Why Class 1 and not Class 2? - Page 2- Mtbr.com
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 101 to 191 of 191
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    For the record, I support full access for EU Class 1 bikes (that is, max 250w and cutoff at 25 kph). That's plenty to have all the same fun as a capable/fit mountain biker, regardless of your physical condition. 750w/20mph is too rich for my blood but I'm ok with it on trail systems where it makes sense - ie with good sight lines, mostly directional trails, and no overall access problems for bikes (almost everything in Moab, for example, would be just fine).
    What leads you to believe there is substantial difference between EU and Class 1 bikes that would lead to a difference in how such bikes would "make sense" on various trails? Name a single US-sold e-bike that is class 1 yet is rated at 750 watts. This distinction you draw is entirely without justification or merit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    The reality is that the cat is out of the bag, though. And actually, hacking production bikes is trivially easy (for most) - toodle on over to Endless Sphere sometime.
    Prove it Walt. I "toodle" over to Endless Sphere more often than I read the forums here. I have not seen a single instance of a commercial e-bike hacked over there. Why would people over there care about 250 watt bikes? They have contempt for them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    You can see for yourself what's available here if you're bored: https://www.ebiketuning.com/
    Maybe you should look there for yourself. Name one product there that advertises that they can increase power output. You do realize that hardware must be capable of that before it can actually be done, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    They can help you with Bosch, Yamaha, Shimano, Brose, Panasonic, BionX, etc, etc!
    They can help me what, Walt? Lifting speed restrictions? BFD

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    In the event that power limits can't be determined/enforced and illegal/overpowered bikes start showing up...yeah, I'm down for banning them all.

    -Walt
    But you've already declared that enforcement isn't possible. Like I said, you are easy to see through. You support nothing but bans and you demonstrate ignorance of the underlying technologies.

    Incidentally, I am an electrical engineer and a professional firmware developer. I am quite familiar with the effort required to do what you claim and a myriad reasons why these things aren't done.

    The e-bike community would be better off without your FUD.

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Every current EU spec emtb on the market can easily be derestricted.

    Every Bafang drive can be derestricted and the max power limits modified by the user/manufacturer.

    It doesn't make them motos by any means, but it's a given that ebikes are easy and relatively cheap to modify.
    This is not what Walt said. I will remind you:

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt
    And even perfectly legal bikes can simply (and invisibly) be hacked/dongled to be much much more powerful, meaning that even if you wanted to try to determine the class/power output of a bike, it would be next to impossible without dynoing the darn thing.
    Walt didn't say "derestricted", he said "much much more powerful". These are very different things, and this is deliberate on his part. It is also complete nonsense.

    If it were only speed restriction I wouldn't have commented, but that's not Walt intends to say at all. BTW, the speed restrictions themselves are arbitrary and the one the EU is saddled with is disliked there and not chosen with trails in mind. Acting as though this is a carefully thought out choice is ignorant, yet Walt just got through saying the EU was reasonable while Class 1 is a bridge too far. It's not hard to figure out Walt's agenda.

    Also, Bafang drives are not eMTBs. Any DIY Ebike builder can do anything without regard to any power limit. Walt was talking about modifying "perfectly legal bikes". I'll note that multi-horsepower e-bikes are "perfectly legal" where I live. This is another trope trotted out by people like Walt to cast aspersions on e-bikes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Why is that important on one type of multiuse trail populated by the same users and not on another? If the reasoning is that they don't have enough power to do any trail damage, who cares?
    Agreed. As long as eMTBs are operated as MTBs, in the same ways for the same purposes, then they are MTBs from an access standpoint. eMTB users need to stop buying into this narrative that they are second class citizens and that trails are the property of MTB riders whose asses need to be kissed for the privileges that they enjoy. Public property is for the enjoyment of all.

  3. #103
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Hey, look, I'd like to be able to ride with my elderly neighbors. There are tons of people who would benefit from EU class 1 ebikes and I doubt you'd ever run into any real problems on the trail.

    But that's not the situation we have, and yes, in fact, you can get more than 250w of power out of all the motors on the market - a lot more. I'm not really ok with that, nor am I ok with cutoff speeds above 15mph or so.

    In other words, I'm fine with someone with an injury or just poor fitness wanting to get out and mountain bike, and be mostly indistinguishable from other trail users. Those power/speed numbers will certainly do it.

    The problem is that people have and will derestrict and sometimes overvolt them, and will build DIY stuff that is way over those limits too. As I said before - this already happened here in Park City and it resulted in the ban hammer dropping. I can't say I disagree with that. I don't particularly want to share trails with 3000w bikes that can go 30mph on the flats.

    -Walt

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Are you saying that e-bikes are for "elderly neighbors"? Only the physically impaired? Who are you to say what other people can ride?

    E-bikes today produce more than 250 watts without modification so that's a red herring. What determines power is the speed at which you produce a given amount of torque. Wattage is beside the point as long as there are modest speed restrictions and motor wattage limits are toothless anyway.

    You can't "over volt" commercial e-bikes, at least none I've heard of. You can de-restrict them because they are specifically designed to allow that (and restrictions are arbitrary). Again, Walt, stop spreading FUD. Extra voltage is of limited value regardless since motors are restricted by human cadences. Voltage raises the RPM at which torque can be produced, but so what? Can't pedal that fast (and ban the throttle).

    I'm with you on DIY bikes of a different power class, yet you consistently argue against a simple restriction that targets those bikes directly, namely the throttle ban. Those bikes, and the riders that want them, are throttle only. They also need large batteries, that's why I like a weight limit. You, on the other hand, are more interested in demonizing all e-bikes because you don't understand how they work.

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Hey, look, I'd like to be able to ride with my elderly neighbors. There are tons of people who would benefit from EU class 1 ebikes and I doubt you'd ever run into any real problems on the trail.

    But that's not the situation we have, and yes, in fact, you can get more than 250w of power out of all the motors on the market - a lot more. I'm not really ok with that, nor am I ok with cutoff speeds above 15mph or so.

    In other words, I'm fine with someone with an injury or just poor fitness wanting to get out and mountain bike, and be mostly indistinguishable from other trail users. Those power/speed numbers will certainly do it.

    The problem is that people have and will derestrict and sometimes overvolt them, and will build DIY stuff that is way over those limits too. As I said before - this already happened here in Park City and it resulted in the ban hammer dropping. I can't say I disagree with that. I don't particularly want to share trails with 3000w bikes that can go 30mph on the flats.

    -Walt
    Both you and craigsj have valid points.

    Craigsj is very much right on the restrictions of hardware and batteries in a factory e-mtbr. You can only push so many amps through a ESC before it burns up and dies, same with batteries. You see overvolting and high amps in the RC world all the time with predictable results of destroyed ESC's, motors and batteries.

    Now I do agree with you about we do not need 3000kW bikes equivalent to a 125cc 2 stroke on single track.

