# Hypothetical eBike Question



## l'oiseau (May 5, 2015)

This just hit me, forgive me if it's been discussed... if it has, point me in the right direction please.

So say eBikes progress to the point of being a viable means of riding on the road.

So would it be viable to ride one of these things on the road to your trail network, where other non-motorized bikes ride, remove the batteries, put them in your backpack and ride the bike on the trails?

I'm not an eBike advocate, but the reason I ask is I drive a car to trailheads. Then I remove my pedal bike from the car and recreate in a non-motorized fashion. Would this be acceptable, or perhaps more acceptable if I had commuted the road portion by eBike? In essence, I can't carry my trail bike on my eBike, so I'd have to take a car otherwise. Would this be a positive step?


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Batteries are heavy! Why would you remove them? You can just turn them off. Are you thinking it would be like taping or zip tying one's shift levers to race a geared bike in a singlespeed category?

Sent from my E5803 using Tapatalk


----------



## l'oiseau (May 5, 2015)

Just for honesty's sake... They'd be just as good on the bike but if a random individual sees you, how do they know you aren't "eBiking"?

Yeah... like taping a shift lever... no cheating!

I'm really just thinking of the overall, perhaps better, environmental impact of riding your bike to your trail rides vs. car transport.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

There's at least one system in development where you could to just that, remove the motor and battery and convert it back to a bike. I'm not sure how you'd solve the "what do I do with this stuff now?" part of the equation for your scenario aside from still carrying it if you don't have trail side lockers.

FAZUA - Evation drive system for e-bikes


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

I think a lot of the time, it wouldn't be visible that you'd removed your batteries. But your back would still hurt more. Seems lose/lose.

I think I'd need an ebike to go at least 30 mph before it was any better than just riding my pedal bike to trails. I do that to access my nearby trails. Further ones typically involve some highway driving for me.

Sent from my E5803 using Tapatalk


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

IMO is if you don't remove the batteries, you could be accused of just "pulling the plug" when you saw a ranger. I rode to the trails with my system off the other day, then turned it on for some steep (to me) hill climbing. BTW:
Luna has a 3 pound 52V, 7 a/h battery; should be good for 10-15 miles on L/M PAS.
I think EGO has a removable motor battery system.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Get a trailer, it would be easy to tow a regular bike.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

l'oiseau said:


> So say eBikes progress to the point of being a viable means of riding on the road.
> 
> So would it be viable to ride one of these things on the road to your trail network, where other non-motorized bikes ride, remove the batteries, put them in your backpack and ride the bike on the trails?


I think e-bikes already are a viable means of transportation on the road but I don't think backpacking batteries is a practical idea. Personally I'd much rather ride a bit slower to the trailhead than lug heavy batteries and a motor around on the fun part.


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

AndrwSwitch said:


> I think a lot of the time, it wouldn't be visible that you'd removed your batteries. But your back would still hurt more. Seems lose/lose.
> 
> I think I'd need an ebike to go at least 30 mph before it was any better than just riding my pedal bike to trails. I do that to access my nearby trails. Further ones typically involve some highway driving for me.
> 
> Sent from my E5803 using Tapatalk


Kinda like this?


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

I'm not even sure what I'm looking at. But if it involves you riding some chunks of access road "garbage miles" at 30 mph instead of somewhere in the teens, I guess?

Sent from my E5803 using Tapatalk


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

AndrwSwitch said:


> I'm not even sure what I'm looking at. But if it involves you riding some chunks of access road "garbage miles" at 30 mph instead of somewhere in the teens, I guess?


Reno Divide is an access road to the Continental Divide. https://www.trails.com/tcatalog_trail.aspx?trailid=BGR047-042

You had mentioned that you would need at least 30mph and I was only trying to illustrate that possibility.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

I hope SAR starts charging by the pound.


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

Hey tt, is that supposed to be some prophetic statement or just plain stupid as it sounds? You do know that SAR, at least in the west, have been getting backcountry calls for vehicles like planes, helicopters, cars, moto's, atv's etc. for a number of years now?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Bigwheel said:


> Hey tt, is that supposed to be some prophetic statement or just plain stupid as it sounds? You do know that SAR, at least in the west, have been getting backcountry calls for vehicles like planes, helicopters, cars, moto's, atv's etc. for a number of years now?


How about 500 lbs. of "Cyclist" and emotorbike?


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Bigwheel said:


> Reno Divide is an access road to the Continental Divide. https://www.trails.com/tcatalog_trail.aspx?trailid=BGR047-042
> 
> You had mentioned that you would need at least 30mph and I was only trying to illustrate that possibility.


Its nice when guys like you come on here and immediately disprove all these ridiculous stories of ebikes being slower than real bikes. Averaging nearly 13mph is fast as fook


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Its nice when guys like you come on here and immediately disprove all these ridiculous stories of ebikes being slower than real bikes. Averaging nearly 13mph is fast as fook


Not to mention fun. I guess I missed the ridiculous stories part you refer to but the original anemic 250w EU models are slow and not worth the extra weight and complexity. They have pumped them up for distribution here which makes them more attractive but the price points are too high IMNSHO. 1000w and a throttle is a different matter. Riding rough dirt "off" roads and some single track, all legal eagle, can be enlightening. I haven't jumped on all the bandwagons that have gone by in the 35 years I have been mtb'ing but the ones I have adopted I have done so because it adds a new element of bike riding pleasure. For me.

And believe it or not I am not a big fan of e mtb's either. Trail access issues aside they are not what I think e bikes should be known and used for. Car replacement within the urban traffic fabric and exploring the myriad secondary and dirt roads that abound here in the U.S. is more in line with what would really benefit the most people with no hub bub.


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

tiretracks said:


> How about 500 lbs. of "Cyclist" and emotorbike?


Snappy.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Bigwheel said:


> Not to mention fun. I guess I missed the ridiculous stories part you refer to but the original anemic 250w EU models are slow and not worth the extra weight and complexity. They have pumped them up for distribution here which makes them more attractive but the price points are too high IMNSHO. 1000w and a throttle is a different matter. Riding rough dirt "off" roads and some single track, all legal eagle, can be enlightening. I haven't jumped on all the bandwagons that have gone by in the 35 years I have been mtb'ing but the ones I have adopted I have done so because it adds a new element of bike riding pleasure. For me.
> 
> And believe it or not I am not a big fan of e mtb's either. Trail access issues aside they are not what I think e bikes should be known and used for. Car replacement within the urban traffic fabric and exploring the myriad secondary and dirt roads that abound here in the U.S. is more in line with what would really benefit the most people with no hub bub.


