# Class 1 and 2 ebikes allowed anywhere a bicycle is allowed in Bentonville Arkansas.



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Headed that way in October with my Rip and Focus. No discrimination. Hot destination. Anyone been there?
https://www.bikenwa.org/news/2017/4/13/arkansas-becomes-fifth-state-to-pass-e-bike-legislation


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Typical, they are talking about roads and bike paths, not trails, again, like always. Why don't you knock this crap off


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Wrong, read the bill. It’s EVERYWHERE BICYCLES ARE ALLOWED. Besides, you don’t ride them so why worry?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes will be allowed wherever regular bicycles are allowed, whereas Class 3 e-bikes will only be allowed on roadways (except in special circumstances). 

Can you read?


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Headed that way in October with my Rip and Focus. No discrimination. Hot destination. Anyone been there?
> https://www.bikenwa.org/news/2017/4/13/arkansas-becomes-fifth-state-to-pass-e-bike-legislation


That article says the entire state of Arkansas has passed this law, but Federal Land still makes their own rules. It will be interesting to see how this works out for State, County and City parks that have multi-use dirt trails.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

The Walmart family owns the land where the riding is. I’ve heard of emtbrs riding there with no worries. Wait! Does Walmart own the feds?!!


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes will be allowed wherever regular bicycles are allowed, whereas Class 3 e-bikes will only be allowed on roadways (except in special circumstances).
> 
> Can you read?


I read this

http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2017/2017R/Acts/Act956.pdf

Can you?
Talks about bike paths. Insurance licensing etc.

(a)(1) A class 1 electric bicycle or a class 2 electric bicycle may be
24 used on a bicycle path or multi-use path where bicycles are permitted.
25 (2) However, the local authority having jurisdiction over a
26 bicycle path or multi-use path may prohibit the operation of a class 1
27 electric bicycle or a class 2 electric bicycle on that path.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Again, no worries in “Bentonville Arkansas “ just what my title reads. Outerbike and imba will be there ripping emtbs everywhere and not a friggin thing you can do about it! Good times, you should try one, but maybe too fast for you..


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Again, no worries in "Bentonville Arkansas " just what my title reads. Outerbike and imba will be there ripping emtbrs everywhere and not a friggin thing you can do about it! Good times, you should try one, but maybe too fast for you..


Except where they can't. Isn't Bentonville something like 30 square miles in it's entirety? I'll wait for the rest of the states land owners to weigh in on this one.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

https://m.pinkbike.com/news/the-unlikely-mountain-bike-mecca-of-bentonville-ar-2017.html

Check it out on Pinkbike. Looks like fun to me.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Wait.. I thought emtbing was shrinking in popularity? FYI, I also ride mtbs.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Wait.. I thought emtbing was shrinking in popularity? FYI, I also ride mtbs.


No one claims that it is so you might want to stop with the hyperbole because tbh, it makes you look like an asshole. One place to ride (on private land) does not make a watershed, gloating over it (prematurely I might add) is just juvenile. The preponderance of discussions on this board concern public land, not private and your example of one instance is not a trend.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Again, no worries in "Bentonville Arkansas " just what my title reads. Outerbike and imba will be there ripping emtbs everywhere and not a friggin thing you can do about it! Good times, you should try one, but maybe too fast for you..


That's fine, single track bike only, have fun. Stop spreading lies about them being allowed everywhere because they are not. Typical ebiker crap.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Lies? Really? Wow. I’m done arguing with you two. Go blow your fingers off and drink a beer. I’m gonna go plug in my bike 😂


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Lies? Really? Wow. I'm done arguing with you two. Go blow your fingers off and drink a beer. I'm gonna go plug in my bike ?


What do you call it? Alternative facts?


----------



## kraisydave (Mar 12, 2017)

Hello,

Ebikes are totally welcome. I only ride an ebike off road due to being disabled. But non-disabled ebike riders hit all the trails as well. I've ridden about everything out there. It would take several weeks to cover the massive trail systems in that area. One of the best places in the nation. Check out Eureka Springs dh as well. Free shuttles Thurs to Sun. Soon Springdale Hard XC will open. Got to ride that early. Another worthy visit all within 30 mins to an hour of the heart of Bentonville. Also the major local shops all rent emtbs as well should a friend need one. Have fun!

Dave


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

kraisydave said:


> Hello,
> 
> Ebikes are totally welcome. I only ride an ebike off road due to being disabled. But non-disabled ebike riders hit all the trails as well. I've ridden about everything out there. It would take several weeks to cover the massive trail systems in that area. One of the best places in the nation. Check out Eureka Springs dh as well. Free shuttles Thurs to Sun. Soon Springdale Hard XC will open. Got to ride that early. Another worthy visit all within 30 mins to an hour of the heart of Bentonville. Also the major local shops all rent emtbs as well should a friend need one. Have fun!
> 
> Dave


That's nice to hear, too bad I'm on the other side of the country otherwise I'd make a trip there.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Lies? Really? Wow. I'm done arguing with you two. Go blow your fingers off and drink a beer. I'm gonna go plug in my bike ?


I believe traditionally, one drinks the beer first, THEN blows their fingers off.

Happy Fourth, all!


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> I believe traditionally, one drinks the beer first, THEN blows their fingers off.
> 
> Happy Fourth, all!


True that.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kraisydave said:


> Hello,
> 
> Ebikes are totally welcome. I only ride an ebike off road due to being disabled. But non-disabled ebike riders hit all the trails as well. I've ridden about everything out there. It would take several weeks to cover the massive trail systems in that area. One of the best places in the nation. Check out Eureka Springs dh as well. Free shuttles Thurs to Sun. Soon Springdale Hard XC will open. Got to ride that early. Another worthy visit all within 30 mins to an hour of the heart of Bentonville. Also the major local shops all rent emtbs as well should a friend need one. Have fun!
> 
> Dave


Thanks Dave. Life behind giants fan can't comprehend emtbs being welcomed. Btw, no pun intended.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Zinfan said:


> That's nice to hear, too bad I'm on the other side of the country otherwise I'd make a trip there.


Isn't Bentonville kinda in the middle?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

mbmb65 said:


> Isn't Bentonville kinda in the middle?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Not when compared to Moon Unit California! Lol. Buy yeah is actually is.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

mbmb65 said:


> Isn't Bentonville kinda in the middle?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Yes, a suburb of Misery.


----------



## Whiptastic (Mar 14, 2016)

Gutch said:


> https://m.pinkbike.com/news/the-unlikely-mountain-bike-mecca-of-bentonville-ar-2017.html
> 
> Check it out on Pinkbike. Looks like fun to me.


My bike is drained after I rode her fast and hard for 45 miles today, but after checking that link to the Walton's Bike Park I'm all charged up!

:thumbsup:


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

kraisydave said:


> Hello,
> 
> Ebikes are totally welcome. I only ride an ebike off road due to being disabled. But non-disabled ebike riders hit all the trails as well. I've ridden about everything out there. It would take several weeks to cover the massive trail systems in that area. One of the best places in the nation. *Check out Eureka Springs dh as well. Free shuttles Thurs to Sun.* Soon Springdale Hard XC will open. Got to ride that early. Another worthy visit all within 30 mins to an hour of the heart of Bentonville. Also the major local shops all rent emtbs as well should a friend need one. Have fun!
> 
> Dave


Are you saying you shuttle your eBike, or were you mentioning the shuttles for those who ride pedal bikes?

Just seems odd to shuttle a motorized bike up a hill, one of the major ideas of an eBike is to use less exertion for the climb so you can "shuttle" up trails that don't have chair lifts or access roads for shuttling.



Zinfan said:


> Not when compared to Moon Unit California! Lol. Buy yeah is actually is.


Where is Moon Unit California? I was born and raised in California and have never heard of such a place.