    There might be a common ground of no DIY conversions since places like Luna seem incapable of being reasonable. Factory bikes can only be pushed to 750w for short periods before they die so there is a built in restriction, the cost of repairs.

  6. #106
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    If it means my kids and grandkids can ride trails someday in the far future, call me Mr. FUD!

    The Levo produces what, a continuous 660W or so in Turbo? It doesn't fry and you can get quite a decent length ride at that power, too. The Factory stuff isn't even vaguely limited to 250W and it's NOT (I've ridden a Levo and also own a 750W Class 2) like riding a normal bike at *all*.

    I don't think the throttle restriction is 1) enforceable, or 2) relevant. The DIY monsterbikes we saw here didn't have throttles AFAIK, they were being "pedaled"... at very high rates of speed.

    -Walt

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    If it means my kids and grandkids can ride trails someday in the far future, call me Mr. FUD!

    The Levo produces what, a continuous 660W or so in Turbo? It doesn't fry and you can get quite a decent length ride at that power, too. The Factory stuff isn't even vaguely limited to 250W and it's NOT (I've ridden a Levo and also own a 750W Class 2) like riding a normal bike at *all*.

    I don't think the throttle restriction is 1) enforceable, or 2) relevant. The DIY monsterbikes we saw here didn't have throttles AFAIK, they were being "pedaled"... at very high rates of speed.

    -Walt
    660w is nothing and there is a reason the motor can be pushed that hard. If you want a hard 250 then you would be looking at much smaller motors that frankly are not that reliable. Luna used to have motors like that but they quit selling them since they were getting burned up. There is just not enough mass for continuous usage.

    Hell when I flew RC planes I had small planes pulling 600+w now those motors came down HOT.. Those motors were hanging out in the wind a 40+ mph, not enclosed in a water proof housing with small heat sink fins.

    There are physical restrictions on this hardware just go an visit a RC forum for details you will never see in a e-bike forum.

  8. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by KenPsz View Post
    There might be a common ground of no DIY conversions since places like Luna seem incapable of being reasonable.
    No, because DIY conversion is poorly defined. How the bike gets built, and who builds it, doesn't matter. Custom builders should not get locked out. Bikes should be judge on what they do and how they're used.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt
    I don't think the throttle restriction is 1) enforceable, or 2) relevant. The DIY monsterbikes we saw here didn't have throttles AFAIK, they were being "pedaled"... at very high rates of speed.
    We're heard that argument before, but throttle restriction is among the most enforceable restrictions and is completely relevant. "Over volters" of mid-drives literally rely on throttle to get any benefit at all. Again, Walt, you voice opinions that are based on ignorance and you never learn anything.

    I find it highly unlikely that any DIY "monster bikes" you've seen on trails lacked throttle. Go over to Endless Sphere sometime and learn about how popular PAS is there. It's viewed with as much derision as "monster bikes" are viewed here, and with at least as much ignorance.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    No, because DIY conversion is poorly defined. How the bike gets built, and who builds it, doesn't matter. Custom builders should not get locked out. Bikes should be judge on what they do and how they're used.
    I have to disagree on the DIY since places like Luna are doing their best to create 1000w+ systems that are small and do cause a problem. When you see that owner and some people he talks to say they are "downhilling the uphills" that is a problem.

    That is why i could see DIY being banned/restricted, they are easy to identify and not easy to control. But manufactures can do low KV windings with restrictions on voltages to keep things in a level everyone could live with.

    I agree with you on the throttle the dudes building the monster bikes are going throttle since they really want an electric motorcycle.

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by KenPsz View Post
    660w is nothing and there is a reason the motor can be pushed that hard. If you want a hard 250 then you would be looking at much smaller motors that frankly are not that reliable.
    Agreed. I've made this point here before but it falls on deaf ears. The fact is that some people take whatever exists and declare that half that is what the limit should be. There's a reason they do that and it's what Walt is doing here.

    Literally all modern eMTBs are capable of far more than 250 watts because that rating means nothing. That this invokes outrage in some people says more about their narrative than the technology itself.

    A motor requires twice the power to spin 100 rpm as it does to spin 50 at equal torque. To provide power over the full range of human cadence requires some headroom and this leads both to extra "peak" power and extra speed beyond intended limits. It's just how the electrical details work out and it's why "nominal power" ratings are worthless.

  11. #111
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    A motor requires twice the power to spin 100 rpm as it does to spin 50 at equal torque. To provide power over the full range of human cadence requires some headroom and this leads both to extra "peak" power and extra speed beyond intended limits. It's just how the electrical details work out and it's why "nominal power" ratings are worthless.
    Exactly...

    -W

  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hikerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    If it means my kids and grandkids can ride trails someday in the far future, call me Mr. FUD!

    The Levo produces what, a continuous 660W or so in Turbo? It doesn't fry and you can get quite a decent length ride at that power, too. The Factory stuff isn't even vaguely limited to 250W and it's NOT (I've ridden a Levo and also own a 750W Class 2) like riding a normal bike at *all*.

    I don't think the throttle restriction is 1) enforceable, or 2) relevant. The DIY monsterbikes we saw here didn't have throttles AFAIK, they were being "pedaled"... at very high rates of speed.

    -Walt
    The next big thing coming is the Haibike Flyon with the TQ 120s motor, which is produced in a Euro-legal 250 watt variant, but this is really a 1000 watt motor - the Euro regulation is toothless. The manufacturer power race is on. If weíve decided that regulation of the bike is unworkable and examination of a bike to see if it has a throttle doesnít accomplish anything, whatís left is regulation of the rider, not the bike.

    Like a fishing or hunting license, only for trails. Exceed a reasonable speed or get clocked going to fast and goodbye permit. Get caught doing so without the permit and goodbye bike; the percentage of problematic riders will quickly drop even without inconsistent enforcement; most people wonít take even a miniscule risk of losing privilege or property.
    "Thank you, God, for letting me have another day"
    The Milagro Beanfield War

  13. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Exactly...

    -W
    Exactly what?

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by KenPsz View Post
    I have to disagree on the DIY since places like Luna are doing their best to create 1000w+ systems that are small and do cause a problem. When you see that owner and some people he talks to say they are "downhilling the uphills" that is a problem.
    I will not defend Luna, there is a lot to dislike there. There is also plenty that is just fine. Luna is not an advocate for what cyclists want.

    I don't agree that "downhilling the uphills" is a problem for a number of reasons. First, the owner of Luna is a stooge and a fraud so who cares what he says. Second, it's just an exaggeration. Third, if that's what people want to do, they have as much right to enjoy public lands as you and me. MTB is recreation, one form is not better than another. If people want to ride uphill on eMTBs great, just make sure there is safety.

    Anyone who rides trails on an e-bike knows that controlling power is key. Fixed power PAS systems, like Bafang, don't work well on the trail at low speeds even though they are fine on the road. Mixing PAS and throttle also doesn't work well. You are either throttling or bicycling, you are either an e-bike or a motorcycle, and there isn't a good way to straddle that fence in my experience.