I was actually thinking of a route I did not too long ago, working on putting together something bigger. Eight miles of asphalt, then ten miles up and over a 2700 foot shoulder along a logging and service road, and seventeen miles back.

For me, part of what's compelling is to do it under my own power. I suspect that's going to be a pretty longstanding clash. I did that route on my 'cross bike. If the part in the middle was more singletrack oriented, I could totally see what l'oiseau was talking about: if the twenty-five miles of asphalt isn't part of what I'm looking for in the ride, why not make it go by faster? Or, if I was using the logging road to shuttle something, same-same.


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

i have been lucky enough to enjoy access to single track out my front door for the most part throughout the years but currently it is a 20 minute car ride away which doesn't always jive with the 1 to 2 hrs. I can alot for riding on a daily basis. Not to mention the fact that it seems as though now the gravity groms have taken over and not yielding to uphill traffic and I have had a few close calls so I am choosing to ride places where no one else is and the ability to do it out the front door. 

I have been using my various bikes to do this around me but the e one just widens my horizons and as I said makes a new experience that I can combine my moto skills with my bicycle ones. In fact I built this bike up from part of the proceeds of selling a 625 SXC KTM because it was boring to just ride that around for fun with little benefit of exercise. The fact that it is a drop bar bike rolling on 45c's just makes it more interesting but it is surprising what it will handle out there. 

Even though I use a throttle only I still am putting 150-250w (which I can tell by stopping pedaling and watching the increase in watts) consistently through the drive train which on my bike is separate from the motor and geared appropriately biased towards the higher end. My bike has a range of 28" to 148" for example so I can climb stupid steep stuff and go just as stupid fast if I so desire as I still have solid pedal input past the output of the motor which cuts out about 32mph so downhill with a tailwind on pavé my highest top speed is 45.5 to date. 

Your ride sounds doable but it takes some math to figure out what your wh/mi consumption is at what speed and a read out like a Cycle Analyst to give you that info. That screen shot above is just one that I access at the end of a ride. The readout I use most gives me current mph, voltage, ah's used and wattage the motor is putting out and between these I can figure pretty much exactly what I have to play with. The little lights and bar gauges on the manufactured models don't provide the necessary data so you will never know for sure during a ride where you really stand range wise for your terrain. I can't imagine having an e bike without all the info it provides as it pretty much deletes range anxiety.


----------



## l'oiseau (May 5, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think e-bikes already are a viable means of transportation on the road but I don't think backpacking batteries is a practical idea. Personally I'd much rather ride a bit slower to the trailhead than lug heavy batteries and a motor around on the fun part.


I completely lost interest in this thread as soon as the eBikers showed up... oh well...

I think I see what you mean about losing the "fun" part


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

So what is to prevent you from just riding a regular bike to the trailhead? I do it all the time. Don't have to worry about battery logistics. Assuming it is " bike" distance. I have trail heads that are 3 and 6 miles away from my house that I pedal to all the time. Just a thought.


----------



## l'oiseau (May 5, 2015)

leeboh said:


> So what is to prevent you from just riding a regular bike to the trailhead? I do it all the time. Don't have to worry about battery logistics. Assuming it is " bike" distance. I have trail heads that are 3 and 6 miles away from my house that I pedal to all the time. Just a thought.


Hmmm... I think this illustrates the misinterpretation here.

Hypothetical = of, based on, or serving as a hypothesis

and a Hypothesis being = a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation

So if you can piece those two definition together, you might see this is an imaginary scenario.

If we want to get into specifics. Nothing stops me (or anyone really) from riding to a trailhead. Except I would say the vast majority of mountain bikers do such. I do very, very often because I drive a car 10 miles to work, which is a bit far for a bike commute for me and I typically ride after work. From work, it's typically another 10 miles or more to a TH. If I drive and ride for an hour, it usually takes up 2 hours out of my day. On days which I work I don't always have time to do much more than that. I expect fatherly duties to come will further limit that.

Again I really have no interest in eBikes but I thought about a supposed scenario for a lot of individuals where it might be a positive environmental impact. Would an eBike make it more practical for me to commute to work? Unlikely. Motor vehicle traffic coupled with weather makes it relatively impractical except for short distances or specific routes which can be connected via bike path. Honestly I think riding a train or bus to work would have less impact than either scenario, but I'm not entirely sure if toting a bike around and riding the bus would be ideal...


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

10 miles is a long bike commute?!?!

Ok. You really don't want to go over to the commuter forum...

-Walt


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

I kinda don't get hypotheticals.

I mean, I know what the words mean. But they're so slippery.

There are some very real use cases for eBikes. The e-DH thing sounds like a great idea. I can think of a couple riding spots near me where that would really shine if the battery lasts for enough laps.

With your original scenario - I have a few great trail networks near me but it's become hard for me to carve out chunks of time to ride. So I mostly ride the one I can get to in a couple minutes. The other spots take enough time to ride to that I need to be ready to commit to a longer ride than I am lately or I add the extra messing around involved in using my car.

So sure - I can see how a bike that changed modes would let me keep more variety in my riding without losing more time with my family. I'd just need it to be fast like a car to do that for me - if the assist tops out at 15 mph, I'm fine just riding my pedal bike. Though I'd need the dual-mode bike to be a legitimately fun trail bike. For now, that seems easier to do with DH bikes.

So there you go - no hypotheticals needed.

Although if a battery pack is hypothetical, then hypothetically it could be really light... Then I wouldn't mind putting it in my pack especially if it was really small. Or hypothetically if we lived in a theft-free society, I could just leave it at the trail head with my name written on it. Or maybe in a locker... 

Sent from my E5803 using Tapatalk


----------



## ImaBum (Jun 1, 2014)

Don't mind the trolls on this forum.

Just go ride on like anyone else. if you're not acting dumb while riding - you have no worries. And if anyone comes up to you to tell you otherwise (other than an LEO), simple tell em to jack off behind the bushes while you ride off.