----------



## pumpsmynads (May 12, 2017)

Why are non emtb riders always involved so passionately in these threads? Serious question. 
If it doesn’t concern you, why give a ****? They’re the ones who’ll get told off, get the fine, etc..
And don’t say because it reflects on mountain biking as a whole - I didn’t come down in the last shower to believe that crap.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

pumpsmynads said:


> Why are non emtb riders always involved so passionately in these threads? Serious question.
> If it doesn't concern you, why give a ****? They're the ones who'll get told off, get the fine, etc..
> And don't say because it reflects on mountain biking as a whole - I didn't come down in the last shower to believe that crap.


There is only a small handful of anti-eBikers that troll through all the eBike forums seeking to stir up hate and discontentment. I have no idea why... must have something to do with a weak self esteem.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> There is only a small handful of anti-eBikers that troll through all the eBike forums seeking to stir up hate and discontentment. I have no idea why... must have something to do with a weak self esteem.


Most of it is due to the fairy tales that e-motorbikers are attempting to sell as fact. Speaking of low self esteem, does the motor cure that for you jim bo?


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

pumpsmynads said:


> Why are non emtb riders always involved so passionately in these threads? Serious question.


If you think that is a serious question, then you must think this is a serious question as well... 
Why are people who don't ride motos, or quads always involved so passionately in preventing them from being allowed in non-motorized areas?


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

sfgiantsfan said:


> That's fine, single track bike only, have fun. Stop spreading lies about them being allowed everywhere because they are not. Typical ebiker crap.


Where did you get the idea that it is bike only?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

pumpsmynads said:


> Why are non emtb riders always involved so passionately in these threads? Serious question.
> If it doesn't concern you, why give a ****? They're the ones who'll get told off, get the fine, etc..
> And don't say because it reflects on mountain biking as a whole - I didn't come down in the last shower to believe that crap.


It is the internet, people like to argue. C'est la vie.

There are plenty of places with legitimate access issues, as well, where e-bikes are a HUGE potential problem (ie, anywhere that uses easements over private land, trails that are already crowded/problematic, etc). People who don't own an e-bike can have a valid opinion in many cases, just like you can have a valid opinion about, say, horses or motorcycles on your local trails even if you don't own/ride them.

-Walt


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

pumpsmynads said:


> Why are non emtb riders always involved so passionately in these threads? Serious question.
> If it doesn't concern you, why give a ****? They're the ones who'll get told off, get the fine, etc..
> And don't say because it reflects on mountain biking as a whole - I didn't come down in the last shower to believe that crap.


It could be that they are butt hurt, don't wanna get smoked by anyone, are narrow minded, and afraid of change. They constantly hide behind access issues, when in reality nobody's lost any in the test areas.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Gutch said:


> It could be that they are butt hurt, don't wanna get smoked by anyone, are narrow minded, and afraid of change. They constantly hide behind access issues, when in reality nobody's lost any in the test areas.


Are they are just ignorant about actual facts and make up things as they go along. The incorrect information spewed in this thread and the individual that claimed every mountain bike trail built in the past twenty years in New England is closed to e-bikes in another come to mind. In both instances the incorrect information was presented as a linchpin to their arguments and a cursory search showed the information to be patently false.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I started this thread to let ebikers know they are legal in Bentonville Arkansas and that’s a huge bike destination. I will be there when IMBA and Outerbike is going on. I’ll bring my Mtb and emtb, ride plenty and enjoy too many cold ones. Can’t wait!


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Gutch said:


> I started this thread to let ebikers know they are legal in Bentonville Arkansas and that's a huge bike destination. I will be there when IMBA and Outerbike is going on. I'll bring my Mtb and emtb, ride plenty and enjoy too many cold ones. Can't wait!


Hit me up, I haven't decided if I'm going to the festival or self shuttling. I'd be happy to show you some of the stuff not part of the official rides.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Hit me up, I haven't decided if I'm going to the festival or self shuttling. I'd be happy to show you some of the stuff not part of the official rides.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


10-4. I believe we'll be camping in the Sprinter. How's the riding?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

We probably won’t be part of the guided rides and I really don’t care to demo anything. I just want to ride and chill.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Gutch said:


> 10-4. I believe we'll be camping in the Sprinter. How's the riding?


It's amazing. You can ride almost anything you want minus full on downhill, we may be getting a lift served park within a couple of hours though. Anything from long XC rides, flow jump lines, big hit lines, rocky tech. I think there is over a couple hundred miles of trail within an hours drive. It's growing so fast it's hard to keep up. Probably 120 and growing fast within riding distance of downtown Bentonville.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

👍 looking forward to it. Thanks for the info.


----------



## dfriz (Feb 17, 2010)

:thumbsup:


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

Why is this thread in the trail building and advocacy forum?


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

bsieb said:


> Why is this thread in the trail building and advocacy forum?


Other than Bentonville being a really good case study for how biking can explode in, reshape, and contribute to the community I have no clue.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## ki5ka (Dec 17, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Headed that way in October with my Rip and Focus. No discrimination. Hot destination. Anyone been there?
> https://www.bikenwa.org/news/2017/4/13/arkansas-becomes-fifth-state-to-pass-e-bike-legislation


Trailbuilding and advocacy. That is what this board is about...


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

And Gutch's post would qualify as advocacy no?

Seems he is the model ebiker: 250w preference, knowledgeable of trail etiquette, and advocating responsible use in a legal setting. 

Maybe I am confused.


----------



## ki5ka (Dec 17, 2006)

Velocipedist said:


> And Gutch's post would qualify as advocacy no?
> .


Exactly, "no". This is not trail advocacy, this is ebike advocacy. It is a different and unrelated subject.


----------



## CycleKrieg (Dec 19, 2013)

pumpsmynads said:


> Why are non emtb riders always involved so passionately in these threads? Serious question.
> If it doesn't concern you, why give a ****? They're the ones who'll get told off, get the fine, etc..
> And don't say because it reflects on mountain biking as a whole - I didn't come down in the last shower to believe that crap.


Actually, some of us are heavily involved in advocacy and eMTBs are huge issue for us as it affects current and future access.

As an example, my state (MN) has adopted text similar to the what Arkansas just adopted. However, just like Arkansas, that applies to transportation only. Each land manager can make their own choices regarding eMTBs. That means for large chunks of mileage of trails within MN can not (legally at least) have eMTBs access.

It gets even murkier too. A new trail that will be built locally could, at least as the land manager is concerned, have eMTB access. However, the money used to build those trails is for non-motorized uses only. So no eMTB access. Ever.

This is my issue with a lot of the eMTB advocates. They just don't understand land management issues and how that intersects with mountain biking access. Your state passing a bill for roadways doesn't magically grant eMTB access to every piece of land. Even if your state's DNR does allow eMTB, that is only for their lands. For county, city and private lands, that access would have to gained land manager by land manager. And for some lands, the funding that built those trails means they may not be able to have eMTBs on them.

So, to put it bluntly, even though some of us are not eMTB riders, it does concern us (thru our trails) and we have to be concerned about what legality is of an activity and how its perceived by the land managers we deal with.


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

Is it though? Damned if you do damned if you don't; it would seem that this free forum has decided that ebike content is here. Would it not behoove us to applaud their advocay efforts to inform new ebikers of legal courteous use.

And how can you say it is a different unrelated subject, when trail access is the issue with ebikes. Seems rather disingenious to tell the ebikers to advocate on their own, and when they do you wish to deny them the forum that is explicitly for trail advocacy.

Color me confused.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Velocipedist said:


> Is it though? Damned if you do damned if you don't; it would seem that this free forum has decided that ebike content is here. Would it not behoove us to applaud their advocay efforts to inform new ebikers of legal courteous use.
> 
> And how can you say it is a different unrelated subject, when trail access is the issue with ebikes. Seems rather disingenious to tell the ebikers to advocate on their own, and when they do you wish to deny them the forum that is explicitly for trail advocacy.
> 
> Color me confused.


Alas, a real cyclist!


----------



## CycleKrieg (Dec 19, 2013)

Switchblade2 said:


> Why don't the Ebikers just build Ebike/hiker trails in MN? Seems like a nobrainer.