    I have a DIY eMTB with proportional PAS and a throttle override and I cannot use the throttle on the trail at all (unless it is throttle only). These problems that Walt feels will lead to the end of the world simply don't exist IMO. Also, riding my bike at trails speeds means I cannot use more than 150% assist as it ends up too much. That means it's no different than any commercial "250 watt" eMTB regardless of what it can theoretically do. The reason for this is that I operate my bike as a bicycle, not as a motorcycle. That's why throttle restriction is so fundamentally worthwhile (back to the original topic).

    Whatever happened to personal responsibility and acting like an adult? I'm trusted to operate my car safely but we need Walt's rules for me to operate a bicycle safely? Seriously, this forum needs an enema.

  15. #115
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Man, for being someone who thinks e-bikes are theoretically a good idea, you guys sure do a good job talking me out of it. Sheesh.

    -W

  16. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Man, for being someone who thinks e-bikes are theoretically a good idea, you guys sure do a good job talking me out of it. Sheesh.

    -W
    I'm curious based on what?

    Electrical motors work in a very well defined know way, you can only bend electrical properties so far.

    Now I do disagree with some of what craigsj is saying that all lands should be open. I do no want someone tearing through my local trails with the equivalent to a 125cc or over 2 stroke.

    There is common ground here but no one wants it since they want more or less and they only want what they want.

  17. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,676
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    [Public property is for the enjoyment of all.

    All except for those who want to use slightly higher powered machines?
    I brake for stinkbugs

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    All except for those who want to use slightly higher powered machines?
    Many of those motors people want to use are far from "slightly higher powered". I did some research on converting a old 125cc to electric and 3kW is a pretty even match.

    Given that research I am more and more against DIY solutions for a e-mtb

  19. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,676
    Quote Originally Posted by KenPsz View Post
    Many of those motors people want to use are far from "slightly higher powered". I did some research on converting a old 125cc to electric and 3kW is a pretty even match.

    Given that research I am more and more against DIY solutions for a e-mtb


    I meant slightly higher powered and up. Also slightly higher powered than a bicycle.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    I meant slightly higher powered and up. Also slightly higher powered than a bicycle.
    How do you define power in a bicycle? Can I use Lance Armstrong as the baseline?

    I know you are not a fan of e-bikes, were many are. Like I said there is common ground where everyone could be if not happy at least content. But frankly given how people are today I am not sure that is real possible.

  21. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,676
    Quote Originally Posted by KenPsz View Post
    How do you define power in a bicycle? Can I use Lance Armstrong as the baseline?

    Sure, why not?

    Electric bikes are fine, I've said that 100 times. It's ebike policy that I disagree with. Everyone wants to be the last one in, then it's full up.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Sure, why not?

    Electric bikes are fine, I've said that 100 times. It's ebike policy that I disagree with. Everyone wants to be the last one in, then it's full up.
    Given some of the DIY setups I am staring to come over more towards your side of the fence on e-mtb.

    I am all for factory bikes but DIY and the watt numbers those are creating not so much.
    Last edited by KenPsz; 3 Weeks Ago at 10:10 AM.

  23. #123
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,533
    Quote Originally Posted by hikerdave View Post
    The next big thing coming is the Haibike Flyon with the TQ 120s motor, which is produced in a Euro-legal 250 watt variant, but this is really a 1000 watt motor - the Euro regulation is toothless. The manufacturer power race is on. If weíve decided that regulation of the bike is unworkable and examination of a bike to see if it has a throttle doesnít accomplish anything, whatís left is regulation of the rider, not the bike.

    Like a fishing or hunting license, only for trails. Exceed a reasonable speed or get clocked going to fast and goodbye permit. Get caught doing so without the permit and goodbye bike; the percentage of problematic riders will quickly drop even without inconsistent enforcement; most people wonít take even a miniscule risk of losing privilege or property.
    If you're going to give up on policing equipment and manage behavior by using a speed limit, then e-motos are good to go!

    Not to mention bringing on the torches and pitchforks among mtb riders who don't want anyone taking their bikes for riding too fast.


    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    You can't "over volt" commercial e-bikes, at least none I've heard of.
    I saw a single thread somewhere where someone did that to a 250w EU spec emtb, but he basically replaced all of the electronics to do so. Agreed, for those bikes, it's not going to happen. They aren't the only game in town though.


    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Also, Bafang drives are not eMTBs.
    They aren't? I bet you'll start seeing more of Bafang on this side of the Atlantic. They're upping their game to compete.

    https://www.bafang-e.com/en/applications/emtb/

    There isn't much point in debating access in the US around 250w emtbs, since our laws allow for 750w, so that's what we'll see eventually. At least a claimed 750w. The big bike companies are not the big ebike companies in the US, 2/3 of ebikes are sold by ebike only companies.

    https://www.bicycleretailer.com/opin...e#.XL87MjBKhaT

    https://www.bicycleretailer.com/opin...d#.XL88-jBKhaR

    https://www.bicycleretailer.com/opin...s#.XL89FTBKhaR

    At some point, those guys are going to drop a semi decent, open mold "750w" emtb with reasonable entry level specs and the power race will be on. It'll be
    someone like Pedego, or Stromer, not the small fry, Luna-tics or Hi Power Cycles. They won't be bought by bike snobs like us, but they will be bought and ridden on singletrack.

    I'm also curious to see if Haibike brings the Flyon to the US at 750w, since they could, and it'd give them a way to set themselves apart from everyone else.

    The industry never thought this whole thing through, they should have defined ebikes by a low allowable peak power or peak torque, throttles or PAS and left it at that. Currently, the door is completely open for as much power as the emtb rider wants if they're willing to deal with the weight.

  24. #124
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Craig, are you saying that you think there should/can be no power limits at all, as long as the rider is pedaling? Because that's not going to fly with any LMs, trust me.

    I would love to get behind the "everyone do whatever you want on public lands" thing, but I've seen what happens and it ends up being fun for basically nobody. Tragedy of the commons is a bitch.

    -Walt

  25. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    12,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    In the event that power limits can't be determined/enforced and illegal/overpowered bikes start showing up...yeah, I'm down for banning them all.

    -Walt
    I can't think of a practical way to determine/enforce e-bike power. Your not going to have a specially trained corps of e-bike savvy LEOs patrolling trails. Some mods would not be obviously to the naked eye and you can simply Class 1 certification decals if you want.

    It's reasonable [for now] to identify if someone has a motorized vehicle or not since they do look sufficiently different to mountain bikes. Once you allow motors anything that looks vaguely like a authorized machine is going to be undetectable in a practical sense.