Of all my days interneting - majority of folk come online to complain or seek help. Not many folk come online to share or educate. So let the trolls on here have their time being trolls and just ride your bike! Battery on or off!

I know I sure will


----------



## ImaBum (Jun 1, 2014)

Walt said:


> 10 miles is a long bike commute?!?!
> 
> Ok. You really don't want to go over to the commuter forum...
> 
> -Walt


A 10 mile commute can vary between folk. It's a short ride for a guy who rides in mid 70's with easy bike paths. Not so easy for a guy who rides in 30 degree temps with 4 inches of snow on the ground.

I have a 26 mile drive to work daily. No way I'd ride a bike that far, even if I was in that type of shape. Far too dangerous. There simply is no practical bike path way for a good chunk of it - thus putting my life at risk. Simply not worth it!


----------



## l'oiseau (May 5, 2015)

Yeah seriously. Surprising from a Moderator actually to make a comment. 10 miles of my route is too far for me to ride in my location. I'm not that hardcore I guess. I don't see anyone else doing it either... 

We don't have a good bike infrastructure, traffic is bad making it nearly impossible to make that distance in less than an hour (an hour commute time is a lot of time out of the day) and my location, on typical years, gets a fair deal or rain and actual winters.

I do know a few full time bikers - I only know one that rides all year in any weather. He also works at a bike shop, and I'm not sure what his commute is. But showing up to the office a pile of sweat after a 10 mile ride in 90 degree weather in 90% humidity or a Popsicle on a 0 degree day trying to ride through slush and road spray.

If I lived in So Cal, maybe it wouldn't be a big deal? If my commute was less than 5 miles, I'd probably do it but not regularly.

And 10 miles in the morning + 10+ miles to get to trails then ? miles of trail riding, then 20 miles to get home is a lot to do in a day where you actually have to work 8-9 hrs, feed yourself, and perhaps have some other responsibility in life beside biking. It's not just 10 miles - it's more like 40 miles total to do some trail riding.

And well, that's not really the point...


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

l'oiseau said:


> Yeah seriously. Surprising from a Moderator actually to make a comment. 10 miles of my route is too far for me to ride in my location. I'm not that hardcore I guess. I don't see anyone else doing it either...
> 
> We don't have a good bike infrastructure, traffic is bad making it nearly impossible to make that distance in less than an hour (an hour commute time is a lot of time out of the day) and my location, on typical years, gets a fair deal or rain and actual winters.
> 
> ...


 I think he was saying from a bike commuters perspective that 10 miles is not that long. Mine is 16 miles, 2-4 trips per week. I ride year round, Boston MA area. Great bike paths and options. Including 8 miles of single track on a 20 miles ride home. Win. Car trip takes 1 hr to the suburbs north of Boston, bike is 20 minutes longer. Sweaty, got a shower? Too hot, too long? An E bike would work great, just saying.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

My longest regular bike commute was six miles each way. That was when I was living in Seattle so it mostly didn't get that cold but it did get pretty wet starting in November. Sometimes I wasn't motivated in the morning, and drove. I always kicked myself in the afternoon. Traffic sucked quite a lot more if I was driving the evening commute. That was an entirely city streets commute. If you haven't tried your potential commute routes, I'd recommend checking them out. You could be pleasantly surprised.

My bike commute has often been one of the best parts of my day. It was a nice bookend for work or school. Sometimes I extended my evening commute to work out, rather than just taking the direct route at medium effort.

I can easily imagine commuting ten miles each day most days, at least as long as temperatures stayed above freezing. Or even below freezing in a dry place - Seattle is a little notorious for how it reacts to snow and ice. The thing is that if I'm riding somewhere where ten miles takes me an hour, it often takes even longer in a car or bus. If I'm doing a mostly suburban route, it would take me longer by bike than by car, but commuting by bike is a great way to lower the opportunity cost of that ride if I want to ride my bike anyway.

Commuting by bike is also not an all or nothing proposition. Lots of people do it a couple days a week. There's multimodal, which you mentioned, and plenty of people do a leg of their trip by car, train, ferry or rideshare, not just by bus. There's a slightly more complicated pattern involving driving in with a bike on, say, Monday, riding home, riding in on Tuesday and driving home, etc. Add a motor assist and I can see more possibilities and longer distances making sense.

All that said, I'm in the "can't" camp myself these days. I'm about 70 miles from work. At least I have a carpool and a lot of time to stare at the Internet. 

Sent from my E5803 using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

You said 10 miles was "a bit far". You didn't say the commute was too dangerous or unpleasant (which would make it too dangerous/unpleasant for an e-bike too, presumably). 

If you don't like bike commuting, that's fine. If an e-bike would help you do it more, that's great. It doesn't sound like that is the case, though.

-Walt


----------



## l'oiseau (May 5, 2015)

Walt said:


> You said 10 miles was "a bit far". You didn't say the commute was too dangerous or unpleasant (which would make it too dangerous/unpleasant for an e-bike too, presumably).
> 
> If you don't like bike commuting, that's fine. If an e-bike would help you do it more, that's great. It doesn't sound like that is the case, though.
> 
> -Walt


I'm glad you stopped at "a bit far" and didn't read the rest of what I wrote...

I also did say I don't think an eBike would make ME commute... I was speculating about the larger picture... again, my prose was/is hypothetical. Quit making it about me. Who am I? Just some guy who rides bikes and puts one on the back of his car... what about the other 100k people who do this? Does it make sense for some of them to have an electric bike that they can ride to trails? Maybe some yes, and some no. The next question is, if it does make sense for them to do road portions with battery assist, is it viable to remove the batteries and ride unassisted on MTB trails? That's it. Quit steering the conversation into "not being a commuter". Perhaps next we can steer it to "riding eBikes on non-motorized trails." Again, not the question.

*Question, clear as day: For those who drive cars and put bikes on the back of them to ride trails, in some instances, not necessarily yours, not necessarily mine, does it make sense to have an eBike and use the motor assist on roads and defeat it on trails? Therefore complying with current regs and putting less strain on our environment with carbon spewing cars.*


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I doubt it. Riding on the road to the trailhead still isn't very exciting and takes a while (and there are dangerous roads, cars, etc). For very short distances... maybe? But then, you could just ride an unassisted bike for short distances. For longer distances people are crunched for time usually and will just drive. 

