking entirely was precisely this one. It was wrong then and wrong now. e-bikes are bikes and the bike community should embrace them. Deal with problematic riders the same way you do now. Step up.
    The sad reality is it's easier to ban the tech rather than the bad actors who misuse the tech. That precedence has long been set and I don't see it changing much. And since bikers will be lumped together it will just result in complete revocation of access. So in order to limit the bad actors mtbers favor banning the tech to limit accessibility.
    Everyone is entitled to my opinion.

  55. #455
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,395
    The last two posts nail it. We can't have high wattage ebikes on singletrack trails. If you disagree, please tell me how. Now that we establish that, how do we enforce it? As was mentioned, it's easy to modify any ebike for high wattage. It takes people to regulate and enforce strict trail access. Strict trail access is allowing one type of ebike but not another. So now our hapless enforcer must be able to identify and understand different wattage ebikes. This means every ebike is subject to random inspection. What a serious pain in the ass. You know what's easier and cheaper? Banning all ebikes. This is why most, if not all, federal and state agencies just ban ebikes up front. No questions asked.

    Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  56. #456
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    We do, we have speed limits on trails all over. But that doesn't stop hikers from using these arguments to get us banned.
    Then you should have sympathy for the issue. Furthermore, if speed limits exist and are assumed effective, then e-bikes can't create a speed differential different than regular bikes. No reason to isolate them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Secondly, if there was a way to truly limit ebikes to wattages and speeds, I'd be more on your side. But its not possible. A 1500w throttle assist bike will be less and less distinguishable from any other ebike soon, and throttles are easily concealed, wattages easily exceed the sticker on the bike, and speed cutoffs are easily removed with dongles.
    We don't limit the power or speed potential of motor vehicles, we hold their operators accountable. I do not advocate speed or power limits on e-bikes, so if were possible you wouldn't be on my side.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Even if we could limit trail use to 750w pedalec with speed cutoff: On a typical multi-use trail with a 15mph speed limit the closing speed for an uphill and a downhill rider is 15mph +, say for some moderate slope, 3-6mph for the uphill rider, or about 20 MPH. With an ebike able to 10-15mph up these same hills, that's a closing speed of 20-25mph. So the speed limit for all bikes would have to be reduced to 10mph to maintain the same level of safety, just so a few can ride with their motors. Thanks ebikes!!!!!
    This is nonsense. All bikes are capable of risky speeds and differentials. E-bikes may be capable of higher speeds during climbs but I think it's bogus to assume it or suggest that it creates a hazard that otherwise wouldn't exist. e-bikes while climbing can lose speed in a hurry and in such situations it's generally the descender creating the issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    What evidence are you looking for on this? A scientific study from a research institution that shows that ebike riders, who's bikes can cruise on flats faster and climb hills faster, actually use them to go faster? Sheesh.
    weak straw man.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    We started with a post comparing a speed boat and a sail boat. You said they cohabitate on waterways without issue all the time. I replied that there are many waterways which allow only human-powered, wind-powered watercraft, and swimming, due to their size, and/or ecology - akin to the many trails which allow only bikes and hikers, especially single-track with tight corners and poor sightlines. I would not want powerboats on many of those waterways. I would not want ebikes on these singletrack because once a 250w or 750w bike is allowed, its too easy for someone to bring 1000w or 1500w bike.
    But equating e-bikes, regardless of power, to speedboats compared to the tiniest sailboats that represent trail bikes is inaccurate and disingenuous. Sure, you can find a waterway that supports a sail boat but not a speed boat, that doesn't mean that there are trails that support MTB but not eMTB. Prove that there is. I also object to your implication that 250-750W might be OK but 1000-1500W wouldn't be. You have this presumption that at least some e-bikes must be banned. Ridiculous.

    In my state e-bikes are specifically identified as being bicycles to be regulated the same as bicycles. They have two restrictions, (1) that they have a maximum speed without pedaling, and (2) they have a maximum weight. The weight restriction is very reasonable, it easily isolates e-bikes from electric "motorcycle" class vehicles and it caps power and speed effectively because motors and batteries weigh a lot. If you actually look at these "monster e-bikes", you will see that they are quite heavy. I believe a weight restriction for bicycles could be quite effective and limiting the real issues that could occur.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    It is you who wants the new entitlement, not me. You need bikers support to do it - if you can't get avid cyclists to join your cause, how will you get HOHAs and the park council members who listen to them?
    Careful. There's a big difference between "entitled to ban others" and "entitled to enjoy the same entitlements as others". Furthermore, I'm not arguing for any new entitlement. The argument is to isolate e-bikes and deny them access to your entitlement. Again, this sounds a lot like the arguments made against recent social progression.

    There is no need to "get avid cyclists" to join any cause nor is it "my cause". The problem is "avid cyclists" creating a new cause to deny others access.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    In videos like ...
    I'd wager there are more videos documenting trail damage and irresponsible riding of MTBs than of all forms of e-bikes put together. Your description of these damning videos even uses terms that were invented to describe things MTB riders do, after all. Both of the videos you provided are promo videos for a manufacturer, something that is done routinely by MTB manufacturers all the time. It doesn't move the bar.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Comparing your cause to the fight against racism and LGBT rights demeans both of those movements.
    It would had I done that but I didn't. This is self-righteous, dog-whistle BS.

    I compared the attitudes of racists and arguments made against marriage equality, I did not compare the cause of e-bikes to the cause of gay or race equality fights. This is yet another disingenuous personal attack.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    You on the other hand are fighting for the privilege to take an expensive toy anywhere you want.
    And you are fighting to deny it while claiming the same privilege for yourself.

  57. #457
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    The last two posts nail it. We can't have high wattage ebikes on singletrack trails. If you disagree, please tell me how.
    I disagree and I don't feel it's my obligation to tell you how. If you are going to make such a claim, you should justify it, not just declare it and push the burden of proof onto others.

    The first problem is what constitutes "high wattage" and how you would limit it if that were the right thing to do. There is ample precedence in this area and we don't not limit the power but the behavior. Wattage figures are easily misrepresented, it's the wrong way to think about things.