That has been my suggestion to whole eMTB industry. Stop wasting time/money trying to shoehorn eMTBs into every property and create a trail fund for research of property issues and the construction of trails that allow eMTBs.

Yes, some existing properties and locations can and should allow eMTB access. (BTW, my local trail system is in the minority in the state and allows eMTB access.) But the real gain for eMTB advocates will likely come from building new trails. One issue is that most grants for trail building in many states are non-motorized as the motorized trail grants are for OHV/snowmobiles. To make up for trails allowing eMTBs inability to qualify for those non-motorized grants, a new grant source needs to be created.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

CycleKrieg said:


> . To make up for trails allowing eMTBs inability to qualify for those non-motorized grants, a new grant source needs to be created.


Or go after some of the motorized grant money.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

CycleKrieg said:


> Actually, some of us are heavily involved in advocacy and eMTBs are huge issue for us as it affects current and future access.
> 
> As an example, my state (MN) has adopted text similar to the what Arkansas just adopted. However, just like Arkansas, that applies to transportation only. Each land manager can make their own choices regarding eMTBs. That means for large chunks of mileage of trails within MN can not (legally at least) have eMTBs access.
> 
> ...


Bingo! :thumbsup:


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

Gutch said:


> Outerbike and imba will be there ripping emtbs everywhere and not a friggin thing you can do about it!


Not exactly true. I can choose to not support IMBA with my money.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Imba? You mean IEMBA? Fug em.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

That’s a great attitude towards IMBA. The exact org that has supported mtbs forever.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Curveball said:


> Not exactly true. I can choose to not support IMBA with my money.


True, but the event will go on without your $20.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> That's a great attitude towards IMBA. The exact org that has supported mtbs forever.


They stabbed MTBers in the back and everyone knows it. That's why they hardly exist outside of Arkansas.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> That's a great attitude towards IMBA. The exact org that has supported mtbs forever.


Seriously? What have they done for me lately?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

True, they’ve only been advocating for mtbs for 30 years...


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> True, they've only been advocating for mtbs for 30 years...


They advocated for 20, the last ten they just collected money and turned belly up on trail issues. You're just proving how little you really do know about these things when you parrot emba party line.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Correct, I don’t follow IMBA daily. So, what your saying is we are better off without them? I’ll choose them 200,000+ mtbrs over a few on this forum. But hey, what do I know? Just a dumb emtbr!


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Correct, I don't follow IMBA daily. So, what your saying is we are better off without them? I'll choose them 200,000+ mtbrs over a few on this forum. But hey, what do I know? Just a dumb emtbr!


You can have 'em. They're on your side. Not mine.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## TSleep (Aug 1, 2016)

My only gripe about this thread is the getting smoked comment. Apples to oranges, I'd absolutely demolish your eMtb on my 450 but it's not the same thing. If they allow it so be it. You guys are some of the most frequent posters hence the traffic. I'm cool with eMtbs if you're handicapped or something like that but think they're more a lazy man's thing if not. Either way as long as they don't cause issues with my access or fun who cares.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

TSleep said:


> My only gripe about this thread is the getting smoked comment. Apples to oranges, I'd absolutely demolish your eMtb on my 450 but it's not the same thing. If they allow it so be it. You guys are some of the most frequent posters hence the traffic. I'm cool with eMtbs if you're handicapped or something like that but think they're more a lazy man's thing if not. Either way as long as they don't cause issues with my access or fun who cares.


Call us lazy, whatever. Just don't be butthurt. Have you ridden one? Btw, I've owned at least 10 450's and they are fun also. I'm not pushing poaching illegal trails. But where they are legal, who cares right?


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

Exactly, I am somewhat dumbfounded that even a well reasoned post like this one devolves as it has. Gutch thank you for being an example for your fellow ebikers. Alas I cannot say the same about the misguided vitriol coming some mtbers.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Switchblade2 said:


> Ebikers could build trails much more efficiently than any paid crew.


Lol

There's a reason NWA is swarming with professional trail builders who are adding many miles of new trail each season, and it's not that the LM's didn't feel like waiting for ebikers to take it on.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch and Traildoc, front and center as the faces of e-motorbiking.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Harryman said:


> Lol
> 
> There's a reason NWA is swarming with professional trail builders who are adding many miles of new trail each season, and it's not that the LM's didn't feel like waiting for ebikers to take it on.


Exactly, part of the Back 40 follows the route of some user created trails that had been there for years. There's a reason why it was not ridden much and definitely not on a map until the pros came in and built what they did. Also, we have some amazingly beautiful rockwork that doubles as art and functionality that volunteers would never be able to complete in a timely manner.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

Velocipedist said:


> Exactly, I am somewhat dumbfounded that even a well reasoned post like this one devolves as it has. Gutch thank you for being an example for your fellow ebikers. Alas I cannot say the same about the misguided vitriol coming some mtbers.


Well said.


----------



## twd953 (Aug 21, 2008)

Gutch said:


> Correct, I don't follow IMBA daily. So, what your saying is we are better off without them? I'll choose them 200,000+ mtbrs over a few on this forum. But hey, what do I know? Just a dumb emtbr!


FYI, according to their 2017 annual report, IMBA's membership is 35,000. My guess is that is going to shrink, not increase. If they had 200,000+ maybe they have some actual political clout.

Are we better off without them? Depends on where you are and what aspects of the sport you care about. If you've got a strong local organization (e.g. Evergreen, NEMBA, COTA etc...) you're not going to notice the absence of IMBA.

The one issue the local orgs can't do as effectively is advocate on the national level on the behalf of mountain bikers when it comes to losing mtb trail access to proposed wilderness and wilderness study areas. IMBA has chosen a path of negotiating on a case by case bases to save a few miles of trails through boundary re-alignments while conceding hundreds of miles of trails that will likely never allow MTB access again (at least not as a result of anything IMBA is a part of). So the one issue we need IMBA for is the one they've chosen to bow out on.

IMBA made matters worse by publicly opposing the STC's house bill 1349, which advocates lifting the blanket ban on bikes in wilderness and evaluating bike access on a case by case basis.

Consequently, a lot of mountain bikers feel sold out by IMBA. There are a lot of folks in this forum that have put in many 1,000s of hours and 1,000s of $ into trail building and advocacy that feel slighted by IMBA, which is why you invoking IMBA as the patron saints of mountain biking is going to receive some push back.


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

life behind bars said:


> Gutch and Traildoc, front and center as the faces of e-motorbiking.


Better be the face of something, than the butt of the jokes.... That was another entertaining, but useless post LBB. Keep it on.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ruthabagah said:


> Better be the face of something, than the butt of the jokes.... That was another entertaining, but useless post LBB. Keep it on.


Since when is "entertaining" useless? It's simple, you don't like the opposition to mopeds so you attempt to demean from a position of weakness. So yes, I'll "keep it up".


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

life behind bars said:


> Since when is "entertaining" useless? It's simple, you don't like the opposition to mopeds so you attempt to demean from a position of weakness. So yes, I'll "keep it up".


I am just like you I hate mopeds. They are stinky, useless polluting machines with their two strokes engines.

You are funny, using all these big words you do not understand.

Please don't stop, this is quite entertaining.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

Gutch said:


> I'm not pushing poaching illegal trails. But where they are legal, who cares right?


What? I really have no problem with this at all.

Come on out to WA and explore our hundreds of miles of moto-legal trails in spectacular scenery on the east side of the Cascades. I'd actually be very happy for you to do so.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Curveball said:


> What? I really have no problem with this at all.
> 
> Come on out to WA and explore our hundreds of miles of moto-legal trails in spectacular scenery on the east side of the Cascades. I'd actually be very happy for you to do so.


I haven't been out that way, but hear it's beautiful. I'll bring my Mtb to take in the singletrack if no ebikes allowed.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

twd953 said:


> FYI, according to their 2017 annual report, IMBA's membership is 35,000. My guess is that is going to shrink, not increase. If they had 200,000+ maybe they have some actual political clout.
> 
> Are we better off without them? Depends on where you are and what aspects of the sport you care about. If you've got a strong local organization (e.g. Evergreen, NEMBA, COTA etc...) you're not going to notice the absence of IMBA.
> 
> ...