Honestly e-bikes make more sense for straight commuting (to work, school, etc) than for riding to a trailhead.

-Walt


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

I think this is a slippery slope because mountain biking in generally is a really large waste of resources. We take a bicycle, perfectly suited to be a very efficient mode of travel and convert it to the a very specific thing for use on a very specific set of conditions. We then schelp it around in cars, your example adding 20 miles of driving to your day, all so we can play with it on trails. It is very similar to skiing, except generally we don't pay to ride the trails. 

I think the e-bike as a commuter is a great thing, especially for saving time, which is a precious and nonrenewable resource in our day. Ever so much more when you have kids but as you mentioned safety, access to bike routes and general weather certainly can make it less than good. I do see occasionally a guy on an electric fat bike commuting in Seattle, though it looks like it would be sketchy in the rain and really really soak you with those massive tires. 

For the multimodal trail/commute use it seems like a great way to go but again at what point do you draw the line? Is it enough to just commute to the trails to assuage your concerns about resource waste? Is resource conservation more important than time with your family or your personal safety? What about those days when you use up your battery half way home or forget to plug it in at work so you can get to the trail head? What about crashing on the batteries in your pack? Or the compromise on the bike weight vs. performance on the trail?

Mountain biking is a first world sport and it comes with first world issues. Trying to eliminate the first world issues means eliminating the mountain biking part. You don't see second and third world countries bemoaning where they can ride their e-bikes, who is going to build the new trails or how to deal with trail conflicts. If they are mountain bikers they just ride their bikes because they are richer than the rest of the people who are just busy being alive. E-bikes are the pinnacle of the first world really. We have taken a toy and added an electrical motor so we can play with our toy with less effort, more speed and more money. First world issue.

Accept that you should drive to the trail, so you can arrive home safely after a good mountain bike ride to your family. Hypothetically where you live this is a non starter, for others it could hypothetically work right?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yeah, in the context of the industrialized world, how you get to the trailhead is pretty much irrelevant. 

For commuting around town, if a significant number of people started riding because of e-bikes, that might be semi-relevant. Transportation is only something like 1/4 of US CO2 emissions, and a bunch of that is long haul trucks and such, but I'd bet you could reduce emissions by 3-5% overall if you got really widespread adoption of e-bikes (like, almost everyone uses them sort of "widespread"). Eliminating trips to the trailhead would be great but I can't imagine it would be even 1/10,000 of a percent.

-Walt


----------



## ImaBum (Jun 1, 2014)

The other side of the table is that people who love to ride their bike and seriously consider riding their bike to work or trail head - At some point in time of their life a situation comes up which this person who is into this hobby would most likely buy or rent a home that's within safe distance to work/trail head. Sometimes that's not always practical but I'm sure it's on the wish list when looking for a new place to live. 


Other folk simply don't have that option and duke it out with the longer distance or put their lives at risk. 

There really is no right or wrong answer to this. But there is folk who think there is a "better person" image to display.


----------



## JRT_in_WMass (Jul 22, 2013)

l'oiseau said:


> So would it be viable to ride one of these things on the road to your trail network, where other non-motorized bikes ride, remove the batteries, put them in your backpack and ride the bike on the trails?


If you build a mid-drive eMTB with a separate second chain connecting the motor to the drive system, then you would have ability to temporarily remove that second chain to provide a visibly obvious mechanical disconnection of the auxilliary electric propulsion system. Store the chain in a small tool bag on the bike when not in use.

...

edit: The board member "tiretracks" seems to have been miffed by this on-topic post in response to the OP's initial 5 month old post, so he downgraded my board reputation and included the comment below. Who has an agenda? The board member "tiretracks" knickers are in a twist over this? To me that is funny. I thought some others here might also be amused by the extent of his anti-eMTB nonsense in a sub-forum on the subject of e-bikes.



tiretracks said:



> bump a 5 month old thread to promote your own agenda


----------



## dman_mb1 (Jan 19, 2007)

The Yamaha mid-drive battery has a loop handle which could be locked up at a trailhead.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

JRT_in_WMass said:


> If you build a mid-drive eMTB with a separate second chain connecting the motor to the drive system, then you would have ability to temporarily remove that second chain to provide a visibly obvious mechanical disconnection of the auxilliary electric propulsion system. Store the chain in a small tool bag on the bike when not in use.
> 
> ...
> 
> edit: The board member "tiretracks" seems to have been miffed by this on-topic post in response to the OP's initial 5 month old post, so he downgraded my board reputation and included the comment below. Who has an agenda? The board member "tiretracks" knickers are in a twist over this? To me that is funny. I thought some others here might also be amused by the extent of his anti-eMTB nonsense in a sub-forum on the subject of e-bikes.


Apparently I'm not the only one that doesn't appreciate your posts so I don't feel the least bit remorseful. I stand by it.


----------



## NEPMTBA (Apr 7, 2007)

Positive, is what you make of it. It is positive in many ways! You save gas and wear and tear on your car, plus you ride more. any time you can ride more is a plus in my book. 

I ride my singlespeed non e bike on the road for 16 miles to the trail head with 32/16 gearing and then switch to 32/22 gearing for the trails. Always have a great time, and the ride back gives me a chance to cool down. Of course this isn't all the time, rather on a day where I have no work. With that said If you have a plan and desire then check your situation and go with it. 

All I have to hide in my pack are a few tools from the process. Hiding a motor and battery might need to address a unique situation.

I have had others at the trail head after the trail ride ask me where I'm going next. I think they think I just ride my mt bike everywhere. Makes me feel good that others think that much of me and my ability to ride as I please.

In your situation I have thought of a push trailer with e motor and hookup. Much simpler and your bike remains pretty much untouched as a bike. Only problem is again leaving it where it would get damaged or stolen at the trail head.

I think it's about your desire to ride! I say go for it, and let us know how it works add some pics too!

This forum is all about ideas and sharing, and you haven't said your gonna break the laws and ride where you please with an e bike, so by all means good luck.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

tiretracks said:


> Apparently I'm not the only one that doesn't appreciate your posts so I don't feel the least bit remorseful. I stand by it.