    I can't think of one motrorsport where hacking and modding for more power wasn't a thing. It's just the nature of humans and motors.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  26. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    I can't think of a practical way to determine/enforce e-bike power. Your not going to have a specially trained corps of e-bike savvy LEOs patrolling trails. Some mods would not be obviously to the naked eye and you can simply Class 1 certification decals if you want.

    It's reasonable [for now] to identify if someone has a motorized vehicle or not since they do look sufficiently different to mountain bikes. Once you allow motors anything that looks vaguely like a authorized machine is going to be undetectable in a practical sense.

    I can't think of one motrorsport where hacking and modding for more power wasn't a thing. It's just the nature of humans and motors.
    Many of the factory e-bikes you would not know are e-bikes if they rode past you.
    Let people try to hack a factory bike to their hearts content, as mentioned earlier that is self regulating since the ESC, motors and batteries can only take some many amps before they fry.

    Now with that said DIY setups are a serious problem and those are easy to identify and should be kept off trails.

  27. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hikerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,109
    Quote Originally Posted by KenPsz View Post
    Given some of the DIY setups I am staring to come over more towards your side of the fence on e-mtb.

    I am all for factory bikes but DIY and the watt numbers those are creating not so much.
    Unfortunately for us eMtbrs, even the class I factory bikes are starting to push the 750 watt limit, if we interpret that limit as peak output but we donít know whether that 750 watt limit is rated continuous, peak input, or peak output, because the legislators who voted for the various state laws didnít know. Haibike stickered my bike with 500 watts, which is the true peak output of the Yamaha PW-SE motor when paired with its factory controller. A Euro-legal Flyon is probably going to measure over 900 watts peak.

    I guess Iíll have to get my trail riding in while I still can; the bike manufacturers donít have the foresight to preserve the eMTB market.
    "Thank you, God, for letting me have another day"
    The Milagro Beanfield War

  28. #128
    Bipolar roller
    Reputation: singletrackmack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,039
    Quote Originally Posted by KenPsz View Post
    Now with that said DIY setups are a serious problem and those are easy to identify and should be kept off trails.
    Problems there is that you limiting embt access to the elite. Basically, limiting ebikes access to those whom have the income to afford a factory ebike and basically making it so only those with high incomes can enjoy the benifits of using a motor on non motorized trails. I can not afford a 5k embt, but can afford to get a DIY kit and use it on my current mtb.

    Maybe it is just me, but I donít think limiting off-road ebike access to only the elite and well off is going to be positive force for those interested in getting ebikes more mainstream.
    Get out of the gutter and onto the mountain top.

  29. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by singletrackmack View Post
    Problems there is that you limiting embt access to the elite. Basically, limiting ebikes access to those whom have the income to afford a factory ebike and basically making it so only those with high incomes can enjoy the benifits of using a motor on non motorized trails. I can not afford a 5k embt, but can afford to get a DIY kit and use it on my current mtb.

    Maybe it is just me, but I donít think limiting off-road ebike access to only the elite and well off is going to be positive force for those wanting to try ebikes out.
    I don't disagree with you, hell I have a DIY on my commuter bike.

    Problem is that DIY setups are all over the place and only getting more powerful that makes this discussion even more difficult for trail access. That tool at Luna keeps pushing more and more videos with more and more outrageous systems.

  30. #130
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    As long as eMTBs are operated as MTBs, in the same ways for the same purposes, then they are MTBs from an access standpoint. .
    Multiple federal, state and local government agencies that regulate access in the United States disagree with you.

  31. #131
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,533
    Quote Originally Posted by KenPsz View Post
    Let people try to hack a factory bike to their hearts content, as mentioned earlier that is self regulating since the ESC, motors and batteries can only take some many amps before they fry.
    It being a "factory bike" isn't a guarantee of anything in the US.

    https://www.electricbike.com/bafang-ultra-max/

    https://electrek.co/2019/01/17/bafan...RI9PLW7ZSI4pEk

  32. #132
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Quote Originally Posted by hikerdave View Post
    I guess Iíll have to get my trail riding in while I still can; the bike manufacturers donít have the foresight to preserve the eMTB market.
    +1

    They screwed up hugely already by not following the EU standard which is very reasonable. Nobody needs 750 extra watts to go for a mountain bike ride. They really don't appear to have anticipated at all that people would hack the systems, either.

    I personally give it a few more years before we start seeing places that currently allow e-bikes banning them. Which is a shame.

    -Walt

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    +1

    They screwed up hugely already by not following the EU standard which is very reasonable. Nobody needs 750 extra watts to go for a mountain bike ride. They really don't appear to have anticipated at all that people would hack the systems, either.

    I personally give it a few more years before we start seeing places that currently allow e-bikes banning them. Which is a shame.

    -Walt
    Banning eBikes is a good move, hopefully they ban regular bikes too as they look the same. Can you imagine how awesome places like PC would be without all those pesky cyclists on the trail?

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post


    there's really no enforcement anyway, so have at it.

    -Walt
    truth, but don't tell everyone that.

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    30
    My MINIMALIST DIY experience...

    I've been riding bicycles in dirt since the 1960's, and I'm not planning to quit. Last year my knee got worse and needs more surgery, which is not an option.

    I needed a bit of assist just for climbing. I added a motor which is very happy up to 250 watts, and will do 350 watts if pressed. My battery is less than 100 watt hours. Cost me $400, added 5.5 Lb to the bike, and provides all the assist I need for Northern California hills.

    I never use the motor on flats or downhills, as I don't want or need it then. I climb at the same speed I always did, (~2.5 to 5 MPH, 80-160 watts assist) but just take some load off my knee. The motor provides about 1/3 of the energy for the climbs. I get to enjoy longer rides with my riding partner who is younger and fitter than me, and he usually requests that I bring the E-bike.

    Point is that I think that a minimalist E-Mountain Bike has a lot of advantages. 350 watts with a small battery gives a very pleasant assist. It pedals fine on flats and slight uphills without any assist. Also the light weight is really nice...

    I do use a throttle for several reasons. We just had a very interesting discussion on the benefits of Throttle vs Torque Sensing vs PAS for mountain bikes at the end of my build thread on Endless Sphere. https://endless-sphere.com/forums/vi...p?f=28&t=96769 Lots of varied views, many in favor of Torque Sensing/PAS

    Funny story - Yesterday as we began our ride, (hadn't made it out of the parking lot...) my assist failed. My buddy peer pressured me into doing the ride without assist. The bike pedaled same as before the conversion, and I didn't notice the weight of the motor. I did need to bail at the 2/3 point due to my knee, but still a fun ride. Don't think I would have done that on a 55 Lb Levo without assist...