    Second is the assumption that high wattage e-bikes cause a problem. In a society that likes to believe in personal freedoms, there is a burden to PROVE that a problem exists before legislating a solution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    Now that we establish that, how do we enforce it? As was mentioned, it's easy to modify any ebike for high wattage. It takes people to regulate and enforce strict trail access. Strict trail access is allowing one type of ebike but not another. So now our hapless enforcer must be able to identify and understand different wattage ebikes. This means every ebike is subject to random inspection. What a serious pain in the ass. You know what's easier and cheaper? Banning all ebikes. This is why most, if not all, federal and state agencies just ban ebikes up front. No questions asked.
    So the process is:

    1. declare there to be a problem without proof.
    2. declare a root cause of the problem without proof.
    3. declare a simple-minded solution to be the only possible solution.
    4. declare that solution impractical to implement.
    5. proceed to an outright ban.

    I don't argue that these are the steps that frequently occur, just that all of them are wrong and that cyclists, who have suffered from this in the past, should not be cheerleaders in the fight to inflict it on others this time around.

    The reason this is a dominant attitude among cyclists is simple, people are motivated by self-interest. Cyclists don't care about other cyclists, they care about getting, and keeping, what they want. That's what this is about, it's not about new dangers posed by low power electric motors on trails, it's about not giving a damn about another cyclist's use of the trails but you having your use of the trails. That e-bike rider pays taxes too.

  58. #458
    mtbr member
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    That e-bike rider pays taxes too.




    So do motorcyclists but they are prohibited from non motorized trails so that argument is a non starter.

  59. #459
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    The reason this is a dominant attitude among cyclists is simple, people are motivated by self-interest. Cyclists don't care about other cyclists, they care about getting, and keeping, what they want.
    It's not just in cycling. This is human nature - greed. "I'm ok jack so screw you." And if If we feel threatened we attack.

    It's wrong. It's the reason the world is going way it is today. We need to overcome this attitude. And until we do there will always be hate towards anything different, anything that threatens the established normality.




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Nothing ventured, nothing gained ... http://doricdiversions.com

    Latitude: 57ļ 45' Aberdeenshire, Scotland.

  60. #460
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,395
    Exactly tiretracks. His rebuttal is pointless. High wattage ebikes do cause problems. Look up any you tube video of any high wattage ebike. A line could be drawn in the sand but as I pointed out, it's impossible to enforce. Ergo, no ebikes.

    Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  61. #461
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,438
    Craig -

    If you don't believe in power/wattage restrictions, I would assume you just want MUTs open to anyone to ride/drive anything? I mean, that's where you end up if you go down that road. There are plenty of electric motos that are just as fast (albeit with less range) than ICE ones.

    I have basically no problems with 250W/15mph euro-standard e-bikes basically anywhere. They are just going to make climbs easier for lazy or disabled people, not make anyone any faster. Once you throw those limits out the window (or can't enforce them effectively) you have problems.

    -W

  62. #462
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by tiretracks View Post
    So do motorcyclists but they are prohibited from non motorized trails so that argument is a non starter.
    They are prohibited for actual reasons, not ones trumped up by the cycling community out of fear that they will lose access to trails. Motorcycles also have facilities reserved for them, often where bicycles are excluded. How many e-bike trails exist where bicycles are banned?

  63. #463
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Robopotomus View Post
    It's not just in cycling. This is human nature - greed. "I'm ok jack so screw you." And if If we feel threatened we attack.

    It's wrong. It's the reason the world is going way it is today. We need to overcome this attitude. And until we do there will always be hate towards anything different, anything that threatens the established normality.




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Thank you. Cyclists need to stop contributing to the problem, they aren't actually protecting their interests in doing so.

  64. #464
    mtbr member
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    How many e-bike trails exist where bicycles are banned?


    How many emotorbike trails have emotorbikers built? They don't build themselves you know.

  65. #465
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    228
    If you love your e-bike that's great. Why do you want to call it a bicycle? I don't call my bicycle a wheelchair, and I don't ride it on the sidewalk.
    E-bikes for the disabled is another topic.
    E-bikes for commuting is another topic.
    The anti e-bike crowd uses trail closure as a fear. I have experienced trail closure due to bicycle- equestrian conflict so in my opinion it is a real thing.
    If you want to use a auto vs dragster and speeding analogy, then use it correctly. I have never heard of a street getting shut down to cars because of speeding. They change the laws and enforce it. Do you think even for a minute that this would happen to singletrack? No, conflict shuts down trails to all cyclists.

  66. #466
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Craig -

    If you don't believe in power/wattage restrictions, I would assume you just want MUTs open to anyone to ride/drive anything? I mean, that's where you end up if you go down that road. There are plenty of electric motos that are just as fast (albeit with less range) than ICE ones.

    I have basically no problems with 250W/15mph euro-standard e-bikes basically anywhere. They are just going to make climbs easier for lazy or disabled people, not make anyone any faster. Once you throw those limits out the window (or can't enforce them effectively) you have problems.

    -W
    Again, Walt, I don't think the assumption that there will be problems justifies any of the kinds of actions being advocated. Innovation gets killed when fear legislates out the possibility of it. I also don't believe there will be problems that we don't have already. I am open-minded to that possibility but I want some proof.

    No, I don't believe the choice is between power restrictions and no restrictions of any kind (assuming that you mean literally anything goes, of course not). I believe that power restrictions are hard to enforce, officers won't want to, and the limits themselves are impossible to choose. What is done now (worldwide) is stifling development and resulting in crappy products. Not wanting to see e-bike restrictions doesn't mean I want to allow motorcycles on hiking trails.

    I believe that the proper approach should be to (1) try to be as inclusive of everyone's interests, (2) promote the public interest while maintaining safety, (3) identify issues that arise as technology improves, and (4) take the least invasive actions needed to address those issues. Government should serve all people, not just some.

    I realize that's not specific, but this approach is hard to argue against yet is pretty much entirely opposed to what is happening and what most are advocating here. Instead we have lazy officials and special interests, including cyclists, that encourage the wrong actions.