Maybe they are mis representing their numbers?


----------



## formula4speed (Mar 25, 2013)

"Supporters" doesn't mean paying member. No idea how they define supporter, which makes it sort of useless as a statistic. 200,000 is a big number though, so it looks nice as advertising though.


----------



## twd953 (Aug 21, 2008)

formula4speed said:


> "Supporters" doesn't mean paying member. No idea how they define supporter, which makes it sort of useless as a statistic. 200,000 is a big number though, so it looks nice as advertising though.


That is interesting. Wonder if they are counting social media likes/follows as "supporters".

Either that, or somebody donated 165,000+ jock straps to "pad" their numbers.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

*poof* !


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

chazpat said:


> *poof* !


Merged with a thread in the moped forum.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> Merged with a thread in the moped forum.


🛵🛵🛵🛵🛵 so fun, you should sign up LBB.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Thanks for the negative chiklets Swampboy! Rejoice!


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> That article says the entire state of Arkansas has passed this law, but Federal Land still makes their own rules. It will be interesting to see how this works out for State, County and City parks that have multi-use dirt trails.


I still don't get class 2. Almost every single conversion kit I've seen, all the way from 250W to 1000W and more, has a throttle. Even the cheaper e-mountain bikes have throttles. I don't think I've seen one that DOES NOT have a throttle. I've only seen road e-bikes without them. Maybe in Europe they make e-mountain bikes without throttles, but essentially all the kits you can buy in America have throttles, so what is the point of class 1 vs. class 2 on dirt if they all have throttles to begin with? Do they really expect someone to not hook up the throttle? Are you supposed to disconnect it on certain trails and then reconnect it later? Seems comical doesn't it?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

richj8990 said:


> I still don't get class 2. Almost every single conversion kit I've seen, all the way from 250W to 1000W and more, has a throttle. Even the cheaper e-mountain bikes have throttles. I don't think I've seen one that DOES NOT have a throttle. I've only seen road e-bikes without them. Maybe in Europe they make e-mountain bikes without throttles, but essentially all the kits you can buy in America have throttles, so what is the point of class 1 vs. class 2 on dirt if they all have throttles to begin with? Do they really expect someone to not hook up the throttle? Are you supposed to disconnect it on certain trails and then reconnect it later? Seems comical doesn't it?


Seems like the manufacturers aren't concerned with trail legal products, doesn't it? Seems like they know a big portion of their market.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Personally I could care less if there's a throttle or not. It's the maximum total power (and hence speed) that matters. You can soft-pedal any number of bikes on a high assist level and zip around (some you can pedal backwards!) and that's really not any different than twisting a throttle, to me. 

I mean, really, if you have a bike where the motor is doing most of the work, how you're activating the motor is sort of irrelevant. 

I guess I could see how watching someone cruise around not pedaling at all could be upsetting to some people, but as long as they're not going crazy fast or endangering other trail users or trail access, who cares?

-Walt


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Walt said:


> Personally I could care less if there's a throttle or not. It's the maximum total power (and hence speed) that matters. You can soft-pedal any number of bikes on a high assist level and zip around (some you can pedal backwards!) and that's really not any different than twisting a throttle, to me.
> 
> I mean, really, if you have a bike where the motor is doing most of the work, how you're activating the motor is sort of irrelevant.
> 
> ...


Having to keep your feet moving works as a form of speed control over rough and technical trail sections.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Walt said:


> Personally I could care less if there's a throttle or not. It's the maximum total power (and hence speed) that matters. You can soft-pedal any number of bikes on a high assist level and zip around (some you can pedal backwards!) and that's really not any different than twisting a throttle, to me.
> 
> I mean, really, if you have a bike where the motor is doing most of the work, how you're activating the motor is sort of irrelevant.
> 
> ...


Idc. I wonder why the big oem's don't produce with throttles?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Idc. I wonder why the big oem's don't produce with throttles?


The answer is with in the regulations that define class 1.


----------



## mbmtb (Nov 28, 2013)

throttles matter a LOT.
why? because it changes how people behave. a pedal-assist low power bike is a very much like bike. a throttle-assist one is very much a motorcycle, even low power.
it changes how you control the bike, especially at the non-concious level. you can be on the throttle by accident, you can't pedal by accident. you brain does not understand very well that your hand position controls your speed, so you barrel through things like an out of control sled.

this does not mean that everyone will mis-behave (= is rude to other users), but that it massively affects who will.

source: my observations of people, mostly on the crowded urban streets.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

And it's not how ebikes are being marketed. They've been sold to governments and consumers as assisted bicycles, and that they should be allowed in bike lanes, bike paths and now on trails. Take away the need to pedal and it's much harder to sell them as something other than a form of motorized bike.


----------



## Structure (Dec 29, 2003)

Not sure how much this is appearing in the US, all the ebikers I've run across seem well behaved, but it seems like pedal assist and speed limiters are going to get quickly hacked.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Gutch said:


> That's a great attitude towards IMBA. The exact org that has supported mtbs forever.


Wow, another group of mountain bikers that don't agree with you.

http://forums.mtbr.com/trail-building-advocacy/sdmb-leaves-imba-1084329.html


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Wow, another group of mountain bikers that don't agree with you.
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/trail-building-advocacy/sdmb-leaves-imba-1084329.html


I was confused that it said SDMBA and it was in Arizona because my SDMBA (San Diego MBA) also left imba this year.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

tfinator said:


> I was confused that it said SDMBA and it was in Arizona because my SDMBA (San Diego MBA) also left imba this year.
> 
> Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


Me too for a second


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

#Winning


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Wow, another group of mountain bikers that don't agree with you.
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/trail-building-advocacy/sdmb-leaves-imba-1084329.html


Does this make IMBA a bad organization for mtbrs??


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

> Does this make IMBA a bad organization for mtbrs??


A huge number of MTBer's feel that it does.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Walt said:


> Personally I could care less if there's a throttle or not. It's the maximum total power (and hence speed) that matters. You can soft-pedal any number of bikes on a high assist level and zip around (some you can pedal backwards!) and that's really not any different than twisting a throttle, to me.
> 
> I mean, really, if you have a bike where the motor is doing most of the work, how you're activating the motor is sort of irrelevant.
> 
> ...


I really don't understand this perspective. You would be concerned about the speed of a mediocre rider on a class 1 eBike, yet you have never expressed concern of an advanced rider on an mtb, whose speed may actually be greater. This seems not to be a speed issue for you, but an eBike issue. If it were speed , you'd be concerned about a standard regardless of the platform a rider was on.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> I really don't understand this perspective. You would be concerned about the speed of a mediocre rider on a class 1 eBike, yet you have never expressed concern of an advanced rider on an mtb, whose speed may actually be greater. This seems not to be a speed issue for you, but an eBike issue. If it were speed , you'd be concerned about a standard regardless of the platform a rider was on.


An advanced rider going warp speed is far less a threat than a mediocre rider at any speed and e-motorbikes are simply going to allow those mediocre riders go faster, easier. My take.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Jim_bo said:


> I really don't understand this perspective. You would be concerned about the speed of a mediocre rider on a class 1 eBike, yet you have never expressed concern of an advanced rider on an mtb, whose speed may actually be greater. This seems not to be a speed issue for you, but an eBike issue. If it were speed , you'd be concerned about a standard regardless of the platform a rider was on.


Really?

You don't see a problem with anyone being able to buy the speed of an elite racer?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Nope, I don’t.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Really?
> 
> You don't see a problem with anyone being able to buy the speed of an elite racer?


Why should anyone? Skill does not come into play here. An upper middle level road rider would have plenty of speed but quite possibly lack the skills in the dirt to go with it.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Why should anyone? Skill does not come into play here. An upper middle level road rider would have plenty of speed but quite possibly lack the skills in the dirt to go with it.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


That's context of "advanced rider" refers to skill not fitness. Skill is everything in the equation. Had to have a look at your post to see how you try to bend it to fit the narrative you attempt to spin.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

life behind bars said:


> That's context of "advanced rider" refers to skill not fitness. Skill is everything in the equation. Had to have a look at your post to see how you try to bend it to fit the narrative you attempt to spin.


