Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

Discussion: E-Bikes a Plus or Minus for Greater Bike Access Overall?

2K views 17 replies 12 participants last post by  CycleKrieg 
#1 ·
I'm intrigued by the recent flap over e-bikes and allowing them access to trails previously open to "analog" bikes.

NOTE: This thread is not a troll—I'm NEUTRAL on this issue, mainly because after doing a lot of reading and listening, I've determined there are a lot of opinions out there on all sides unsupported by peer-reviewed, fact-based science and data (and driven primarily by emotion and preference). So I'm still in search of more fact-based science and data.

I feel pretty sure that a perception (or misperception?) that exists over e-bikes is that they are more like "electric motorcycles" than bikes—meaning they're much faster and will be ridden much farther (in any given area) than analog bikes.

So a big question I'm trying to get to the bottom of is...to what extent is this true? I've read in many places that this is BS...and that e-bikes are *barely* different from analog bikes.

Regarding speed, I keep hearing about the 750W limit. That's a hard number which makes sense...but where things get a lot slipperier is when it comes to top speed. I've heard some say e-MTB's would struggle to reach 20mph on trails. Is this supported by facts? At the same time, I keep reading about certain types of e-bikes (not specified whether street or MTBs) topping out at 28mph.

Either way, I'm certain of one thing: for the most part, e-bikes are perceived by the hiking community as "insanely fast, and too fast for trails." And without supporting science, it's perfectly logical for hikers to think "If I'm almost run off the trail by regular bikes, then electric bikes will be even worse." (And as an aside, I'd say that the e-MTB advocates would benefit from eliminating this perception that e-bikes are ridiculously fast. Something like a video, taken from a stationary position along a trail, with the camera being passed by an analog biker...then an e-biker, could really help!)

So that's one issue—speed and safety.

The other issue that has clearly risen to the top of debates over MTB access to trails is impact.

And when we talk about impact, it's REALLY important to focus not on "impact to the trail tread" (that's been beaten to death, and too many MTBers obsess over this red herring), but on the overall impact of human presence in natural environments (e.g. impact to wildlife, plant species, the wilderness experience, etc.).

It stands to reason that *if* everyone agrees one can go farther (in the same amount of time) on an e-bike than an analog bike, then trail use *could* increase in any given area ("use" defined as "the total number and frequency of users on a given trail in a given period of time").

I think many in the hiking community are actually not concerned about impacts to the trail tread (which is why I called this a red herring), but overall impacts on the wilderness experience (which doesn't include lots of people screaming around on bikes).

I should also add, importantly, that I'm not necessarily talking about Wilderness (with an uppercase W, as in "federally designated"), though there are certainly some MTBers advocating for allowing bikes in Wilderness. I'm mainly talking about wilderness with a lowercase w (as in any reasonably remote natural area away from civilization).

So generally speaking, could the argument to allow E-bikes on existing trails open to biking (as well as possible trails NOT currently open to biking) potentially lead to even stronger limits on bikes generally?

Scott
 
See less See more
#3 ·
I feel pretty sure that a perception (or misperception?) that exists over e-bikes is that they are more like "electric motorcycles" than bikes-meaning they're much faster and will be ridden much farther (in any given area) than analog bikes.

So a big question I'm trying to get to the bottom of is...to what extent is this true? I've read in many places that this is BS...and that e-bikes are *barely* different from analog bikes.

Regarding speed, I keep hearing about the 750W limit. That's a hard number which makes sense...but where things get a lot slipperier is when it comes to top speed. I've heard some say e-MTB's would struggle to reach 20mph on trails. Is this supported by facts? At the same time, I keep reading about certain types of e-bikes (not specified whether street or MTBs) topping out at 28mph.

Either way, I'm certain of one thing: for the most part, e-bikes are perceived by the hiking community as "insanely fast, and too fast for trails." And without supporting science, it's perfectly logical for hikers to think "If I'm almost run off the trail by regular bikes, then electric bikes will be even worse." (And as an aside, I'd say that the e-MTB advocates would benefit from eliminating this perception that e-bikes are ridiculously fast. Something like a video, taken from a stationary position along a trail, with the camera being passed by an analog biker...then an e-biker, could really help!)

So that's one issue-speed and safety.

Scott
I took it to a trail outside of SLC called bobsled and had been down and up three times by the time the non-ebike reached to the top.

https://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/used-ebike-over-weekend-my-opinion-1118397.html
 
#4 ·
I'm intrigued by the recent flap over e-bikes and allowing them access to trails previously open to "analog" bikes.

NOTE: This thread is not a troll-I'm NEUTRAL on this issue, mainly because after doing a lot of reading and listening, I've determined there are a lot of opinions out there on all sides unsupported by peer-reviewed, fact-based science and data (and driven primarily by emotion and preference). So I'm still in search of more fact-based science and data.

I feel pretty sure that a perception (or misperception?) that exists over e-bikes is that they are more like "electric motorcycles" than bikes-meaning they're much faster and will be ridden much farther (in any given area) than analog bikes.

So a big question I'm trying to get to the bottom of is...to what extent is this true? I've read in many places that this is BS...and that e-bikes are *barely* different from analog bikes.