    I agree with you that throttle vs pedal assist alone shouldn't matter and I also believe that throttle plus pedal assist is likely the best setup, but I also recognize that if e-bikes introduce problems due to speed that throttle will correlate strongly. That means I believe that pedal-assist only could be a reasonable compromise. I would not like to see that, though.

    I also strongly believe in bicycle weight limits. In Texas there is a 100 pound limit. I'd support making it 60 or even 50 pounds (WITH battery). Most e-bikes, even lower powered ones, are in the 40-50 pound range and the higher powered ones are almost always over 50 once the battery is added. Hell, if its eMTB make the limit 45 pounds.

    I say add the battery because many eMTB riders will put the battery in a backpack rather than on the frame. They then claim their bike is only 40ish pounds. Big motors are worthless without big batteries and big batteries weigh plenty.

    Anyway, no one should be opposed to people enjoying the outdoors and getting some exercise. Their choice to use assist is not a challenge to your manhood, as some are clearly sensitive to, nor are their actions reflective of yours. Cyclists should resist lawmakers who do the wrong things out of ignorance and/or laziness because if they don't their interests are at risk too.

  67. #467
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by tiretracks View Post
    How many emotorbike trails have emotorbikers built? They don't build themselves you know.
    Most certainly just as many as MTB riders had built in a similar stage in their development. These kinds of arguments are insulting.

  68. #468
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,376
    Yes, they don't ban cars because of dragsters, but dragsters are only allowed on race tracks.
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  69. #469
    mtbr member
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Most certainly just as many as MTB riders had built in a similar stage in their development. These kinds of arguments are insulting.



    Emotorbikes have been around for at least a decade, how many many emotorbike trails have been built? The real insult is your blindly stumbling around making straw man arguments while calling opposition "idiocy".

  70. #470
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Regarding eMTBs, most are using mid-drives rather than hub drives. Low power models aren't a concern, higher power ones are dominated by mid-drives. When you see an e-bike with a giant hub motor, it is invariably used on the street despite its cheesy full suspension with double crown fork. People want a sofa when they blast up and down roads at unreasonable speeds...

    Now, I said I don't have an eMTB and I don't, but I have studied them intently and have been considering one for years. I'm pretty familiar with the current state of affairs but am no means an expert.

    As I said, hub motors aren't really a concern because you don't really get into high power until your hub is a beast Once you have that, you will need a beefed up rear triangle, usually beyond 135/142 or 150 spacing, and you will need controller of considerable size and weight. These factors lead to crappy handling and kits that enable it have awful suspension kinematics. Anyone who rides this isn't knowledgable regarding MTB at all. Such a bike is not only undesirable on the trails, it will weigh, with a frame battery, 70-100+ pounds. Can't help it when your rear hub weighs 20 by itself. These really are DIY electric motorcycles.

    The proper approach is to take an MTB frame, hopefully the right one, and add a mid-drive. This allows a lighter motor that runs power through the chain, enabling better use of the bike's capabilities. The downsides are that true proportional assist can be hard, you can't shift well under power, and maximum power is limited before the chain system becomes overstressed. You can still put plenty through that chain, but 10hp peak is about all people are willing to do. Still a threat for speed but nowhere hear like a ICE dirt bike.

    The best lower cost mid drive right now is a BBSHD. That drive unit weighs 13 pounds iirc. All it needs is controls, a display and a battery. Most common batteries will weigh 7-10 pounds, making the conversion add 20-25 pounds. In addition, it is unlikely that a rider that is a threat for high speeds will use an XC racing bike so you will expect these conversions to start around 50 pounds. This results in a 1500W bike. There is a 2500W hacked BBSHD at the same weight but batteries for it become an issue. BTW my commuter uses a BBSHD so I am quite familiar with it.

    Riders sometimes choose hardtails, but most conversions are FS or fat bikes and nearly all are pigs.

    There are some alternatives to the BBSHD. Only one that I am aware of, the Tangent Ascent, is significantly lighter. A Tangent Ascent can cut 6 pounds or more off the conversion weight. The Ascent is truly the sh*t, the best thing there is in this market and the guy who does them is great. The Ascent is $2000+ though for just the drive and e-bike converters are cheap. It's the cream but there aren't currently many.

    These mid drives are 1500-6000 watts, the power range that everyone seems to get worked up over. Most of these systems are 50V which means 30-100+ amps of current. Very few battery packs are capable of this, meaning either a custom pack or LiPo. LiPo is heavier and potentially dangerous and LiPo usage involves either a battery chamber in the frame or a backpack for the clever riders. LiPo batteries in the frame never produces a bike under 60 pounds.

    So...in my mind, it's simply unrealistic to think that there's an eMTB out there that's going to have the performance potential to worry about that is also lightweight. Only one setup I know of, a Tangent drive with a LiPo backpack battery, stands a chance of a sub-50 pound weight ready to ride. Furthermore, a heavy bike, motor or otherwise, is likely to correlate strongly with higher intended speeds. That's why I believe an aggressive trail bike weight limit would probably be the best way to cull out the most dangerous of the e-bikes.

    Hopefully this is helpful. Know your "opponent". There are no massively fast, overpowered eMTB's anywhere near conventional trail bike weights nor will there be. Furthermore, there is virtually no one trying to make one (outside of Tangent). You can't take a weight weenie XC bike and add 3000W to it, either, without destroying its character and making an undesirable solution. Plus..it costs money and DIY e-bikers are cheap.

  71. #471
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by tiretracks View Post
    Emotorbikes have been around for at least a decade, how many many emotorbike trails have been built? The real insult is your blindly stumbling around making straw man arguments while calling opposition "idiocy".
    Do you know what a "straw man argument" is? Apparently not by your usage.

    The term "Emotorbike" is apparently one you have made up, I haven't seen it before and don't know what it means. At first I assumed it meant eMTB since you were talking about trail building. Now that you assert they've been around "at least a decade" it appears you've changed the meaning. Regardless, it's clearly intended to invoke bias. eMTBs are not electric motorcycles.