Except he did not say advanced rider did he? He said speed of an elite racer, those two, the speed of elite racer and being an advanced rider, are not mutually inclusive. That's your problem you don't take the time to comprehend what you read. It really is unfortunate as it results in you regularly derailing all sorts of conversations.

Pro tip, had I been addressing your comments I would have quoted you.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Except he did not say advanced rider did he? He said elite racer, those are not mutually inclusive. That's your problem you aren't capable of comprehending what you read. It really is unfortunate as it results in you regularly derailing all sorts of conversations.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


This is the post that started the present discussion and it clearly states "advanced rider"



> I really don't understand this perspective. You would be concerned about the speed of a mediocre rider on a class 1 eBike, yet you have never expressed concern of an advanced rider on an mtb, whose speed may actually be greater. This seems not to be a speed issue for you, but an eBike issue. If it were speed , you'd be concerned about a standard regardless of the platform a rider was on.


So, you're the one that seems to be having comprehension problems, making your response simple mental masturbation. Thanks for derailing this one A.H.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

life behind bars said:


> This is the post that started the present discussion and it clearly states "advanced rider"
> 
> So, you're the one that seems to be having comprehension problems, making your response simple mental masturbation. Thanks for derailing this one A.H.


Not at all. I'm sorry you cannot wrap your head around the general idea that conversations evolve and can go off on tangents. I addressed precisely the point I meant to address in the manner I meant to address it in. If you somehow feel, and you obviously do, that responding to that point lessens the impact of your post then your issue is not with me but the person that made it.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

life behind bars said:


> An advanced rider going warp speed is far less a threat than a mediocre rider at any speed and e-motorbikes are simply going to allow those mediocre riders go faster, easier. My take.


Now see, I'm addressing your post so I quoted you.

Yes and no, there are any number of ways to achieve "advanced rider" speeds without assistance for short periods of time. There is also the fact that just because one can achieve those speeds there is little likelihood that they will remain on the trail for any period of time if their skills are subpar. I think you are confusing skill with the ability to go fast which is, as laid out above, not necessarily mutually inclusive.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Really?
> 
> You don't see a problem with anyone being able to buy the speed of an elite racer?


First, I don't believe that a mediocre rider will be able to ride a class 1 eBike with the same speed as an elite racer.

From a perspective of trail access, your postulation doesn't bother me at all.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Too bad there isn't a way for the mods to just lock the 4 of you in a e-room together where you can go back and forth forever with the same endless bullshit and no one else has to suffer through it.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Jim_bo said:


> First, I don't believe that a mediocre rider will be able to ride a class 1 eBike with the same speed as an elite racer.
> 
> From a perspective of trail access, your postulation doesn't bother me at all.


I just saw a guy on an e-bike go by me at close to 10mph on a climb that the fastest guy I know, climbs at 7mph(strava). I was pushing my SS up the fire road when he passed. I talked to they guy for a few minutes. He was not in the greatest shape, he said he was getting over a hip injury and could not even ride his real bike up the hill we were on. Never cleared it until he got an e-bike. So, yeah, an average guy can make elite racer speed. 
If you think speed on trails has nothing to do with trail access, your more dense than I ever could have imagined.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

sfgiantsfan said:


> If you think speed on trails has nothing to do with trail access, your more dense than I ever could have imagined.


Now you are latching onto this weak correlation as well? Speeds of 10 mph are not what get trails closed. Almost every single instance where speed and closure has been discussed here as an actual event it involved rider moving downhill at speeds greatly in excess of 10mph, most 20 mph. But please, by all means, continue on with the false equivalencies.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

To a hiker, bikers coming at them uphill at 10-15 and downhill who knows how fast. Speed is a real problem to slower moving trail users. To an old lady hiker, a bike coming up at 10-15 is downhill speeds. I have seen numerous people use this as a reason to ban bikes in Open Space meetings. So there is your false equivalency. Go back to using the fact that you bought a moped so trails will magically open.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

sfgiantsfan said:


> To a hiker, bikers coming at them uphill at 10-15 and downhill who knows how fast. Speed is a real problem to slower moving trail users. To an old lady hiker, a bike coming up at 10-15 is downhill speeds. I have seen numerous people use this as a reason to ban bikes in Open Space meetings. So there is your false equivalency. Go back to using the fact that you bought a moped so trails will magically open.


You've seen people using bikes moving uphill at high speeds as a reason to ban them? Where did that happen? You're also making a large assumption that e-bikers will have such encounters at a higher rate, potential for is not the same as actually happening. If you want to ban based on potential then that is a slippery slope fallacy and is based in emotion, bias and conjecture rather than facts and logic.

As to me buying a moped, nope don't own a single two wheeled vehicle with a motor. Try again.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

sfgiantsfan said:


> I just saw a guy on an e-bike go by me at close to 10mph on a climb that the fastest guy I know, climbs at 7mph(strava). I was pushing my SS up the fire road when he passed. I talked to they guy for a few minutes. He was not in the greatest shape, he said he was getting over a hip injury and could not even ride his real bike up the hill we were on. Never cleared it until he got an e-bike. So, yeah, an average guy can make elite racer speed.
> If you think speed on trails has nothing to do with trail access, your more dense than I ever could have imagined.


Was he legal? If so, great!


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Was he legal? If so, great!


It was legal, that is why there is no part of the story involving me telling him to get his moped off the trails.

I have no problem with them where they are legal, I don't want them on my trails but they are legal in places around here.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Gutch said:


> I started this thread to let ebikers know they are legal in Bentonville Arkansas and that's a huge bike destination. I will be there when IMBA and Outerbike is going on. I'll bring my Mtb and emtb, ride plenty and enjoy too many cold ones. Can't wait!


How are you liking it so far?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Unfortunately my trip got cancelled with scheduling. Bummer indeed.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Gutch said:


> Unfortunately my trip got cancelled with scheduling. Bummer indeed.


Yeah that sucks it was a great event. I ended up not demoing but am dead from all the riding I did on my Rallon. There were a ton of e-bikes on the trails.

An anecdotal note, I can see why people have trail access issues. We ran into four or five guys who were just blatantly reckless and jerks, riding way more dangerous than we normally see here. Shocking, I know, but not a single one was on an e-bike.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Switchblade2 said:


> Tuck thanks for the update on the reckless mountain bikers. I think there needs to be an Ebike Association that promotes Responsible Ebiking (Responsible Ebikers of America). They could also be an organization that lobbies for Ebike trail access on BLM and USFS land.


And you'll be the ambassador of all things e-motorbike as well?


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Switchblade2 said:


> Time to get back on track. It's nice to see the people in Arkansas understand the benefits of allowing Ebiking on their trails. Hopefully the information gained from a large group of the riding public will allow for legislation in other states to allow for Class I Ebiking.


Perfect. Y'all can all stay in Arkansas. It's a win/win.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Thus land is my land, thus land is my land.. wait, that’s not how the song goes! In time you will see ebikes advocating for new trails or current trail access. I believe they should be a separate user group for sure and accountable for themselves. JMO.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I agree, that’s where the issue lies.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Switchblade2 said:


> Would I have the right to ride all the other trails that I also helped construct?


No. You would be in violation of federal law. Again.


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

1. Some people hate hiking trails because they ruin nature
2. Some hikers hate bikes because they ruin the hiking trials
3. Some bikers hate motor-assist bikes because they ruin the biking/hiking trails

Everyone's got an axe to grind.
And then nature steps in and completely wipes out massive sections of all trails, proving that humans are idiots.

(Witness the lawsuit a moron citizen brought against our city for thinning the tree population in a local nature preserve in order to promote healthy growth. Two months after he filed suit, a major storm took out over 1,300 trees in that same preserve. The rain also cut a gully up to 15 feet deep in areas that permanently wiped out a bunch of trail sections.)