  36. #136
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Quote Originally Posted by figofspee View Post
    Banning eBikes is a good move, hopefully they ban regular bikes too as they look the same. Can you imagine how awesome places like PC would be without all those pesky cyclists on the trail?
    If they get indistinguishable enough, I imagine that will indeed happen in some places. PC is getting crowded enough these days that we are starting to experience some trail conflicts (mostly involving dogs AFAIK) and a couple of trails got closed to downhill traffic recently. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

    -W

  37. #137
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Quote Originally Posted by FZBob View Post
    Point is that I think that a minimalist E-Mountain Bike has a lot of advantages. 350 watts with a small battery gives a very pleasant assist. It pedals fine on flats and slight uphills without any assist. Also the light weight is really nice...
    .
    This, x1000. Unfortunately it seems the industry is headed mostly in the other direction.

    -Walt

  38. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,700
    Quote Originally Posted by figofspee View Post
    Banning eBikes is a good move, hopefully they ban regular bikes too as they look the same.
    Hmmm...funny, but that's precisely the concern that a lot of people have voiced in the past. Usually e-bike proponents try to dismiss out of hand. Looks like you've accepted that it's actually an issue.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  39. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Man, for being someone who thinks e-bikes are theoretically a good idea, you guys sure do a good job talking me out of it. Sheesh.

    -W
    Stop pretending to be open minded Walt. No one is talking you out of anything.

  40. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    They aren't? I bet you'll start seeing more of Bafang on this side of the Atlantic. They're upping their game to compete.
    Saying Bafang is an eMTB is the same as saying Bosch or Shimano are eMTB. They are all manufacturers of parts, and an electric motor isn't a bicycle.
    That distinction is important when you say that eMTBs are easily modified or hacked or whatever else. DIY and hacking commercial products are not the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    There isn't much point in debating access in the US around 250w emtbs, since our laws allow for 750w, so that's what we'll see eventually. At least a claimed 750w. The big bike companies are not the big ebike companies in the US, 2/3 of ebikes are sold by ebike only companies.
    There are no US laws governing what an eMTB is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    I'm also curious to see if Haibike brings the Flyon to the US at 750w, since they could, and it'd give them a way to set themselves apart from everyone else.
    The Flyon uses a 3rd generation QT motor. The 2nd generation QT was canceled because no one would adopt it. Why? Because it was too powerful. The current QT motor is less powerful because no one wanted the bigger one. Kind of works against the power narrative, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    The industry never thought this whole thing through, they should have defined ebikes by a low allowable peak power or peak torque, throttles or PAS and left it at that. Currently, the door is completely open for as much power as the emtb rider wants if they're willing to deal with the weight.
    In what industry has that ever worked though? Don't disagree, but free markets and developing technologies don't really work that way.

  41. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Craig, are you saying that you think there should/can be no power limits at all, as long as the rider is pedaling? Because that's not going to fly with any LMs, trust me.
    I'm saying that if it acts like a bike and is used like a bike then it is a bike. If a bike is operated at typical bike speeds and has typical bike mass then it will have typical bike safety issues. In this case, worrying about power ratings is nothing more than an emotional response. I can support reasonable restrictions aimed at ensuring that e-bikes are operated like bikes and am just as in favor of excluding motorcycles from bike trails as any of you are.

    Walt, you want to argue about power limits one moment and then argue that nothing is enforceable the next. How is that productive?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    I would love to get behind the "everyone do whatever you want on public lands" thing, but I've seen what happens and it ends up being fun for basically nobody. Tragedy of the commons is a bitch.
    So your solution is to reserve the commons for your personal interest. Stop pretending that you are arguing for a fair solution to the problem, or even that there is a problem that requires your solution. MTB riders are no more entitled to public lands than eMTB riders are, that's the thing that you refuse to accept.

  42. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    I can't think of one motrorsport where hacking and modding for more power wasn't a thing. It's just the nature of humans and motors.
    This is case of the less you know, the easier it is to believe this. It's another emotional response.

    Here's a motorsport where modding for more power isn't a thing: commercial eMTBs. Why? Because measures are actively taken to prevent it, because the stock parts are not amenable to such mods, and the efforts required are far less than simply doing a DIY project instead.

    In other words, this isn't an argument.

  43. #143
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,267
    Geeze dude, Walt is trying to have a civilized discussion, you're the one trying to have an argument. I agree that it's people like you that swing my needle towards the "no ebikes" end of the spectrum.
    By continuing to browse my posts, you agree to send me cookies.

  44. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    Multiple federal, state and local government agencies that regulate access in the United States disagree with you.
    That's not really true, but to the extent it is, it's because they are ignorant and have listened to people like you. That will change though.

    Fact is, e-bikes as a technology faced many regulatory problems because of laws written before they were a thing. Efforts were made a couple decades ago to fix those issues but what we see to day are some vestigial remains of that problem. It isn't government agencies disagree, its that they haven't yet been brought up to date.

    But sure, keep on believing that the world righteously opposes e-bikes.

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,676
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    MTB riders are no more entitled to public lands than eMTB riders are, that's the thing that you refuse to accept.

    Are class1 mountain bikes more entitled to public lands than class 3 mountain bikes?
    I brake for stinkbugs

  46. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    This, x1000. Unfortunately it seems the industry is headed mostly in the other direction.

    -Walt
    There is utterly no evidence of this. Sorry, Walt, but this is a troll.

  47. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Geeze dude, Walt is trying to have a civilized discussion, you're the one trying to have an argument. I agree that it's people like you that swing my needle towards the "no ebikes" end of the spectrum.
    No he's not, he's openly advocating for banning eMTBs by restating the same mistruths that he has been offering forever. Also, your needle isn't swinging; if it were you'd be interested in an objective argument.

    The problem here is that no one will call out the persistent lies and misrepresentations that occur here all the time. Walt has no understanding of how electric motors work; if he were interested in a productive discussion he would be open to learning what he doesn't understand. There is literally no evidence of that.

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Are class1 mountain bikes more entitled to public lands than class 3 mountain bikes?
    No one is more entitled to public lands than anyone else and nothing I have said suggests otherwise. But of course you know that, this is a troll.

    Are there any actual examples of class 3 mountain bikes? AFAIK, that's a vestige of applying road e-bike terminology to mountain bikes. The classification system for e-bikes doesn't actually exist outside a few areas anyway.

    I personally see no value in separate class 1 and class 3 eMTB designations. I see value in having one since it eliminates throttles which I strongly support.

  49. #149
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,267
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    No one is more entitled to public lands than anyone else and nothing I have said suggests otherwise. But of course you know that, this is a troll.

    Are there any actual examples of class 3 mountain bikes? AFAIK, that's a vestige of applying road e-bike terminology to mountain bikes. The classification system for e-bikes doesn't actually exist outside a few areas anyway.

    I personally see no value in separate class 1 and class 3 eMTB designations. I see value in having one since it eliminates throttles which I strongly support.
    So why don't ebikes with throttles have a right to those public lands?