 Would it be possible for the mods to close threads that we are not supposed to revive? I have been told I am on shaky ground here and I would hate to inadvertently post on a forbidden thread and get into even more trouble.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

There is nothing wrong with reviving an old thread if you have valid info to add to it and it would make more sense to add it to the existing thread instead of starting a new thread.

Honestly it is more bothersome to have a new thread pop-up ever other month on the same topic when one could have instead searched for said topic and found an existing thread to post in.

That is just basic forum etiquette.

I for one am not a fan of the reputation mechanism employed by this site, in fact I turned mine off since I have the ability to do so as a moderator. I could care less how many bars are next to my name. Reputation was traded in currency at one point on this site, it got so bad the site admins turned off all reputation gains in the OC section to stop it.


Anyway, back on topic - Tiretracks, cool your jets.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Klurejr said:


> There is nothing wrong with reviving an old thread if you have valid info to add to it and it would make more sense to add it to the existing thread instead of starting a new thread.
> 
> Honestly it is more bothersome to have a new thread pop-up ever other month on the same topic when one could have instead searched for said topic and found an existing thread to post in.
> 
> ...


 I wondered what this "reputation" stuff was about. It's the only forum I have seen that uses such a thing and I was here for several months before I even noticed it was there. Heck, I wasn't even aware of the notifications for months.....

Thanks for the explanation, would it be a step too far to ask what purpose it serves today?


----------



## eBikesmith (Jan 31, 2017)

> So would it be viable to ride one of these things on the road to your trail network, where other non-motorized bikes ride, remove the batteries, put them in your backpack and ride the bike on the trails?


If this is an issue where you live, I honestly don't see why not. I really like a couple of the suggestions regarding a battery that you can lock up to something, or a even a small trailer that acts as the motor drive unit. Both sound like good ideas if you're comfortable with leaving them locked up where you ride. Also, if you do happen to have mid-drive where there are two separate chains; taking the chain off of the one between the motor and the chain ring, would also make it clear that your are not able to get any assist.

A few other suggestions I'd like to throw out there is an actually backpack battery. I haven't seen one for sale, but there are other guys on the forums building and using them.

Lastly, I'd like to play devil's advocate here, and ask a philosophical question. Why should the rider have to present clear, physical evidence (no battery, or chain) that they are not using electric assist? Shouldn't it be the accuser, or law enforcement personal, needing to present proof of wrongdoing? Idk, the whole premise just doesn't feel right. It's not like you're doing something that could be perceived as a visible threat to others (like open-carry), assuming you are following all of the trail laws.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

eBikesmith said:


> Lastly, I'd like to play devil's advocate here, and ask a philosophical question. Why should the rider have to present clear, physical evidence (no battery, or chain) that they are not using electric assist? Shouldn't it be the accuser, or law enforcement personal, needing to present proof of wrongdoing? Idk, the whole premise just doesn't feel right. It's not like you're doing something that could be perceived as a visible threat to others (like open-carry), assuming you are following all of the trail laws.


Would you really want people constantly stopping you to make sure your bike is not electric powered when it is an electric bike? If you're riding an e-bike on trails they are not permitted on, it should be your responsibility to prove that it is not being powered by electricity. If not, I'd be prepared for constant interruptions. And yes, e-bikes can be a "visible threat" on many trails.


----------



## eBikesmith (Jan 31, 2017)

> If not, I'd be prepared for constant interruptions.


Idk, I can't relate. California state parks are really cool with ebikes, and according to our laws, our trails are very friendly and accommodating.



> And yes, e-bikes can be a "visible threat" on many trails


I'm sorry mountainbiker24, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not in this one.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

eBikesmith said:


> If this is an issue where you live, I honestly don't see why not. I really like a couple of the suggestions regarding a battery that you can lock up to something, or a even a small trailer that acts as the motor drive unit. Both sound like good ideas if you're comfortable with leaving them locked up where you ride. Also, if you do happen to have mid-drive where there are two separate chains; taking the chain off of the one between the motor and the chain ring, would also make it clear that your are not able to get any assist.
> 
> A few other suggestions I'd like to throw out there is an actually backpack battery. I haven't seen one for sale, but there are other guys on the forums building and using them.
> 
> Lastly, I'd like to play devil's advocate here, and ask a philosophical question. Why should the rider have to present clear, physical evidence (no battery, or chain) that they are not using electric assist? Shouldn't it be the accuser, or law enforcement personal, needing to present proof of wrongdoing? Idk, the whole premise just doesn't feel right. It's not like you're doing something that could be perceived as a visible threat to others (like open-carry), assuming you are following all of the trail laws.


 Hmmm. Riding an ebike, where e bikes are not allowed? Battery or not ? Seems problematic. That doesn't feel right. Sort like walking with a fishing pole where fishing is not allowed. Or empty beer cans in the car.


----------



## eBikesmith (Jan 31, 2017)

> Sort like walking with a fishing pole where fishing is not allowed. Or empty beer cans in the car.


Those are actually some good analogies. Again, it's just hard for me to relate. I live in an area where our laws allow mountain bikers and eMTBs to ride the same trails, and we all get along just fine with courtesy and respect for each other.


----------



## JRT_in_WMass (Jul 22, 2013)

leeboh said:


> Hmmm. Riding an ebike, where e bikes are not allowed? Battery or not ? Seems problematic. That doesn't feel right. Sort like walking with a fishing pole where fishing is not allowed. Or empty beer cans in the car.


Its nice to be within short drive of the Deerfield River tailwater in Zoar, the Westfield, the Farmington, the Housatonic, etc. Some other people find ways to make do with what they have near where they live, and that may include fishing in urban locations, carrying gear through areas where fishing is disallowed to access areas where it is not disallowed.

















I usually give whatever empties to local kids collecting empties on weekends. But I don't think it would be at all unusual for someone to return empties to recover the deposit using their trunkless SUV or wagon or minivan to do so. Do you think that is unusual?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

^^^^ Missing the point.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

eBikesmith said:


> Idk, I can't relate. California state parks are really cool with ebikes, and according to our laws, our trails are very friendly and accommodating.
> 
> I'm sorry mountainbiker24, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not in this one.


I would check with the individual state parks that you plan to ride. While AB1906 says it's ok...it also states that individual jurisdictions have the final say.

Down here in Orange County Parks....they are not allowed.


----------



## JRT_in_WMass (Jul 22, 2013)

leeboh said:


> ^^^^ Missing the point.