----------



## raisingarizona (Feb 3, 2009)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Now you are latching onto this weak correlation as well? Speeds of 10 mph are not what get trails closed. Almost every single instance where speed and closure has been discussed here as an actual event it involved rider moving downhill at speeds greatly in excess of 10mph, most 20 mph. But please, by all means, continue on with the false equivalencies.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


"Speeds of 10 mph are not what get trails closed."

Apparently they are if it's not done by an elite racer!

Seriously though, your exercising ability and time to do so doesn't buy you bike handling skills.


----------



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

Switchblade2 said:


> rob well said, Mother Nature does millions of times more damage to the environment than a few well-intentioned trail builders.


Nature doesn't damage the environment, it builds it.


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

This supports my concerns that bike manufactures and e-bike riders have no intent to stop at Class 1 e-bike access to natural surface trails. The line continues to move. First it was Class 1 access for ADA, then it was Class 1 for all, now we have moved right on to Class 2. 

The major bike manufactures are selling Class 3 bikes for road/commuter bikes. 

If given a choice consumers are going to choice a 28mph e-bike over a 20mph bike. 

The end game is clearly going to be for Class 3 access to mountain bike trails.


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

J.B. Weld said:


> Nature doesn't damage the environment, it builds it.


And it does it right over whatever physical damage walkers/hikers/bikers can do to it.
I've seen well-worn trails disappear under growth after after very little time of not being used.
The concern that bikes are hurting nature is ridiculous, regardless of their speed.


----------



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

robbnj said:


> And it does it right over whatever physical damage walkers/hikers/bikers can do to it.
> I've seen well-worn trails disappear under growth after after very little time of not being used.
> The concern that bikes are hurting nature is ridiculous, regardless of their speed.


The human species will most likely end up being a blip on the earth's radar and eventually nature will reclaim pretty much any evidence of our presence. We do have a profound impact on the natural world though.

Fast bikes may not hurt nature per se but they can negatively effect many users nature experience. Using your reasoning you could say the same about a paved highway as a trail.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

It amazes me I get negative rep for owning, riding, and posting in the ebike forum. Oh well, less chicklets. I should start dumping back on fools in the other bike forums, but don’t, pretty immature really.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> It amazes me I get negative rep for owning, riding, and posting in the ebike forum. Oh well, less chicklets. I should start dumping back on fools in the other bike forums, but don't, pretty immature really.


You get negative rep because people don't like your posts, not all the other ****.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I feel your love LBB.


----------



## robbnj (Jul 19, 2013)

J.B. Weld said:


> The human species will most likely end up being a blip on the earth's radar and eventually nature will reclaim pretty much any evidence of our presence. We do have a profound impact on the natural world though.
> 
> Fast bikes may not hurt nature per se but they can negatively effect many users nature experience. Using your reasoning you could say the same about a paved highway as a trail.


You could. I've seen some highways that get regular use and *still* seem to be getting reclaimed by nature.
Except for non-biodegradeables, It wouldn't take long for this planet to do a decent job of recycling what man has created were we to become suddenly extinct. Just look at how quickly abandoned buildings decay and crumble (be they wood or concrete and steel), or how quickly those paved roads lose the battle to nature.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I agree that trail damage is, in the long run, not a big deal. Nature always wins. And e-bikes (or motorcycles) are pathetic compared to a good hard rainstorm when it comes to causing erosion. Trails survive all kinds of stupid stuff. 

If you take the "who cares, it'll all be dust in 1000 years" thing to it's logical conclusion, though, then you should be ok with me riding my nuclear powered steamroller on your favorite local trail, or better yet, strip-mining it.

You wouldn't like that because I'd be ruining everyone else's fun - so the actual question is whether adding motor power will increase speeds enough to cause problems for other trail users - which would be unacceptable. I personally don't think we have an answer to that yet, though my instincts tell me humans like to go faster and have more power anytime they can, so it's probably only a matter of time before the current old-fogy class 1 crew is joined by the delimited 3000W fullface guys. 

-Walt


----------



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

robbnj said:


> You could. I've seen some highways that get regular use and *still* seem to be getting reclaimed by nature.


No doubt they'll all eventually erode away but while they're still around they'll be filled with 65mph traffic.


----------



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

robbnj said:


> Except for non-biodegradeables, It wouldn't take long for this planet to do a decent job of recycling what man has created were we to become suddenly extinct. Just look at how quickly abandoned buildings decay and crumble (be they wood or concrete and steel), or how quickly those paved roads lose the battle to nature.


I mostly agree with that too but if we did suddenly become extinct, which isn't unlikely, our impact will continue for at least a few millennia.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Walt said:


> I agree that trail damage is, in the long run, not a big deal. Nature always wins. And e-bikes (or motorcycles) are pathetic compared to a good hard rainstorm when it comes to causing erosion. Trails survive all kinds of stupid stuff.
> 
> If you take the "who cares, it'll all be dust in 1000 years" thing to it's logical conclusion, though, then you should be ok with me riding my nuclear powered steamroller on your favorite local trail, or better yet, strip-mining it.
> 
> ...


Bullshit speculation Walt.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> Bullshit speculation Walt.


A buddy of mine stopped a guy on an emoto yesterday on one of our trails, no pedals, not even close to an ebike. I've seen two 3k kit bikes on our trails, I've yet to see any class 1's. It's not just speculation IME.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Harryman said:


> A buddy of mine stopped a guy on an emoto yesterday on one of our trails, no pedals, not even close to an ebike. I've seen two 3k kit bikes on our trails, I've yet to see any class 1's. It's not just speculation IME.


Are your trails e-bike legal?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## rideit (Jan 22, 2004)

Harryman said:


> A buddy of mine stopped a guy on an emoto yesterday on one of our trails, no pedals, not even close to an ebike. I've seen two 3k kit bikes on our trails, I've yet to see any class 1's. It's not just speculation IME.


Did he protest? What was the outcome...a stern talking to?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Are your trails e-bike legal?


These are not.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

rideit said:


> Did he protest? What was the outcome...a stern talking to?


My buddy, "Um, do you know you're not supposed to be riding that here?"

Emoto dude, "yeah" shrugs, and continued on.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Harryman said:


> These are not.


The trails don't allow it at all or just that specific bike?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

No class 1-3 ebikes allowed on almost all mtb trails here, and not on these specifically either.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Harryman said:


> No class 1-3 ebikes allowed on almost all mtb trails here, and not on these specifically either.


Then it's impossible to use your situation as a correlation to a trail that allows them. Human nature is going to be "well it's already wrong. Let's go for broke".

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

How are the ebikes molding in, in Bentonville? There is always going to be the rare idiot and they also ride bikes, hike, whatever. A poacher is a poacher no matter what. The emtb industry is producing 98% class 1 emtbs at least.


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

Walt said:


> I agree that trail damage is, in the long run, not a big deal. Nature always wins. And e-bikes (or motorcycles) are pathetic compared to a good hard rainstorm when it comes to causing erosion. Trails survive all kinds of stupid stuff.
> 
> If you take the "who cares, it'll all be dust in 1000 years" thing to it's logical conclusion, though, then you should be ok with me riding my nuclear powered steamroller on your favorite local trail, or better yet, strip-mining it.
> 
> ...


A lot of singletrack allows motorcycles, it hasn't caused me any problems. You guys have so much fear that it is amazing you find the courage to ride mountain bikes, people die on those things!


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

figofspee said:


> A lot of singletrack allows motorcycles, it hasn't caused me any problems. You guys have so much fear that it is amazing you find the courage to ride mountain bikes, people die on those things!


 Pretty broad swath of assumptions there. Lots of singletrack does not allow motors. Some does. Where do your ride?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Then it's impossible to use your situation as a correlation to a trail that allows them. Human nature is going to be "well it's already wrong. Let's go for broke".


Thank you for your insight Dr. Tucker, just reporting in what we're actually seeing on the trails, not speculating. People are also riding Class 1s illegally, and posting about it online. They give no f'cks either.