    Regarding eMTB's, however, I would claim there are fewer on the trails now than in the early days of MTB before ANY trails where built BY MTB riders. No way to say one way or another. I've never even seen an eMTB in person but I was riding MTB before suspension forks existed and we only rode motorcycle trails and fire roads.

    Now, if you want to talk straw man arguments, who has proposed that MTB riders build trails while "Emotorbike" riders don't? Would that be you?

  72. #472
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,438
    A weight limit is a great idea - but how do you enforce that? Again, your solution requires an enforcement aspect that is (as of now) impractical.

    -Walt

  73. #473
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,588
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    A weight limit is a great idea - but how do you enforce that? Again, your solution requires an enforcement aspect that is (as of now) impractical.

    -Walt
    For multi-use single track I suppose I might support something like a 30-pound across the board max limit on all 2-wheel vehicles including e-bikes. Good riddance to the heavy DH rigs and all the associated problems they bring. A 30 pound e-bike will be some combination of no power or no range. Or very expensive if it's using voyage-to-Mars technology.

    But kidding aside, the problem with a weight limit is the discrimination hidden within. A 250 watt Walmart sled might not make the 50 pound limit but somebody's $10K 3kw rig might.

    "Power to the people". (bicycling for the masses)

    On a side note my son just got back from the Sea Otter Classic and reported a huge increase in the representation of e-bikes this year; both at the booths and attendees who brought bikes to get around on. And BTW some very fit riders on them.

    Not good news for the sport of Mountain Biking.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  74. #474
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,586
    Hey Craig, so what would fairly constitute proof of these things (say any of the predicted things - ebike danger/higher closing speeds, erosion, whatever) - what would that proof or evidence be, that changed your mind?

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post


    So the process is:

    1. declare there to be a problem without proof.
    2. declare a root cause of the problem without proof.
    3. declare a simple-minded solution to be the only possible solution.
    4. declare that solution impractical to implement.
    5. proceed to an outright ban.

    I don't argue that these are the steps that frequently occur, just that all of them are wrong and that cyclists, who have suffered from this in the past, should not be cheerleaders in the fight to inflict it on others this time around.

  75. #475
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    A weight limit is a great idea - but how do you enforce that? Again, your solution requires an enforcement aspect that is (as of now) impractical.

    -Walt
    Any action requires some sort of enforcement or its a paper tiger. Not sure what could possibly be appropriate, effective, and require no enforcement.

    Now, if you would suggest that a power limit could be enforced at the point of sale, so could a weight limit. A weight limit would be far easier to enforce on the trail than a power or speed limit would. Neither would be effective for DIY bikes.

    I would structure a weight limit to be imposed on any bike, not just e-bikes. This would not be a burden to conventional bikes. I would further guide enforcement to not actively pursue a violation unless there appears to be reckless or damaging behavior. This would exclude the possible bike that might be heavy because it's old or cheap. Then bring a hanging scale. I suppose a picture and a required weigh in or confiscation could work instead of a scale on site. The thing about weight is that it is easy to measure and objective. Power limits aren't. Speed restrictions are vulnerable to computer manipulations, so testing on the trail or after is difficult.

    A weight limit would discourage sales of big, heavy bikes which is a good thing. It would discourage sales of big, high powered e-bikes that don't really exist except in kit form. It would also make such bikes more visible and obvious. Riders of such beasts rely on stealth. If it looks like it has a big battery then it could be in violation. With power limits the battery size is irrelevant.

    Really, when you think about the battery size is directly proportional to speed potential. I'd argue limiting battery is easier than power and equally effective. This would not be true for road but its would for trail.

    I don't know about trail, but power consumption on the road is 10-25 Wh per mile depending on speed. Higher speeds escalate power consumption rapidly. On the trail it is the same. I've heard that trail usage can be low because average speeds are lower than road. A fast eMTB, though, will see 2 things, (1) that the consumption per mile will be much greater, and (2) the distances desired in a ride will be far greater. This means a massively bigger battery.

    I've heard of riders using batteries over 1 KWh for relatively modest rides. IMO that's ridiculous. A weight limit ends that in a hurry.

  76. #476
    mtbr member
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by zooey View Post


    With the democracy topic popping up, I was reminded of the all the legislation on immigration, travel, and refugees under Trump and how it appears similar to this topic.

    I was thinking of the hikers against mtbers because of the hyped up threat of ebikes, who are stupid about conserving their own good time by not having some outsiders spoil it. Rather than adapt to the changes, they reject it, and attempt to reverse and hold off any significant change. Apparently, they think they can claim public land for specific user groups. They don't think it's big enough for all of us, so someone's got to go, choosing only close friends and themselves to take control. That's just seriously F'd up if you think this mindset is acceptable anywhere else... reminds me of all the United Airlines memes now, and also school bullies at the playground.

    Damn, all I've been doing in this post is talk about conservative/right-wing mind-sets.


    Leave politics out of it.

  77. #477
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,395
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Any action requires some sort of enforcement or its a paper tiger. Not sure what could possibly be appropriate, effective, and require no enforcement.

    Now, if you would suggest that a power limit could be enforced at the point of sale, so could a weight limit. A weight limit would be far easier to enforce on the trail than a power or speed limit would. Neither would be effective for DIY bikes.

    I would structure a weight limit to be imposed on any bike, not just e-bikes. This would not be a burden to conventional bikes. I would further guide enforcement to not actively pursue a violation unless there appears to be reckless or damaging behavior. This would exclude the possible bike that might be heavy because it's old or cheap. Then bring a hanging scale. I suppose a picture and a required weigh in or confiscation could work instead of a scale on site. The thing about weight is that it is easy to measure and objective. Power limits aren't. Speed restrictions are vulnerable to computer manipulations, so testing on the trail or after is difficult.

    A weight limit would discourage sales of big, heavy bikes which is a good thing. It would discourage sales of big, high powered e-bikes that don't really exist except in kit form. It would also make such bikes more visible and obvious. Riders of such beasts rely on stealth. If it looks like it has a big battery then it could be in violation. With power limits the battery size is irrelevant.