    Almost all the mountain bike trails around me were made by mountain bikers on county land. Hikers are allowed but mountain bikers have the right of way, and some trails are marker "no hiking" for safety reasons. If ebikes truly were "just another bike" on the trails, pretty much like Walt has said, I'd be less concerned about them on the trails around me. But they are faster, which means more passing which means the trails get blown out. These are mostly narrow, twisty singletrack where passing isn't always easy without going off trail. Despite what you want to think, ebikes are not bicycles.
    By continuing to browse my posts, you agree to send me cookies.

  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,676
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    No one is more entitled to public lands than anyone else and nothing I have said suggests otherwise. But of course you know that, this is a troll.

    Are there any actual examples of class 3 mountain bikes? AFAIK, that's a vestige of applying road e-bike terminology to mountain bikes. The classification system for e-bikes doesn't actually exist outside a few areas anyway.

    I personally see no value in separate class 1 and class 3 eMTB designations. I see value in having one since it eliminates throttles which I strongly support.


    So motorcycles are equally entitled to public lands as long as they're equipped with pas?
    I brake for stinkbugs

  51. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    12,805
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    So motorcycles are equally entitled to public lands as long as they're equipped with pas?


    Sweet. I'm sure we can attach some pedals to this ^^^. This was being displayed at Sea Otter. You can bet the moto industry is excited about getting a foot in the door on mountain bike/hiking trails with some form of motorized recreation so they can start selling all manner of motos to folks who currently have non-motorized trails close by, but have a trek to get to an authorized OHV area.

    If an e-bike is actually a non-motorized mountain bike equivalent than this is just an e-bike equivalent. Don't worry it only works with a thumb assist [TAS]. If a person isn't moving their thumb the bike won't move so they are still getting exercise. The harder you use your thumb the faster it goes. It also has a power restriction so it only does 20mph. No way to hack that. Impossible. Never gonna happen....probably. I mean just look at it. It's basically a mountain bike right?

    Don't be one of those NIMBY human powered mountain bike purists whose egos are so fragile they can't handle being passed on a steep climb at 40mph.....errr...no I meant 20mph.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  52. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    So why don't ebikes with throttles have a right to those public lands?
    Try to keep up. I've already answered this.
    I oppose throttles because requiring pedaling assures that bikes are used as bikes. The argument against e-bikes is that they are not bicycles, yet people oppose restrictions directly targeting that very issue. It's not the bike, it's the rider.

    A longer answer is that electric motors have relatively flat torque curves whereas humans do not when combined with gearing. Requiring pedaling and proportional assist makes it far more difficult for a rider to ride at speeds that are "abusive" to MTB trails, and the throttle is exactly the thing used to overcome this. Eliminating the throttle makes a "potential motorcycle" much more like a bicycle because it both alters rider behavior AND alters the torque available to the rider at higher speeds. I understand that most won't get this, but it's true nonetheless.
    I could explain further but my posts are already too long.

    The biggest difference between an e-bike and a motorcycle is the throttle, not the motor. Without the throttle, it is hard to use a bigger motor. If you don't believe me, spend some time over at endless sphere where everyone wants an unregulated motorcycle and distain for PAS is universal. Can't go fast with PAS, that's the "problem" according to ES but it's the solution from my perspective.

    Make no mistake, if a trail is intended solely for bicycle use, I oppose motorcycle access to that trail. I also oppose a categorical definition of e-bikes as motorcycles and I promote regulations that help maintain a proper distinction. That why I oppose throttles and promote weight limits. I would also support requiring proportional assist, though enforcement is hard there.

    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Almost all the mountain bike trails around me were made by mountain bikers on county land.
    And the public thanks the charitable donations of those trail builders, but the trails are the property of the public, not the builders. You state this because you feel this grants you an entitlement. It does not.

    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    But they are faster, which means more passing which means the trails get blown out.
    Where is the evidence of this? You take this for granted, doesn't mean it is so.

    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    These are mostly narrow, twisty singletrack where passing isn't always easy without going off trail. Despite what you want to think, ebikes are not bicycles.
    So racers should be banned as well? They are faster than you and will want to pass you. Are you a strong rider? If so, you should be banned as well. That appears to be your argument. How dare others be faster than you.

    Frankly, this is really at the core of every anti-ebike argument. Riders are resentful that others aren't working as hard as they are for what they get on the trail.

  53. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Don't be one of those NIMBY human powered mountain bike purists whose egos are so fragile they can't handle being passed on a steep climb at 40mph.....errr...no I meant 20mph.
    Nice straw man, Vik. Don't worry, maybe you'll be able to work some advertising revenue off of e-bikes one day. How's your recumbent business going?

  54. #154
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Look, I own a 750w Class 2. I've ridden a LEVO (not derestricted) a few times. They do NOT behave like normal bikes, at all. You can go much, much faster on anything that requires pedaling (ie, pedaly DH, flat, up). This is why I've *consistently* said (for several years now) that the limit should have been the EU limit of 250/15. Those numbers put you (unless you're a motivated pro) right in the normal mountain bike speed/behavior range, in general. 750w (or a LEVO that actually puts out a continuous 660) does not.

    To be clear: I could care less if e-bikes are on the trails, so long as they behave like normal bikes and don't cause me any access problems going forward. I've already seen evidence otherwise (in fact, last weekend in St. George a dude in a fullface and armor came screaming by my kids on a climb on his e-bike. On BLM land. Awesome.)

    You can argue with me until you're blue in the face but the onus is on the folks who want to ride their e-bikes on the trails to regulate/restrict/behave such that it works.

    -Walt

  55. #155
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    That's not really true, but to the extent it is, it's because they are ignorant and have listened to people like you.
    No, it is really true. Your claim that as long as eMTBs are operated as MTBs, in the same ways for the same purposes, then they are MTBs from an access standpoint is explicitly contradicted by federal, state, and local laws. Shorter version: your claim is demonstrably false.

    The simple fact that eMTb access is restricted by law has nothing to do with law makers "listening to people like me."


    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    But sure, keep on believing that the world righteously opposes e-bikes.
    I never made such a claim, I don't believe that, and it's a straw man that you created.

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    So motorcycles are equally entitled to public lands as long as they're equipped with pas?
    It's funny how hard you try to put words in my mouth when I state clearly what I mean already. You're a weak troll.

    Motorcycles are not entitled to public lands because they are machines, not people. Utterly nothing I have said suggests anything like your weak straw man.

  57. #157
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    I don't know why you keep calling people trolls, Craig. Nobody here (IMO) is just being inflammatory for the sake of being inflammatory. I think the question of whether extra power or throttles is the bigger problem for e-bikes is a pretty interesting one and we've had some good points made for both ideas.

    -Walt

  58. #158
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    There are no US laws governing what an eMTB is.
    This is demonstrably false.

    Federal and state law govern what an electric bike is, as Harryman noted.

    Electric mountain bikes are covered by those statutes, as are electric road bikes, electric cruiser bikes, etc., etc.