All they're accomplishing is annoying the parks dept and hammering more nails into their access coffins.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Harryman said:


> Thank you for your insight Dr. Tucker, just reporting in what we're actually seeing on the trails, not speculating. People are also riding Class 1s illegally, and posting about it online. They give no f'cks either.
> 
> All they're accomplishing is annoying the parks dept and hammering more nails into their access coffins.


I'm sorry that you tried to use a flawed anecdote. My apologies that telling you it was flawed was so upsetting to you.

Some of us actually live where all the trails are open to Class 1s and 2s, with probably more users, and have yet to see that issue.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

How is it flawed? It is representative of the ebikes he interacted with and shows their bad behavior, you justifying their bad behavior or discounting it because where you are everyone gets along has no less weight then his anecdote. Flawed logic is all yours.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Velocipedist said:


> How is it flawed? It is representative of the ebikes he interacted with and shows their bad behavior, you justifying their bad behavior or discounting it because where you are everyone gets along has no less weight then his anecdote. Flawed logic is all yours.


Not at all. His scenario was used to support the opinion that Class 3 showing up where 1 and 2 are legal but Class 3 is illegal is inevitable. The trails he was discussing are not legal for Class 1 or 2. Thus it's apples to oranges. Like it or not if a person is going to break rules, with no, in their mind, other alternative, the go big or go home attitude will usually show up.

Where I am we actually have Class 1 and 2 legal trails, the issue being discussed. Thus it's apples to apples and a better anecdotal correlation. Formal logic is hard.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Not at all. His scenario was used to support the opinion that Class 3 showing up where 1 and 2 are legal but Class 3 is illegal is inevitable. The trails he was discussing are not legal for Class 1 or 2. Thus it's apples to oranges. Like it or not if a person is going to break rules, with no, in their mind, other alternative, the go big or go home attitude will usually show up.
> 
> Where I am we actually have Class 1 and 2 legal trails, the issue being discussed. Thus it's apples to apples and a better anecdotal correlation. Formal logic is hard.


I was responding to this, Gutch calling BS on this from Walt: "I personally don't think we have an answer to that yet, though my instincts tell me humans like to go faster and have more power anytime they can, so it's probably only a matter of time before the current old-fogy class 1 crew is joined by the delimited 3000W fullface guys."

We're seeing both the old fogeys and the go fast guys riding ebikes where they are not supposed to be. I'm not trying to explain the rationale behind why they are riding what they ride, I'm not sure why you think that's important?

You haven't seen any illegal ebikes where you ride, good for you. We're both reporting in with a sample size of one.

And Class 3 is 750w/28mph PAS, I haven't seen any of those yet on mtb trails, just on bike paths. Where Class 1 & 2 are legal, but I still see mostly illegal ebikes. Heavens, people disregarding park regulations? Never saw that coming....


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Harryman said:


> I was responding to this, Gutch calling BS on this from Walt: "I personally don't think we have an answer to that yet, though my instincts tell me humans like to go faster and have more power anytime they can, so it's probably only a matter of time before the current old-fogy class 1 crew is joined by the delimited 3000W fullface guys."
> 
> We're seeing both the old fogeys and the go fast guys riding ebikes where they are not supposed to be. I'm not trying to explain the rationale behind why they are riding what they ride, I'm not sure why you think that's important?
> 
> ...


Except in one case it's a direct comparison. In the other the only commonality is two wheels and handlebars for all intents and purposes. You giving your anecdote is fine. However, its situational differences reduces its value.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

You are missing the forest for the trees. Your experience and his experience are equally valid to show real world use of ebikes on trails. 

"anecdotal correlation" sweet irony indeed.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> I was responding to this, Gutch calling BS on this from Walt: "I personally don't think we have an answer to that yet, though my instincts tell me humans like to go faster and have more power anytime they can, so it's probably only a matter of time before the current old-fogy class 1 crew is joined by the delimited 3000W fullface guys."
> 
> We're seeing both the old fogeys and the go fast guys riding ebikes where they are not supposed to be. I'm not trying to explain the rationale behind why they are riding what they ride, I'm not sure why you think that's important?
> 
> ...


The clowns on the huge wattage frankenbikes will not be the "norm" as we know. I have not seen any riding with class 1&2's, you have and Walt is speculating will happen. I think a lot of the outcome is going to be location and draw.

I don't believe ebikers are any worse than mtbrs however. Most ebikers are older and more mature.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Velocipedist said:


> You are missing the forest for the trees. Your experience and his experience are equally valid to show real world use of ebikes on trails.
> 
> "anecdotal correlation" sweet irony indeed.


The trees here are what are important apparently as you are a bit off base. On one trail e-bikes are legal and no Class 3 issues. On another they are not and there have been. The statement being responded to, this is the important part you seem to be missing, was implying opening trails to Class 1 would act as a gateway to illegal Class 3 use. Use of a Class 3 in a location where any e-bike is illegal in no way supports that argument. It's all about context, continually staring at the forest has been shown to cause it to be missed.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

You have provided no basis that allowing class 1 will not lead to further poaching with higher classes. With a current dearth of hard data you could be right, you could be wrong. Neither situation is outlier, and both are informative for future trail access.


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

*Class 1 is not the end game.*

This thread shows the intent. The title is "class 1-2 ebikes allowed anywhere bicycles allowed in Bentonville". This shows the the OP is not interested in mountain bike access for e-bikes stopping at class 1.

The large bike companies are only making class 1 e mountain bikes, but the smaller players are making class 2 and 3 bikes. The large companies aren't going to loose market share to the smaller companies for very long. They will start making 28mph mountain bikes (class 3) just like they are on road and commuter bikes.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

We had a guy on a DIY monsterbike ripping around my local trails a bit last year. He certainly helped cement the current e-bike ban. 

As I said, I don't know what the future holds. I know that we've had people (many, many people) openly post here about derestricting their bikes and building illegal DIY setups. If you wander over to EndlessSphere, you'll find a ton more of that stuff. 

Around here e-bikers mostly just got a reputation for poaching, which as Harry said, pretty much closed the door to them getting legal access to anything anytime soon. Nobody wants to reward bad behavior.

-Walt


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Velocipedist said:


> You have provided no basis that allowing class 1 will not lead to further poaching with higher classes. With a current dearth of hard data you could be right, you could be wrong. Neither situation is outlier, and both are informative for future trail access.


And the inverse is also true regarding basis. In fact arguing it as likely is merely a slippery slope fallacy. However, one anecdotal situation specifically addresses the topic at hand. The other is based on markedly different circumstances. This is not a hard concept to grasp.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

indytrekracer said:


> This thread shows the intent. The title is "class 1-2 ebikes allowed anywhere bicycles allowed in Bentonville". This shows the the OP is not interested in mountain bike access for e-bikes stopping at class 1.
> 
> The large bike companies are only making class 1 e mountain bikes, but the smaller players are making class 2 and 3 bikes. The large companies aren't going to loose market share to the smaller companies for very long. They will start making 28mph mountain bikes (class 3) just like they are on road and commuter bikes.


Ignoring the strawman/goal post moving, unless you are concerned with visual optics the performance difference between the two is nowhere near that between the two and Class 3.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## ACree (Sep 8, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Most ebikers are older and more mature.


Older perhaps. MTBR posting doesn't correlate with your assertion of maturity.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ACree said:


> Older perhaps. MTBR posting doesn't correlate with your assertion of maturity.


Thanks for the negative rep, talk about maturity? Why not go troll elsewhere? Have you ever started a post in the ebike forum?? Yup


----------



## ACree (Sep 8, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Thanks for the negative rep, talk about maturity? Why not go troll elsewhere? Have you ever started a post in the ebike forum?? Yup


You're welcome, I regret that I can't give you more as many of your prolific posts are well deserving.

I would suggest you clarify your understanding of maturity and troll, you seem confused by the meaning of both.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ACree said:


> You're welcome, I regret that I can't give you more as many of your prolific posts are well deserving.
> 
> I would suggest you clarify your understanding of maturity and troll, you seem confused by the meaning of both.