Not missing the point at all. Merely disagreeing.

If some particular location disallows the use of bicycles augmented with an auxiliary electric powered propulsion system, then fully disconnecting that system from the drivetrain by removing a chain should satisfy the requirement, and perhaps merely disconnecting the battery might be sufficient.

It seems unnecessary that one should be required to remove all of the components from the frame, or be intimidated into concealing them from sight, if it is not required by law, simply because someone else's frail sensitivities might be offended by the mere sight of an electric motor and/or battery pack, especially if that person is not in a position of authority, is merely a self-important trail nanny trying to force their whims upon others.

What next? Would you allow some self-important trail nanny to enforce their whimsical notion of a dress code, maybe require all riders to wear collared long sleeve shirts, neckties, tweed knickers, vests and brown brogue Budapester shoes?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Trail nanny? Hmmm. Or illegal poaching getting all the trails shut down? Do you think there are rangers on the trails at all? Checking anything? Not here in Eastern MA for the most part. Hypothetically speaking, one might find a big stick in the spokes of the hypothetical front wheel. Riding an e bike with the power turned off is still riding an e bike. Not legal for the most part where I ride anyway.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

That's an interesting question: are ebikes physically banned from the trails or is the operation of ebikes banned? I know that if you have a green stickered dirt bike with no other license plate you cannot ride it on public roads to get to a riding area or even ride across a road. However you are allowed to push it on or across the road to the trail where it is then legal to mount and ride again. In other words, the presence of the unlicensed vehicle is not in violation, but the operation is. 

I suspect that this principle is the one that would be applied by any ranger or LEO one encountered. BTW I believe that physical assault is illegal not matter what the other person is riding or where they are. As an aside, if one did assault an illegal ebiker causing a crash, how would the assailant make their escape: out run the ebike? Or simply hope to hurt the offender so severely that they cannot continue riding........


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

It's a hypothetical question.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Do you have a hypothetical answer? Or did you fail to think it through.......hypothetically of course?

BTW, is it legal to carry or walk while pushing an MTB when on a hiking only trail?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Wouldn't know, I don't poach hiking only trails. Plenty of ( mostly) multi use trails where I ride. And I prefer to ride my bike. Push? That's for riders when their motor quits working. Or I run out of coffee and bacon.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

If you can push or carry an MTB on a hiking trail, there is no reason you cannot ride an ebike with no power on a bike trail.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

WoodlandHills said:


> Do you have a hypothetical answer? Or did you fail to think it through.......hypothetically of course?
> 
> BTW, is it legal to carry or walk while pushing an MTB when on a hiking only trail?


It depends I guess where the trail is. Not in a wilderness area, just having a bike with you will be enough for the rangers to take your front wheel making you walk it out. Colorado current ebike laws allow you to ride them on non ebike legal bike paths with the motor off, which seems logical to me. If I was a rider, I'd pull the battery just to make it obvious because I'm sure I'd get sick of people telling me I shouldn't be there.


----------



## eBikesmith (Jan 31, 2017)

> Push? That's for riders when their motor quits working. Or I run out of coffee and bacon.


Honestly, I hope your joking.

After reading how you want to inflict physical harm to other riders, and then rebuking analytical comparisons of people walking their bikes on hiking trails with satirical statements on poaching...

Is this how you always talk to people?


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

JRT_in_WMass said:


> It seems unnecessary that one should be required to remove all of the components from the frame, or be intimidated into concealing them from sight, if it is not required by law, simply because someone else's frail sensitivities might be offended by the mere sight of an electric motor and/or battery pack, especially if that person is not in a position of authority, is merely a self-important trail nanny trying to force their whims upon others.


I think it is pretty clear the op wasn't referring to trails open to e-bikes, and apparently, you have no clue why people would have an issue with e-bikes on illegal trails. I'd suggest reading through some previous threads to gain some perspective.


----------



## JRT_in_WMass (Jul 22, 2013)

mountainbiker24 said:


> JRT_in_WMass said:
> 
> 
> > It seems unnecessary that one should be required to remove all of the components from the frame, or be intimidated into concealing them from sight, *if it is not required by law* simply because someone else's frail sensitivities might be offended by the mere sight of an electric motor and/or battery pack, especially if that person is *not in a position of authority*, is merely a self-important trail nanny trying to force their whims upon others.
> ...


Exactly the point. If you convert an eMTB to an MTB, then that MTB should be allowed on any trail where MTBs are allowed.

Somebody starts with a conventional bicycle, an MTB. They augment the MTB with an auxiliary electric powered propulsion system, converting the MTB to an eMTB. If they disable the auxiliary system, then it has been converted back to being an MTB regardless that the bike might be carrying some added unused items. It is an MTB from functional standpoint, and is not an eMTB. The unused parts make it visually similar to an eMTB, but not functionally similar.

A self-appointed self-important person, non-expert in the law, and lacking legal authority to enforce the law (a self-important trail nanny) has no right to impose his own whimsical notions of bicycle aesthetics upon others, especially by threat of use of force.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

eBikesmith said:


> Honestly, I hope your joking.
> 
> After reading how you want to inflict physical harm to other riders, and then rebuking analytical comparisons of people walking their bikes on hiking trails with satirical statements on poaching...
> 
> Is this how you always talk to people?


Joking, The only reason I would walk my bike was if i had run out of energy, doesn't happen too often. Harm? No, hypothetical question, ie not based in reality. People ride their bikes, the only reason to be walking your bike on a hiking trail is to poach. If the sign says no bikes allowed on trail, doesn't matter if you are walking it or riding it.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

JRT_in_WMass said:


> Exactly the point. If you convert an eMTB to an MTB, then that MTB should be allowed on any trail where MTBs are allowed.
> 
> Somebody starts with a conventional bicycle, an MTB. They augment the MTB with an auxiliary electric powered propulsion system, converting the MTB to an eMTB. If they disable the auxiliary system, then it has been converted back to being an MTB regardless that the bike might be carrying some added unused items. It is an MTB from functional standpoint, and is not an eMTB. The unused parts make it visually similar to an eMTB, but not functionally similar.
> 
> A self-appointed self-important person, non-expert in the law, and lacking legal authority to enforce the law (a self-important trail nanny) has no right to impose his own whimsical notions of bicycle aesthetics upon others, especially by threat of use of force.