  59. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt
    ...but the onus is on the folks who want to ride their e-bikes on the trails to regulate/restrict/behave such that it works.
    So far this has never been your argument, so don't assert now that anyone is arguing with you on this point. I am the one arguing personal responsibility, along with regulations targeted at just that. You're the one arguing regulations targeting the equipment, then arguing that the regulations cannot work, then arguing that when those regulations fail then there must be a ban. You're the one on the wrong side of this issue, Walt.

    If this is now your position, then good. You're part of the way to understanding why throttle bans are good.

  60. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,676
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Motorcycles are not entitled to public lands because they are machines, not people. Utterly nothing I have said suggests anything like your weak straw man.


    Bicycles and e-bikes are machines. They are not people.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  61. #161
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    MTB riders are no more entitled to public lands than eMTB riders are, that's the thing that you refuse to accept.
    You're entitled to your own opinion but you're not entitled to your own facts.

    The reality is that eMTB riders are indeed less entitled to public lands than MTB riders are.

    Just as in the current public land access framework MTB riders are less entitled to public lands than equestrians and equestrians are less entitled than people on foot.

  62. #162
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    The classification system for e-bikes doesn't actually exist outside a few areas anyway.
    All of the states that have codified the ebike classification system are merely "a few areas" to you? You're not making sense here.

  63. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    Your claim that as long as eMTBs are operated as MTBs, in the same ways for the same purposes, then they are MTBs from an access standpoint...
    You are interpreting that as a statement of fact where it was a statement of my personal position. I was not making a universal claim on legal rights, as no such statement could ever be made.

    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    The simple fact that eMTb access is restricted by law has nothing to do with law makers "listening to people like me."
    Funny how this ignores that I explained how it is not and prefaced that with "but to the extent it is". Do you think this BS works on anybody?

  64. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dragracer88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    305
    I personally think that Any bike limited to 250w/15 mph is pathethic. Not to mention, all the e mtbs I have rode are between 500 and 750 watts. Throttle e MTBs and high powered e MTBs certainly have their place. Such as super steep climbs like 20 percent grades. A turbo Levo just doesn't have the power for super steep climbs. I'm a very capable and skilled rider, but throttling dies have its place.

  65. #165
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Hey, you got dragracer88 on your side, Craig! Things are looking up...

    -W

  66. #166
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,409
    Quote Originally Posted by dragracer88 View Post
    I personally think that Any bike limited to 250w/15 mph is pathethic. Not to mention, all the e mtbs I have rode are between 500 and 750 watts. Throttle e MTBs and high powered e MTBs certainly have their place. Such as super steep climbs like 20 percent grades. A turbo Levo just doesn't have the power for super steep climbs. I'm a very capable and skilled rider, but throttling dies have its place.
    Quoted for posterity.

    -W

  67. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    I don't know why you keep calling people trolls, Craig. Nobody here (IMO) is just being inflammatory for the sake of being inflammatory.
    I don't agree, Walt, and further I believe you are being inflammatory. Furthermore, there is outright trolling going here, just as there always is.

    Look, Walt, I have great respect for your contributions on MTBR. I know who you are and value your posts, but I don't respect what you say in the e-bike forums because it is frequently wrong regarding the underlying technology. I personally believe that you and I would like to see exactly the same things happen and exactly the same kinds of progress on the issue be made, but the way you demonize e-bikes is not helpful and your opinion carries a lot of weight, far more than mine does.

    I believe a more productive discussion could be had if we talk about what constitutes acceptable behavior and usage of bicycles on trails, then try to map what they means to e-bikes so that they can be viewed as bicycles by the widest audience. That's how I like to look at the issue, that's why I don't get wrapped up in "watt" arguments, and it's why promote the kinds of restrictions that I do. It seems to me frequently that I'm the only one looking at the issue this way.

  68. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Bicycles and e-bikes are machines. They are not people.
    Picking an argument with yourself on that one, troll.

  69. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    The reality is that eMTB riders are indeed less entitled to public lands than MTB riders are.
    I recommend you look up the definition of "entitled" and stop embarrassing yourself.

  70. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    All of the states that have codified the ebike classification system are merely "a few areas" to you? You're not making sense here.
    Yes, it's a big world and a big country. "All" of these states are still relatively few states.

    You are really desperate to find an argument you can win, aren't you?

  71. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Hey, you got dragracer88 on your side, Craig! Things are looking up...

    -W
    Indeed Walt. Not trying to be inflammatory at all! Oh, and "quoted for posterity".

    When two sides are emotional and unreasonable, an objective viewpoint can easily be supported and flamed by people on both sides. This kind reaction doesn't surprise me at all, nor does your reaction to it. I'm not remotely tribal on this issue or any other, it's sad to see that you are.

  72. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,676
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Picking an argument with yourself on that one, troll.


    Just pointing out your error. Why all the name calling? Is that all you got?
    I brake for stinkbugs

  73. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Just pointing out your error. Why all the name calling? Is that all you got?
    Not my error, I've never said otherwise.

  74. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,676
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Not my error, I've never said otherwise.


    You are being ridiculous.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  75. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082

    Walt abusing moderation system

    Just received this gem from Walt via private message:

    Dear craigsj,

    You have received an infraction at Forums - Mtbr.com.

    Reason: Insulted Other Member(s)
    -------
    Seriously, rule 1 is stop digging.

    -Walt
    -------

    Hard to respect you now, Walt.

  76. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    446
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    Hey, you got dragracer88 on your side, Craig! Things are looking up...

    -W
    Not true Walt, there are many people behind what Craig is stating. For the most part this thread stayed on base, but there are definitely trolls. Anyone that keeps referring to a class 1 or 2 ebike as a motorcycle are clearly ignorant.

    You go into these other Ebike forums with DIY bikes, most are clearly not being used as a durable mountain bikes. Trying to compare a DIY bike to a Levo, Intense, the YT Decoy, etc is not a fair comparison. The original post is about class 1 & 2 bikes. You cannot increase power of these, you maybe able to change the speed limiter, but that's it.
    I've been on my class 1 ebike for about 3 weeks now and I still have no climbing KOMs to show for it, heck I can't even break into the top 10! I have no clue why people keep saying they are going to be doing 20mph uphill, when this is not true, unless it's a fairly flat climb. Downhills I'm about the same speed or slightly slower than my normal mtb.

  77. #177
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    You are being ridiculous.
    I am not. The first time you trolled me with this I overlooked your error; the second time I did not. This is your mistake, not mine, go back and look it up.

    My position is that all of the public is equally "entitled" to the benefit of public lands. That does not mean that every piece of land must be allowed access to every activity.

  78. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post
    I have no clue why people keep saying they are going to be doing 20mph uphill, when this is not true, unless it's a fairly flat climb.
    Yeah, it's completely untrue if not ridiculous, and I'd say they make it up to further their personal agendas. I'd also point out that Walt has said this himself, complaining about being nearly run over by e-bikers climbing uphill at unreasonable rates of speed. Sure

  79. #179
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    You are interpreting that as a statement of fact where it was a statement of my personal position.
    You are having trouble differentiating between truths/facts and your opinion then. This seems to be an issue of yours that weaves its way throughout your posts - you make blanket factual claims which are unsupportable.