    Really, when you think about the battery size is directly proportional to speed potential. I'd argue limiting battery is easier than power and equally effective. This would not be true for road but its would for trail.

    I don't know about trail, but power consumption on the road is 10-25 Wh per mile depending on speed. Higher speeds escalate power consumption rapidly. On the trail it is the same. I've heard that trail usage can be low because average speeds are lower than road. A fast eMTB, though, will see 2 things, (1) that the consumption per mile will be much greater, and (2) the distances desired in a ride will be far greater. This means a massively bigger battery.

    I've heard of riders using batteries over 1 KWh for relatively modest rides. IMO that's ridiculous. A weight limit ends that in a hurry.
    You've got to get off the weight limit thing. That's an easy non-starter. As far is it being easier to enforce, how? A ranger with a scale? Eyeballing it? Not going to happen. Face it, as long as ebikes include everything from 1 watt to a million watts, they'll just be banned outright because there's no way to effectively enforce a limit.

    I work for/with the BLM by the way. I have a bit of insider information on the subject and they won't lift their ban on ebikes anytime soon.

    Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  78. #478
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,440
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    You've got to get off the weight limit thing. That's an easy non-starter. As far is it being easier to enforce, how? A ranger with a scale? Eyeballing it? Not going to happen. Face it, as long as ebikes include everything from 1 watt to a million watts, they'll just be banned outright because there's no way to effectively enforce a limit.

    I work for/with the BLM by the way. I have a bit of insider information on the subject and they won't lift their ban on ebikes anytime soon.

    Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
    Agreed. The local land managers here take the same view, the only way they see they have a shot at regulating ebike use on non moto singletrack is to not allow any. Unlike the EU where there are strict regulations as to what can be sold and penalties if you go around it, in the US you have guys selling this and riding it on non moto trails to show it off without a care.



    The ebike industry is it's own worse enemy imo, if they had copied EU legislation I doubt many people would care about emtbs.

  79. #479
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    33

    I just might answer some questions, maybe!

    Like most threads of this type, by page 10 they have collected enough insinuation and misinformation to deteriorate into back and forth drivel. That is too bad because the OP had a valid question.
    E-bikes are still way in their infancy and very poorly understood by both manufacturers and the biking community. They need another 8-10 years of development. I stumbled into the e-bike scene because I wanted to get my handicap wife an e-bike so she could manage to ride on something besides dead flat paved with no wind. There was nothing commercially available that was manageable for her to used so I designed and built one for her. I liked hers so much I built an e-fat bike version for myself.
    First of all for those of you whom have never ridden an e-mtb here is a primer what they are and what they are not.
    1.) Donít believe the marketing hype you see out there. Humans are pathetic at producing usable power. You can mountain bike half a day and not expend the equivalent of 10 cents worth of USA priced electricity. 750 watts is 1 lousy horse power before powertrain losses, hear that, ONE. Do you really think you are going to get motorcycle dirtbike performance out of a 1 hp legal e-mtb? If you think you can I have some beach property for sale in Death Valley. That1 horse power is only a supplement to your pathetic lousy ability to produce propulsive energy, thatís it.
    2.) Battery technology is expensive, heavy and inefficient at this time. You canít carry enough battery power to sustain high powered (750 watts and higher) for very long. You encounter the problems of voltage sag and stored power capacity. You wonít find high power e-mtbs tearing things up very far from the parking lot and frankly high powered e-bikes are much more fun at some place like a motocross park or party at someoneís large expansive back yard. They are heavy, don't turn on a dime and when they run out of battery there is no warning and re-charges take a long time. Cost severely limits the number of high powered e-bikes you will find. They are a party toy.
    3.) E-bikes are far less flickable than regular mountain bikes. Combine that with their low power, usually better traction and trails designed for lighter more flickable bikes and you have a recipe for slowing down. You better be damned good if you are going into a typical corner and thinking you are going to power-on and slide around it. That is much easier on a light flickable mountain bike downhill with skinny tires.
    4.) E-mtbís from a practical point of view are not much faster. Speed comes at the cost of exponential power increases. That means burning through batteries for not that much gain in speed. Especially uphill.
    So where do e-mtbís shine?
    A bit of warning for those inclined to just go out and buy an e-bike for single track. Most e-mtbís suck due to poor design. E-bike manufacturers do not understand where their products should shine and believe their own marketing hype. Most e-bike manufacturers design products for slobs. Their bikes pedal poorly without power and deliver power even when it should not be necessary.
    For reasonably fit riders, e-bikes are best used to supplement extra power when and where itís needed. Extra power is needed where the rider is giving out without enough power to cope. It is not much fun to be giving out, gasping for air and falling off your bike right in front of another rider going up a steep narrow grade. The trouble is most e-bikes deliver the opposite, they pedal poorly without power and are designed to give more power the harder you pedal instead of great pedaling performance and more power when you drop below cadence. Understand before you buy. I built mine to pedal easy and deliver power where its needed.
    E-bikes allow many riders to do things that are highly beneficial but require more power than said rider can produce. Examples would be keeping up with other faster riders, running fatter tires with much lower tire pressures. Riding in sand and snow. Carrying extra items like water, snacks, clothing changes and repair items. In group rides, load the e-bikes.
    E-bikes do wonders for eliminating the quick spikes in power that produce lactic acid, dangerous heart rates and riders giving out before the ride is complete.
    An e-bike designed and used in this fashion can deliver the goods for long rides with modest battery sizes. I get 40-70 miles out of my 700 watt hour battery. I bike twice as many miles as I did before the e-bike, I have gained fitness and currently a happy unapologetic e-mtn biker.

  80. #480
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    Yes, they don't ban cars because of dragsters, but dragsters are only allowed on race tracks.
    This is not true. Nothing prevents dragster use on the street. Get the proper certs that all cars must meet and it is fine.

  81. #481
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Hey Craig, so what would fairly constitute proof of these things (say any of the predicted things - ebike danger/higher closing speeds, erosion, whatever) - what would that proof or evidence be, that changed your mind?
    Statistical evidence that ties e-bike usage directly to the "problems" that people claim need to be solved. This would require a demonstration that e-bikes are actually differentiated in their impact from regular bikes.