 Un bunch yer panties. Where I ride, no motorized vehicles allowed. Motor is still there, disabled or not. Switch on or off, chain hooked up? What ev. Splitting hairs at this point. One can read the same laws as it applies to conservation land, the DCR, State rules, and various land trusts like TToR. The point is why ride a disabled e bike with all that weight if you are not going to poach? Use of force? That was a hypothetical question. Seems like some trail head peer pressure and and some local trail rules would sort all that out, hypothetically speaking of course.


----------



## andytiedye (Jul 26, 2014)

Seems like for the OP's situation (using the motor to get to the trail) an "e-trailer" would be far superior. The bike remains an ordinary MTB, and the trailer with motor & battery gets chained up at the trailhead.

Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

leeboh said:


> Joking, The only reason I would walk my bike was if i had run out of energy, doesn't happen too often. Harm? No, hypothetical question, ie not based in reality. People ride their bikes, the only reason to be walking your bike on a hiking trail is to poach. If the sign says no bikes allowed on trail, doesn't matter if you are walking it or riding it.


 I was under the impression that in America one was presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. Are the self-appointed authorities now able to read minds and determine intent? Or have the laws been changed to read that walking with a bike is the same as riding it.....

In most cities it is illegal to ride bicycles on the sidewalk, yet I see people walking their bikes there all the time on the way into or out of their place of business or for whatever reason they want. Sometimes even walking for blocks with a friend who does not have a bike..... I guess we will now have to arrest them all since the mind readers "know" that the only reason they are there is to poach.

I had no idea that the Constitution was interpreted differently on dirt trails than on pavement......who knew?


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

andytiedye said:


> Seems like for the OP's situation (using the motor to get to the trail) an "e-trailer" would be far superior. The bike remains an ordinary MTB, and the trailer with motor & battery gets chained up at the trailhead.
> 
> Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk


 Would you be willing to chain up your $1000+ MTB at the trailhead so you could walk a trail with a friend or would you rather walk your bike while ambling along together?


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

WoodlandHills said:


> Would you be willing to chain up your $1000+ MTB at the trailhead so you could walk a trail with a friend or would you rather walk your bike while ambling along together?


That is one convoluted hypothetical question. Personally I'd rather ride my mountain bike to a mtb trail and _ride_ it, pushing a 60 pound electric sled for a 5 mile hike doesn't sound like too much fun.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

WoodlandHills said:


> Would you be willing to chain up your $1000+ MTB at the trailhead so you could walk a trail with a friend or would you rather walk your bike while ambling along together?


 I never went for a walk in the woods with my bike. I like to ride them, YRMV.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> That is one convoluted hypothetical question. Personally I'd rather ride my mountain bike to a mtb trail and _ride_ it, pushing a 60 pound electric sled for a 5 mile hike doesn't sound like too much fun.


 The question was what would you do with your eMTB if you were going to meet up with a friend for a walk together on a trail that banned eMTBs. The OP suggested that if one had a trailer with a battery and motor one could just leave it behind chained up while one rode their now pure MTB. Given that this trailer would cost at least $1000, I just wondered if the OP was willing to chain up their expensive MTB and walk away from it when confronted with an analogous situation.

Given the amount of theft that occurs at trailhead parking lots, I would not........


----------



## andytiedye (Jul 26, 2014)

Best solution: Live near the trailhead and use the ebike to get into town.

Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

WoodlandHills said:


> The question was what would you do with your eMTB if you were going to meet up with a friend for a walk together on a trail that banned eMTBs.


Push it if you want, it wouldn't bother me the slightest but I could see why it would be against regulations because 99 out of 100 people pushing an electric bike on a non-motorized trail would only be doing so because they spotted a ranger.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Or ran out of juice.


----------



## JRT_in_WMass (Jul 22, 2013)

leeboh said:


> Where I ride, no motorized vehicles allowed. Motor is still there, disabled or not. Switch on or off, chain hooked up? What ev. Splitting hairs at this point.


If you ride in Massachusetts, nonmotorized is defined as not being *powered* by a motor or engine. Carrying an unused motor or engine is not disallowed. The regs also disallow use of kite powered wheeled vehicles (not kidding), but there are no rules disallowing you from strapping a rolled up kite onto your bicycle frame. So you can go fly a kite, just not when you are riding your bicycle.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Just double up that tin foil hat. Alternative facts do not apply here. As said before, splitting hairs here. Agree to disagree here.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

If you are ADA you can ride a elec MT bike on a non motorized trail I just got off the phone with the parks ppl this is for a city park that allows MT biking her words were if the local MT bikers try n stop me she would ban them . WOOT!!


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

rider95 said:


> If you are ADA you can ride a elec MT bike on a non motorized trail I just got off the phone with the parks ppl this is for a city park that allows MT biking her words were if the local MT bikers try n stop me she would ban them . WOOT!!


That's fine for YOU. However we all know that the ebike manf's are not targeting the disabled. Watch the Spec. Levo propaganda videos....those people are not disbled.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Yes you are right that is a diff subject and will be handled diff , I just think all the fuss over the e bike is unwarranted .


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Here is a thought, What if the eBike's were designed to be a pedal bike and the battery and motor were quick release to be unlocked.

Then at the trail-heads you have powered locking lockers where you could place your battery n motor ot get charged while you pedaled the trails, then when you get back to the trail-head to ride home, you pop your fully charged batter n motor back in the bike and away you go....

Obviously the logistics and infrastructure would be a nightmare to get put into play, but it is an interesting thought.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

If its not posted No E bikes than its a gray arear and some states e bikes are by law allowed on bike paths , so any MT bike trail that is not marked no e bikes you could ride . This doesn't mean that the local ranger park manger will care one way or the other , If you ride with a ADA placard you pretty much can ride anywere as explaned to me here in IN by the park manger that over sees my city park with Mt bike trails .


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Big difference between a bike path and a multi use off road trail.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Not in the laws eyes if the law says e bike legal on the bike paths it doesn't say either paved or nonpaved or anything about mulita use trail , any park manger that doesn't want e bikes would have to post something which is good then after a few yrs compare the diff to allowing e bikes to trails that didn't . I have a meeting on Thursday with the city to discuses my local Mt bike park .