Regarding speed, I keep hearing about the 750W limit. That's a hard number which makes sense...but where things get a lot slipperier is when it comes to top speed. I've heard some say e-MTB's would struggle to reach 20mph on trails. Is this supported by facts? At the same time, I keep reading about certain types of e-bikes (not specified whether street or MTBs) topping out at 28mph.

Either way, I'm certain of one thing: for the most part, e-bikes are perceived by the hiking community as "insanely fast, and too fast for trails." And without supporting science, it's perfectly logical for hikers to think "If I'm almost run off the trail by regular bikes, then electric bikes will be even worse." (And as an aside, I'd say that the e-MTB advocates would benefit from eliminating this perception that e-bikes are ridiculously fast. Something like a video, taken from a stationary position along a trail, with the camera being passed by an analog biker...then an e-biker, could really help!)

So that's one issue-speed and safety.

The other issue that has clearly risen to the top of debates over MTB access to trails is impact.

And when we talk about impact, it's REALLY important to focus not on "impact to the trail tread" (that's been beaten to death, and too many MTBers obsess over this red herring), but on the overall impact of human presence in natural environments (e.g. impact to wildlife, plant species, the wilderness experience, etc.).

It stands to reason that *if* everyone agrees one can go farther (in the same amount of time) on an e-bike than an analog bike, then trail use *could* increase in any given area ("use" defined as "the total number and frequency of users on a given trail in a given period of time").

I think many in the hiking community are actually not concerned about impacts to the trail tread (which is why I called this a red herring), but overall impacts on the wilderness experience (which doesn't include lots of people screaming around on bikes).

I should also add, importantly, that I'm not necessarily talking about Wilderness (with an uppercase W, as in "federally designated"), though there are certainly some MTBers advocating for allowing bikes in Wilderness. I'm mainly talking about wilderness with a lowercase w (as in any reasonably remote natural area away from civilization).

So generally speaking, could the argument to allow E-bikes on existing trails open to biking (as well as possible trails NOT currently open to biking) potentially lead to even stronger limits on bikes generally?

Scott
Well, the Bike Manufacturers are not doing any favors for the trail access side of things with promotional video like this:

- - brake stand burn out.... I am sure the Hiking groups would faint seeing that....

- - Flying up a crowded staircase.... now imagine that is a crowded trail.....

Yes, that is a pro level rider doing things the average rider probably cannot do on an eBike, but it is highly irresponsible of a bike manufacturer to make such a video.

Show that video at a land management meeting and you can create all sorts of Havoc.
 
#5 ·
I feel like those videos get picked on because they show e-bikes, but brake stand "burnouts" are entirely doable on a normal bike. When I was a kid me and my friends thought it was fun to do in loose dirt. Meanwhile there are plenty of ridiculously irresponsible promotional videos featuring normal bikes and no-one is clutching their pearls over them.
 
#12 ·
I've determined there are a lot of opinions out there on all sides unsupported by peer-reviewed, fact-based science and data (and driven primarily by emotion and preference). So I'm still in search of more fact-based science and data.
Scott
The opinions you hint at are those that people enjoy debating, like just how fast an e-bike is, I'm going to refrain from discussing any of them because the real issue is the process. There is a complicated set of rules that determine how federal land is managed and now there is a discord.

There are a heap of rules based on the motorized/human powered divide. Clearly an e-bike has a motor. Overriding this boundary creates conflict with Recreation Opportunity Spectrum, NEPA, travel management rules, RMP rules and probably a dozen others. All mountain bike access has gone through those steps at some point and got to this point for better or worse. Now our access is at stake as we are quickly taken across the line into motorized territory.
 
#13 ·
E-Bikes a Plus or Minus for Greater Bike Access Overall?
Well I can't possibly see how it is going to be a plus....

Whether it is a minus is up for debate. I think it will in the end be a minus, but how much of a minus I do not know. And we may never really know, because whether access gets better or worse over the next 10 years, it will be hard to pinpoint what the effect of eBikes was on that.

I think it will depend somewhat on how they get classified....

Where eBikes are considered something different than regular bikes, and regulated separately, I do no think it will effect access for regular bikes.

Where they are considered the same as regular bikes, I think it will effect it. How much... that is the question.
 
#15 ·
My concern about e-bikes is related to trail access. Specifically higher climbing speeds that e-bikes allow and to some extent more riders going fast on flats (up to 20mph) will increase the issue of user conflicts. Most hikers will never be able to distinguish between e-bikes and regular bikes and more negative encounters will increase the push for restricting bikes in general. If every rider (both pedal and e-bike) were cool and respectful then this would be minimal to non-issue. However not everyone is. Some people don't respect rules or others. Some those will buy e-bikes, some will mod their e-bikes and some will piss off other users. The thing I don't understand is how many there will be and how the encounters will go down. I have ridden a few times with a guy on a e-bike on legal multi use trails and how he plays in group ride and around hikers is really 100% up to him. He can blend in nicely or be nasty outlier. I am not concern about trail damage as the power levels just are not there for the most part.
 
#18 ·
They are already having a negative impact on access issues because opponents of MTB access conflate ebikes with them.
Exactly.

The proponents of e-MTBs aren't helping either. Seriously, look at how this forum on trail building has become the dominion of e-MTB proponents that just don't want to acknowledge that e-MTBs create some real management challenges. Its even worse when you read an article and some yahoo from the e-MTB group within People for Bikes intentionally conflates e-MTBs with normal MTBs.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top