  82. #482
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by tiretracks View Post
    Leave politics out of it.
    Ha. There is nothing to this thread but politics.

  83. #483
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    You've got to get off the weight limit thing. That's an easy non-starter. As far is it being easier to enforce, how? A ranger with a scale? Eyeballing it? Not going to happen. Face it, as long as ebikes include everything from 1 watt to a million watts, they'll just be banned outright because there's no way to effectively enforce a limit.

    I work for/with the BLM by the way. I have a bit of insider information on the subject and they won't lift their ban on ebikes anytime soon.

    Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
    So you have an inside line to the problem or, perhaps, are directly related of the problem.

    Sorry, but weight is far easier to enforce in any environment than a power limit. Anyone who says otherwise is mentally challenged or has an agenda. A scale would be a trivial requirement compared to, say, a portable dyno. Weight limit is also state law where I live so not everyone shares your view or the ignorant approach of the BLM.

  84. #484
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    ...in the US you have guys selling this and riding it on non moto trails to show it off without a care.
    Without a care over what? You expose your prejudice with such a comment. You think that everyone inherently knows there is something wrong with this.

    That bike is typical of the junk in that part of the e-bike market. It is also 70 pounds and easily targeted, despite being "42% lighter than the top competitor"!

    "EU legislation" sucks and legislation is a function of government, not industry. EU rules have a significant impact on US products despite not being enforceable. The vast majority of e-bike products are nothing like the POS in your video.

  85. #485
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,586
    Quote Originally Posted by PierreR View Post
    Like most threads of this type, by page 10 they have collected enough insinuation and misinformation to deteriorate into back and forth drivel. That is too bad because the OP had a valid question.
    E-bikes are still way in their infancy and very poorly understood by both manufacturers and the biking community. They need another 8-10 years of development. I stumbled into the e-bike scene because I wanted to get my handicap wife an e-bike so she could manage to ride on something besides dead flat paved with no wind. There was nothing commercially available that was manageable for her to used so I designed and built one for her. I liked hers so much I built an e-fat bike version for myself.
    First of all for those of you whom have never ridden an e-mtb here is a primer what they are and what they are not.
    1.)Donít believe the marketing hype you see out there. Humans are pathetic at producing usable power. You can mountain bike half a day and not expend the equivalent of 10 cents worth of USA priced electricity. 750 watts is 1 lousy horse power before powertrain losses, hear that, ONE. Do you really think you are going to get motorcycle dirtbike performance out of a 1 hp legal e-mtb? If you think you can I have some beach property for sale in Death Valley. That1 horse power is only a supplement to your pathetic lousy ability to produce propulsive energy, thatís it.
    2.)Battery technology is expensive, heavy and inefficient at this time. You canít carry enough battery power to sustain high powered (750 watts and higher) for very long. You encounter the problems of voltage sag and stored power capacity. You wonít find high power e-mtbs tearing things up very far from the parking lot and frankly high powered e-bikes are much more fun at some place like a motocross park or party at someoneís large expansive back yard. They are heavy, don't turn on a dime and when they run out of battery there is no warning and re-charges take a long time. Cost severely limits the number of high powered e-bikes you will find. They are a party toy.
    3.)E-bikes are far less flickable than regular mountain bikes. Combine that with their low power, usually better traction and trails designed for lighter more flickable bikes and you have a recipe for slowing down. You better be damned good if you are going into a typical corner and thinking you are going to power-on and slide around it. That is much easier on a light flickable mountain bike downhill with skinny tires.
    4.)E-mtbís from a practical point of view are not much faster. Speed comes at the cost of exponential power increases. That means burning through batteries for not that much gain in speed. Especially uphill.
    So where do e-mtbís shine?
    A bit of warning for those inclined to just go out and buy an e-bike for single track. Most e-mtbís suck due to poor design. E-bike manufacturers do not understand where their products should shine and believe their own marketing hype. Most e-bike manufacturers design products for slobs. Their bikes pedal poorly without power and deliver power even when it should not be necessary.
    For reasonably fit riders, e-bikes are best used to supplement extra power when and where itís needed. Extra power is needed where the rider is giving out without enough power to cope. It is not much fun to be giving out, gasping for air and falling off your bike right in front of another rider going up a steep narrow grade. The trouble is most e-bikes deliver the opposite, they pedal poorly without power and are designed to give more power the harder you pedal instead of great pedaling performance and more power when you drop below cadence. Understand before you buy. I built mine to pedal easy and deliver power where its needed.
    E-bikes allow many riders to do things that are highly beneficial but require more power than said rider can produce. Examples would be keeping up with other faster riders, running fatter tires with much lower tire pressures. Riding in sand and snow. Carrying extra items like water, snacks, clothing changes and repair items. In group rides, load the e-bikes.
    E-bikes do wonders for eliminating the quick spikes in power that produce lactic acid, dangerous heart rates and riders giving out before the ride is complete.
    An e-bike designed and used in this fashion can deliver the goods for long rides with modest battery sizes. I get 40-70 miles out of my 700 watt hour battery. I bike twice as many miles as I did before the e-bike, I have gained fitness and currently a happy unapologetic e-mtn biker.
    This is a great writeup, but battery and motor technology are both accelerating dramatically as we move to clean cars and other applications. There are a bunch of very promising battery technologies in development with significantly higher energy density.

    http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/1303...he-air.amphtml

    Here's why this matters now: If ebikes become prolific in their current form, technology will make them much more dangerous very shortly, in 5-10 years time. They will be able to sustain higher speeds for longer periods with less weight penalty. Then everything is in place for blanket bike bans. Slowly, incidents will rise. When recording these incidents, authorities will make no distinction between ebikes of different types, or even ebikes and bikes - they'll all just be bikes at that point.