    "That's not really true" is a statement regarding a fact.

  80. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,676
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post

    My position is that all of the public is equally "entitled" to the benefit of public lands. That does not mean that every piece of land must be allowed access to every activity.


    That's pretty much exactly what I've been saying, we just disagree on the details.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  81. #181
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Yes, it's a big world and a big country. "All" of these states are still relatively few states.

    You are really desperate to find an argument you can win, aren't you?
    The argument is won from the start when folks like you make ridiculous claims that are at odds with the facts.

    You: "The classification system for e-bikes doesn't actually exist outside a few areas anyway."

    Reality: The classification system for e-bikes exists in many areas, like in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington.

  82. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    You are having trouble differentiating between truths/facts and your opinion then. This seems to be an issue of yours that weaves its way throughout your posts - you make blanket factual claims which are unsupportable.

    "That's not really true" is a statement regarding a fact.
    Here is the post in question in its entirety (emphasis added):

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj
    That's not really true, but to the extent it is, it's because they are ignorant and have listened to people like you. That will change though.

    Fact is, e-bikes as a technology faced many regulatory problems because of laws written before they were a thing. Efforts were made a couple decades ago to fix those issues but what we see to day are some vestigial remains of that problem. It isn't government agencies disagree, its that they haven't yet been brought up to date.

    But sure, keep on believing that the world righteously opposes e-bikes.
    Your claim is totally without merit. There is no question that my statement is qualified and immediately recognizes that in some cases it is true. I then discuss why many cases where e-bikes are adversely regulated are merely carry-overs of rules that pre-date e-bikes. This is actually true of the Forestry Service, perhaps the highest profile of the anti-e-bike rules, where they are interpreting existing rules and deciding that they prohibit e-bikes.

    Again, you are desperately looking for an argument to win and are resorting to deliberate deletions of context in order to make childish pedantic arguments. Give it a rest.

  83. #183
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    Reality: The classification system for e-bikes exists in many areas, like in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington.
    oh, here you are with another pedantic argument. Are you winning yet?

    Is the debate now an argument over the interpretation of "few" and "many"? Is 10 states "many" states? Do those 10 states constitute more than a "few areas" of the world? Is this somehow helpful to anything other than your injured pride?

  84. #184
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    oh, here you are with another pedantic argument. Are you winning yet?

    Is the debate now an argument over the interpretation of "few" and "many"? Is 10 states "many" states? Do those 10 states constitute more than a "few areas" of the world? Is this somehow helpful to anything other than your injured pride?
    Odd. My pride is neither injured nor a part of the discussion. Another straw man.

    I'm sticking to facts here, despite your repeated attempts at obfuscation.

    If Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington constitute only "a few areas" in your mind that explains why your post was so bizarre. That's assuming that you were familiar with the facts, which is still questionable.

  85. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    446
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    Odd. My pride is neither injured nor a part of the discussion. Another straw man.

    I'm sticking to facts here, despite your repeated attempts at obfuscation.

    If Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington constitute only "a few areas" in your mind that explains why your post was so bizarre. That's assuming that you were familiar with the facts, which is still questionable.
    Hey newbie, seem suspicious youíre stalking this forum. I wonder who you really are? Og is this you my friend?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  86. #186
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Here is the post in question in its entirety (emphasis added):


    Your claim is totally without merit. There is no question that my statement is qualified and immediately recognizes that in some cases it is true. I then discuss why many cases where e-bikes are adversely regulated are merely carry-overs of rules that pre-date e-bikes. This is actually true of the Forestry Service, perhaps the highest profile of the anti-e-bike rules, where they are interpreting existing rules and deciding that they prohibit e-bikes.

    Again, you are desperately looking for an argument to win and are resorting to deliberate deletions of context in order to make childish pedantic arguments. Give it a rest.
    Full context. You're mixing facts with your opinions once again.

    Why Class 1 and not Class 2?-csj1.jpg

  87. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    Odd. My pride is neither injured nor a part of the discussion. Another straw man.

    I'm sticking to facts here, despite your repeated attempts at obfuscation.

    If Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington constitute only "a few areas" in your mind that explains why your post was so bizarre. That's assuming that you were familiar with the facts, which is still questionable.
    Uh huh. No doubt you are totally dispassionate. Repeated attempts at obfuscation? Such as? What post was "so bizarre"? What "facts" are you "assuming" I'm "familiar with"?

    Lots of words here, rimtacos, signifying nothing. You think you'll get something to argue about from my reply? Do you have any actual contribution to make?

  88. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    Full context. You're mixing facts with your opinions once again.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	csj1.JPG 
Views:	8 
Size:	27.8 KB 
ID:	1248389
    LOL you claim full context then quote a post where you've already deleted the context, and you don't even quote the post but take a screenshot of it. Priceless!

    Agree with mtbbiker, clearly an account created for this purpose and looks just like og-mtb. Isn't this what moderation is for, or is that only for certain posters to get their way?

  89. #189
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    What post was "so bizarre"?
    This is the bizarre post that you are asking about:

    "The classification system for e-bikes doesn't actually exist outside a few areas anyway."

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    Do you have any actual contribution to make?
    My actual contributions are sharing the truth. It seems that you can't handle the truth.

  90. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,082
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    This is the bizarre post that you are asking about:

    "The classification system for e-bikes doesn't actually exist outside a few areas anyway."
    I can't make the point any better than you just made it. Add "bizarre" to the list of words you need to look up in a dictionary.

    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    My actual contributions are sharing the truth. It seems that you can't handle the truth.
    I don't know what this "truth" is that you are referring to, but hopefully it is the argument that you are so desperate to win.

  91. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,700
    Quote Originally Posted by rimtacos View Post
    Odd. My pride is neither injured nor a part of the discussion. Another straw man.

    I'm sticking to facts here, despite your repeated attempts at obfuscation.

    If Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington constitute only "a few areas" in your mind that explains why your post was so bizarre. That's assuming that you were familiar with the facts, which is still questionable.
    All of the New England states actually.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Beginner Class to Sport Class was easy... But....
    By RideMX104 in forum Enduro Racing
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-08-2014, 11:13 AM
  2. Mini Ex, 2,000 lb class or 4,000 lb class?
    By tjp in forum Trail Building and Advocacy
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 03-18-2014, 03:06 PM
  3. What race class should I enter on my single speed and why
    By RojoRacing53 in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-21-2014, 04:33 PM
  4. Difference between class 1 and class 2 racks?
    By usctom in forum Cars and Bike Racks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-29-2007, 10:30 PM
  5. Chrome for my frame and fork? Why or Why not?
    By pisgahproductions in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-17-2006, 06:45 PM

Members who have read this thread: 138

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.