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

If one were to actually read the laws, almost all states DO define bike paths, hiking trails and multi use off road trails. MA at least.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

rider95 said:


> If its not posted No E bikes than its a gray arear and some states e bikes are by law allowed on bike paths , so any MT bike trail that is not marked no e bikes you could ride . This doesn't mean that the local ranger park manger will care one way or the other , If you ride with a ADA placard you pretty much can ride anywere as explaned to me here in IN by the park manger that over sees my city park with Mt bike trails .


They are not posted specifically here, yet are illegal since they are considered motorized vehicles, which there is signage about. So, no, you are not correct. ADA allowances are decided on an agency by agency basis, so what a ranger in Indiana decides, doesn't apply everywhere, it's worth looking into where ever you ride.

Tier 1 trails are wide paved bike/walking paths
Tier 2 trails are wide natural surface (crusherfines) bike/walking trails
Tier 3 are singletrack hiking/biking trails

Almost without exception, the legislation's goal in the various states is to regulate ebike access on roadways, bike lanes and tier 1/2 trails, not singletrack.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Well I have a meeting on Thursday with the ADA ppl to help clear somethings up for me .


----------



## JRT_in_WMass (Jul 22, 2013)

leeboh said:


> Just double up that tin foil hat. Alternative facts do not apply here. As said before, splitting hairs here. Agree to disagree here.


I am not sure why you want to wear a tin foil hat, much less what that strangeness has to do with bicycles.

As I mentioned before, if you ride in Massachusetts, non-motorized is defined as being *powered* by something other than a motor or engine. Carrying an unused motor or engine is not disallowed. The regs also disallow use of kite powered wheeled vehicles (not kidding), but there are no rules disallowing you from strapping a rolled up kite onto your bicycle frame.

So *you can go fly a kite*, just not when you are riding your bicycle.

What follows is excerpted from
Code of Massachusetts Regulations 302 CMR 12.02: Definitions
*Kite-powered apparatus* means a wheeled vehicle, board or other equipment which is powered or towed by a kite.

*Non-Motorized Vehicle* means a vehicle *powered* by anything other than a motor or engine.​


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

rider95 said:


> Well I have a meeting on Thursday with the ADA ppl to help clear somethings up for me .


I wish them the best of luck.



rider95 said:


> Not in the laws eyes if the law says e bike legal on the bike paths it doesn't say either paved or nonpaved or anything about mulita use trail , any park manger that doesn't want e bikes would have to post something which is good then after a few yrs compare the diff to allowing e bikes to trails that didn't . I have a meeting on Thursday with the city to discuses my local Mt bike park .


There is no sign on my trails that says no monster trucks. I guess that means they are legal, too?


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Were is your trail?? is it fun?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

JRT_in_WMass said:


> I am not sure why you want to wear a tin foil hat, much less what that strangeness has to do with bicycles.
> 
> As I mentioned before, if you ride in Massachusetts, non-motorized is defined as being *powered* by something other than a motor or engine. Carrying an unused motor or engine is not disallowed. The regs also disallow use of kite powered wheeled vehicles (not kidding), but there are no rules disallowing you from strapping a rolled up kite onto your bicycle frame.
> 
> ...


 No motors allowed, in use or not. Try walking with a hunting rifle in a no hunting area, see how far that goes. Not. Really not getting the point here, not yet anyway. Please come out to the eastern part of MA and see how far your poaching gets, no motorized vehicles allowed for most of eastern half of MA. As per DCR rules, no e-bikes allowed on non motorized trails. Period. Does not say anything about being turned on or not. Should I type slower so you can understand?


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

The ADA has agreed with me on e bikes for handicap ppl to use in a st or city mt bike park and has assigned me a case worker ! I get to champion e bikes for handicap ppl !!!!! woot !! I think I will be good at it don't you?? Gonna start in my city park lets ROLL


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

rider95 said:


> The ADA has agreed with me on e bikes for handicap ppl to use in a st or city mt bike park and has assigned me a case worker ! I get to champion e bikes for handicap ppl !!!!! woot !! I think I will be good at it don't you?? Gonna start in my city park lets ROLL


good job. What City Parks parks you working with?


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

The park manger is already on board I have talked to her its the local Club and just a few of the MT bike Gods in the club , there is at least one other handicap rider on a e fat tire bike that's wants to use the park also but has been harassed. I tried to start a topic on this but guess it was closed , gonna do my best to see this guy gets a chance to use his park too . I wont say what park or club yet mostly out of respect for the club they do a lot of good .


----------



## HPIguy (Sep 16, 2014)

mountainbiker24 said:


> There is no sign on my trails that says no monster trucks. I guess that means they are legal, too?


The mental image of you trying to hike a bike a monster truck up what we rode last time gave me a good laugh.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rider95 said:


> The park manger is already on board I have talked to her its the local Club and just a few of the MT bike Gods in the club , there is at least one other handicap rider on a e fat tire bike that's wants to use the park also but has been harassed. I tried to start a topic on this but guess it was closed , gonna do my best to see this guy gets a chance to use his park too . I wont say what park or club yet mostly out of respect for the club they do a lot of good .


 Might get some better discussion in the regional forums for for your area.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

rider95 said:


> I wont say what park or club yet mostly out of respect for the club they do a lot of good .


How is identifying the location a lack of respect for the clubs there?

If there is a park or area that is willing to open up more trails legally to e-bikes, please post it. One of the biggest issues we face as mods on this site if parsing out when people are poaching area's that are explicitly illegal, such as MA, vs area's where the laws are changing, have been changed, etc.

There is even a thread in this section specifically for listing Legal riding area's for eBikes.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

I am Happy to announce that the Hooiser MT bike ass HMBA and Indy parks has approved e bikes by handicap ppl Thanks to Frank Merrit of the HMBA and Brentty Van Meter of indy parks . I look forward to showing how e bikes can fit in and even be a useful tool . Now lets Ride!!


----------



## JRT_in_WMass (Jul 22, 2013)

rider95 said:


> I am Happy to announce that the Hooiser MT bike ass HMBA and Indy parks has approved e bikes by handicap ppl Thanks to Frank Merrit of the HMBA and Brentty Van Meter of indy parks . I look forward to showing how e bikes can fit in and even be a useful tool . Now lets Ride!!


Congrats. Good work.


----------