  86. #486
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    ...but battery and motor technology are both accelerating dramatically as we move to clean cars and other applications.
    No they aren't. Quite the opposite of "accelerating dramatically", battery technology is the largest impediment to many applications and has been improving only modestly for quite a while. Meanwhile, motor technology is mature, not really improving. What has improved recently is controller technology. But hey, why let facts get in the way of your dog-whistling? It's easier to whip up the emotions when you don't really understand what you are talking about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Here's why this matters now: If ebikes become prolific in their current form, technology will make them much more dangerous very shortly, ...
    More capable, yes, "much more dangerous" no. Your assumption is that e-bikes are inherently dangerous by their nature. This is your hangup, it's not fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    in 5-10 years time. They will be able to sustain higher speeds for longer periods with less weight penalty.
    That sounds great. We need to provide a climate where these technologies can improve.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Then everything is in place for blanket bike bans.
    Everything is in place now, in fact people celebrate blanket bans today. Stupidity is all you need and that exists in abundance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Slowly, incidents will rise. When recording these incidents, authorities will make no distinction between ebikes of different types, or even ebikes and bikes - they'll all just be bikes at that point.
    They are all just bikes and incidents involving conventional bikes also rise. You love to cast e-bikes as villains and other bikes as innocents. The danger is with the mentality of certain riders, most of which ride bikes, not e-bikes, today.

    Frankly, dangerous behavior correlates with youth, and younger riders may take to e-bikes at lower rates than the population overall. Thus, we might see the opposite of what you suggest, e-bikes proving to have lower incident rates than bikes overall, so it's important that there be real data. No one knows what the facts will be, it's all just speculation, speculation with an agenda.

  87. #487
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,565
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    They are all just bikes
    That is your opinion,. Mine is that yes, they are bikes but they are quite different from bicycles, there is both a tangible and philosophical difference between the two that that is clearly obvious to many (most?) people that you fail to acknowledge or grasp.

    You keep going on about blanket bans on electric bikes but there is no more a blanket ban on them than there is for cars, motorcycles, mountain bikes or hikers. Each has their own individual restrictions and appropriate venues.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  88. #488
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,438
    I'd love to live in a libertarian fantasy world where we can simply hold people accountable for their actions and how they harm others on an individual basis. E-bikes would be great in that world.

    But we don't live there and the easiest way to keep the highly correlated lazy people and jerks from ruining things is to just ban things that make bikes a lot faster and easier for lazy people to operate. Bikes are super slow on climbs. That's a good thing.

    I could get behind a system where you agree to allow your e-bike to be tracked (Strava flyby style?) and you forfeit it if people complain about your behavior. That would allow the individual responsibility aspect to keep things under control.

    -Walt

  89. #489
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    This is a great writeup, but battery and motor technology are both accelerating dramatically as we move to clean cars and other applications. There are a bunch of very promising battery technologies in development with significantly higher energy density.

    Future batteries, coming soon: Charge in seconds, last months and power over the air - Pocket-lint

    Here's why this matters now: If ebikes become prolific in their current form, technology will make them much more dangerous very shortly, in 5-10 years time. They will be able to sustain higher speeds for longer periods with less weight penalty. Then everything is in place for blanket bike bans. Slowly, incidents will rise. When recording these incidents, authorities will make no distinction between ebikes of different types, or even ebikes and bikes - they'll all just be bikes at that point.
    I do not see how any such incidents with hyper powered ebikes could or would be buried in the statistics. Not with all the local people such as yourself to keep them honest and to trumpet any such incident to the high heavens to buttress your argument. I don't think that any sort of event that resulted in any injury or even any property damage could be covered up in todays environment or the one to come as ebikes get more common on trails.

  90. #490
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    I could get behind a system where you agree to allow your e-bike to be tracked (Strava flyby style?) and you forfeit it if people complain about your behavior. That would allow the individual responsibility aspect to keep things under control.

    -Walt
    That's a fantasy world all right, but I don't think it's a libertarian one. More like the ones that were so popular in Europe in the 1930's........

  91. #491
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,376
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    This is not true. Nothing prevents dragster use on the street. Get the proper certs that all cars must meet and it is fine.
    So then it would be a car, just like if you took the motor off your motorbike, it would be a bike
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  92. #492
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    That is your opinion,. Mine is that yes, they are bikes but they are quite different from bicycles, there is both a tangible and philosophical difference between the two that that is clearly obvious to many (most?) people that you fail to acknowledge or grasp.

    You keep going on about blanket bans on electric bikes but there is no more a blanket ban on them than there is for cars, motorcycles, mountain bikes or hikers. Each has their own individual restrictions and appropriate venues.
    A track bike and a downhill bike have "tangible and philosophical differences" yet the are both bikes. "That is clearly obvious to many (most?) people" as well. Justify how e-bikes are inherently so much different that they need to be made distinct when these other two aren't. Trails open to MTBs would be open to a track bike yet not to an eMTB? There are fewer differences with an eMTB than a track bike. Perhaps this is something you can "acknowledge or grasp".

    As for "blanket bans", your point rings hollow, it would appear nothing more than arguing the semantics "blanket". The entire point of classifying e-bikes as separate from bikes is to exclude them from areas where bikes are otherwise allowed. I did not introduce the term.

  93. #493
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    But we don't live there and the easiest way to keep the highly correlated lazy people and jerks from ruining things is to just ban things that make bikes a lot faster and easier for lazy people to operate. Bikes are super slow on climbs.
    Then we should ban suspension, pneumatic tires, the list goes on an on. Who are you to declare what technologies that "makes bikes a lot faster" should be allowed or banned? Bicycles wouldn't exist without a desire to make things faster and easier.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    I could get behind a system where you agree to allow your e-bike to be tracked (Strava flyby style?) and you forfeit it if people complain about your behavior. That would allow the individual responsibility aspect to keep things under control.
    Would you support that system for all bikes? Do you feel it's fair that others get to decide, without due process, your fate? The confiscation of your property? How about implementing this system only for bikes made by WaltWorks? Perhaps some could get behind that.

    Sorry, Walt, but these ideas don't make sense. You have the privilege of not just doing something you enjoy but making a living off of it. I think that's great, but others have the right to expect the same access and what you suggest is the denial of that access to others of your choice and punitive actions against them without due process.

  94. #494
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    So then it would be a car, just like if you took the motor off your motorbike, it would be a bike
    Yes, dragsters are cars, just not street-legal ones. The action of making them street-legal does not turn them into cars, it merely expands their use.

    I do not own a motorbike. I do own an e-bike which is distinct from motorbikes in that it is legally recognized as a bicycle and explicitly regulated in the same manner. I do not have to "take the motor" off to turn it into a bike any more than I have to license my car in order to turn it into a car. I only have to license it to drive it on the street.

  95. #495
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,565
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    A track bike and a downhill bike have "tangible and philosophical differences" yet the are both bikes. "That is clearly obvious to many (most?) people" as well. Justify how e-bikes are inherently so much different that they need to be made distinct when these other two aren't.

    Justify? Funny that you claim to be so smart yet can't seem to understand the basic concept of human powered vs. motor powered and what the fundamental difference is between them.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  96. #496
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,438
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Then we should ban suspension, pneumatic tires, the list goes on an on. Who are you to declare what technologies that "makes bikes a lot faster" should be allowed or banned? Bicycles wouldn't exist without a desire to make things faster and easier.
    Bikes aren't really much faster on trails than they were 25 years ago. If you make the course gnarly enough (ie DH park) then modern suspension and tires make a big difference on the DH, but that's not the MUT areas we're talking about (and I have no problem with E-bikes on any bike-only trail system). Elsewhere I'd be surprised if a strong rider was even 1mph faster now than they were in the 1980s (yes, I was there).

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Would you support that system for all bikes? Do you feel it's fair that others get to decide, without due process, your fate? The confiscation of your property? How about implementing this system only for bikes made by WaltWorks? Perhaps some could get behind that.
    Yes, I'd be fine with it for all bikes. I didn't say anything about due process, because we're not talking about criminal offenses, in general. My point is simply that if you want to add power/speed to vehicles operated on MUTs, you need to show that you're not going to cause problems by doing so. Tracking bikes could be a way to do that (and to show that e-bikes are totally fine).

    The burden of proof is (rightly) on the new/heavier/faster user group here. I don't understand why that's controversial.

    Also, not to nitpick, but what does my business have to do with this?

    -Walt

  97. #497
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,586
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    No they aren't. Quite the opposite of "accelerating dramatically", battery technology is the largest impediment to many applications and has been improving only modestly for quite a while. Meanwhile, motor technology is mature, not really improving. What has improved recently is controller technology. But hey, why let facts get in the way of your dog-whistling? It's easier to whip up the emotions when you don't really understand what you are talking about.
    I guess all these Teslas, Leafs, and mobile phones were all just waiting to happen on 2005 battery technology. If I only knew back then...

  98. #498
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Funny that you claim to be so smart...
    Hey a-hole, provide a single reference where I have made this claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    ...yet can't seem to understand the basic concept of human powered vs. motor powered and what the fundamental difference is between them.
    It is a difference that does not justify segregating them. Why can't you "seem to understand" that? Red is fundamentally different from black but that doesn't justify banning red bikes. This is a easy concept to get for people who don't have an aversion to logical arguments.

  99. #499
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Bikes aren't really much faster on trails than they were 25 years ago. If you make the course gnarly enough (ie DH park) then modern suspension and tires make a big difference on the DH, but that's not the MUT areas we're talking about (and I have no problem with E-bikes on any bike-only trail system). Elsewhere I'd be surprised if a strong rider was even 1mph faster now than they were in the 1980s (yes, I was there).
    I don't agree but this leads a more interesting question...

    If nothing in the last 25 years has improved speeds in trails (much), then why should we assume that electric assist will rapidly create dangerous situations on trails? Is it additional speed that does it? Are we to believe that the sole determiner of trail speed is available power? This really defies logic. It is largely true on the road but even there it does not cause problems in moderation, and I always thought this was a big reason to prefer MTB over road.

    The industry has really done a poor job over decades if what you say is true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Yes, I'd be fine with it for all bikes. I didn't say anything about due process, because we're not talking about criminal offenses, in general. My point is simply that if you want to add power/speed to vehicles operated on MUTs, you need to show that you're not going to cause problems by doing so. Tracking bikes could be a way to do that (and to show that e-bikes are totally fine).
    You said "and you forfeit it if people complain about your behavior". Property forfeiture is a serious penalty and you proposed it as the consequence of a simple complaint from "people". I'm not sure how you justify asset forfeiture nor how your process is suitable under such circumstance. Fact is, if someone doesn't like me they can lodge a complaint regardless of my behavior and many are that unethical. That's what due process is for and it is not limited to criminal matters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    The burden of proof is (rightly) on the new/heavier/faster user group here. I don't understand why that's controversial.
    Why is that? Why should it be assumed that a bicycle with new parts on it must accept a "burden of proof" that would be unprecedented? Should a new model bicycle be banned until it can meet the same burden of proof? Have trail bikes ever met such a burden of proof? Why is it that there is this assumption that bikes that so few know or understand must absolutely present a danger that requires government interference to protect us against, particularly in an industry where, for decades, nothing has happened that has even moved the speed needle?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Also, not to nitpick, but what does my business have to do with this?
    It was an argument to absurdity, nothing more. I would not criticize your business.

  100. #500
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    886
    This looks like a pretty good reason for wanting an emtb:



    http://reviews.mtbr.com/specialized-...ail-tool-twist

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. New rider
    By redhot1.4 in forum Texas
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 01-24-2017, 10:22 AM
  2. Faster rider, Stronger Rider
    By Osco in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 12-29-2014, 09:29 PM
  3. Are you a "park rider" or a "wilderness rider?"
    By SWriverstone in forum Passion
    Replies: 133
    Last Post: 05-20-2014, 11:26 PM
  4. Experienced rider with newb rider in Moab
    By willdtrout in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-17-2012, 05:01 PM
  5. Rider down.........
    By gollub01 in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 06-23-2011, 11:16 AM

Members who have read this thread: 347

Posting Permissions

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