Thank you for your insight about ebikes. I'm glad you enjoy them and have experience on many models. You can neg rep me as many times as you wish. Funny, you never hear much about ebikers busting on or neg repping mtbrs. Always the other way around. Go kick your dog or something. If I call you an a**clown, will that about be at your level?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

The good news here kids is that you can go to Bentonville, ride whatever the f*** you want.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> The good news here kids is that you can go to Bentonville, ride whatever the f*** you want.


Oh yippee, Bentonville.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

indytrekracer said:


> This thread shows the intent. The title is "class 1-2 ebikes allowed anywhere bicycles allowed in Bentonville". This shows the the OP is not interested in mountain bike access for e-bikes stopping at class 1.
> 
> The large bike companies are only making class 1 e mountain bikes, but the smaller players are making class 2 and 3 bikes. The large companies aren't going to loose market share to the smaller companies for very long. They will start making 28mph mountain bikes (class 3) just like they are on road and commuter bikes.


Um, I'm the OP. What is my intent? What am I interested in? Please enlighten me.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> Funny, you never hear much about ebikers busting on or neg repping mtbrs. Always the other way around.


Maybe they just don't make a big deal about it, I've been neg-repped a few times by pro-ebikers.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> The good news here kids is that you can go to Bentonville, ride whatever the f*** you want.


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Gutch again.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

Gutch said:


> I believe they should be a separate user group for sure and accountable for themselves. JMO.


While I'm not a big fan of e-mtbs* in general, I have no problem with this approach.

*I specify it as e-mtb for trail use. E-bikes on the roads are a great idea IMO.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> Maybe they just don't make a big deal about it, I've been neg-repped a few times by pro-ebikers.


So have I. I just didn't get all whiny about it, as I really don't care.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Um, I'm the OP. What is my intent? What am I interested in? Please enlighten me.


I will give you the chance to speak for yourself. Do you think class 2 and above e-bikes should or should not be allowed on mountain bike trails?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

My post says class 1&2 allowed at Bentonville. You figure it out.


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> My post says class 1&2 allowed at Bentonville. You figure it out.


So you criticize me for reading into your post and the tell me to figure it out. Nice.

If you desire to see more natural surface trails opened up to e-bikes, you should be upset about class 2 e-bikes being allowed on natural surface trails. It will be used against those wanting e-bike access.

Also, here is the exact language from the bill that was passed



> 27-51-1705. Use on bicycle paths. 22
> (a)(1) A class 1 electric bicycle or a class 2 electric bicycle may be 23 used on a bicycle path or multi-use path where bicycles are permitted. 24 (2) However, the local authority having jurisdiction over a 25 bicycle path or multi-use path may prohibit the operation of a class 1 26 electric bicycle or a class 2 electric bicycle on that path.


The article left out section 2 which allows the local authority to ban class 1 and 2 e-bikes. There are no requirements listed for banning e-bikes, so it is pretty easy for them to be banned from any single track in Arkansas.

Since National Forests ban e-bikes, all National Forest trails in Arkansas are not e-bike legal to start with.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

indytrekracer said:


> So you criticize me for reading into your post and the tell me to figure it out. Nice.
> 
> If you desire to see more natural surface trails opened up to e-bikes, you should be upset about class 2 e-bikes being allowed on natural surface trails. It will be used against those wanting e-bike access.
> 
> ...


Except those trails literally make up a fraction of the trails in Arkansas. 

To help you out with the access part. In an area that allows e-bikes Class 1 and 2 with unfettered access the following issues have occurred:

a. A mile of trail is being completed and opened a week.
b. There are four companies, the majority with multiple crews, booked for at least the next two and a half years through building new trails.
c. Numerous public and private properties have been dedicated to mountain bike usage in the past three years.

In short the only real access issue being faced is trying to decide which trail you wish to access that day regardless of chosen ride.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Yes, go ride your ebike in Bentonville, have a good time. What more can be said?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

indytrekracer said:


> There are no requirements listed for banning e-bikes, so it is pretty easy for them to be banned from any single track in Arkansas.


Very likely the regs you quoted have no bearing on singletrack.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

slapheadmofo said:


> Very likely the regs you quoted have no bearing on singletrack.


They mostly don't as most of the trails in the state are not on state land. State land generally allows it anyway. I don't ride an e-bike and don't ride state land so I have not more than cursorily researched it outside the local area. All of the major trail areas to my knowledge allow up to openly embrace the usage. More bikes = more people = more money = more trails.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

tuckerjt07 said:


> Except those trails literally make up a fraction of the trails in Arkansas.
> 
> To help you out with the access part. In an area that allows e-bikes Class 1 and 2 with unfettered access the following issues have occurred:
> 
> ...


I have been to Bentonville a couple times in the past 2 years. One of the guys who was helping me build trails in Indiana moved to the area and the last time I was there, I join a local volunteer crew for a trail work session. So I have a pretty good idea of what is going down in Bentonville. E-bikes are not driving the trail construction.

It is the local land managers who are allowing Class 1 and 2 bikes, and they are likely getting a lot of direction from the Walton family.

It could be good or bad for e-bikes. Being one of the few locations with lots of truly legal e-bike access, there will likely be an influx of e-bike riders. Now the ball is in the e-bike riders court. Play nice and show the e-bikes can really coexist or provide ammunition to those of us skeptical of the social impact of e-bikes.

I just want to be clear, that the Bill passed does not force Bentonville to allow e-bikes. They can ban e-bikes on any trails (paved or natural surface).


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

indytrekracer said:


> I have been to Bentonville a couple times in the past 2 years. One of the guys who was helping me build trails in Indiana moved to the area and the last time I was there, I join a local volunteer crew for a trail work session. So I have a pretty good idea of what is going down in Bentonville. E-bikes are not driving the trail construction.
> 
> It is the local land managers who are allowing Class 1 and 2 bikes, and they are likely getting a lot of direction from the Walton family.
> 
> ...


That's cool that you've visited. I hope you enjoyed it. I live here.

It would behoove you to quit strawmanning people it hurts your credibility. No one said e-bikes are the sole driver of new trails. That would be tourism dollars at this point.

Thanks for clearing that up about the law. Since the only person that seemed to be confused about what other people thought about it at this point was yourself maybe we can now everyone get on the same page. 

As to banning e-bikes from natural surface trails Bentonville city government will be extremely limited in doing that. Since you're so familiar with the local landscape I'll let you puzzle out the why. 
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

tuckerjt07 said:


> That's cool that you've visited. I hope you enjoyed it. I live here.
> 
> It would behoove you to quit strawmanning people it hurts your credibility. No one said e-bikes are the sole driver of new trails. That would be tourism dollars at this point.
> 
> ...


My credibility has nothing to do with posts on MTBR. My credibility comes from 15 years of working with land mangers and, showing that I am someone they can trust and work with. I have committed to them that I represent human powered mountain biking and they view e-bikes as motorized. I have no interest in going back on my word with them, so I am not advocating for e-bikes. Whether I advocate against them depends on where the e-bike community goes.

What I heard in the beginning was that only Class 1 bikes should be allowed on single track. I would puzzle out that Outer Bike pushed for class 2 access to come to Bentonville and the City took the financial benefit of Outbike into account in allowing Class 2 e-bikes. So to me that shows that the bike industry is not committed to limiting natural surface trails to class 1 e-bikes.

I oppose class 2 and 3 e-bike access to the 100+ miles of mountain bike trails I have been involved in building in Indiana. If bike manufactures start making class 2 and 3 e-mountain bikes, then it will not be practical to only allow class 1 e-bikes. So I would have to oppose class 1 as well.

The organization that is leading the way on e-bike advocacy is People for Bikes.

From there Land Manager Handbook (https://peopleforbikes.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/eMTB_Book_11.7.17_lowrez.pdf)



> Most eMTBs from major manufacturers are Class 1 electric bikes that require riders to be pedaling for the motor to engage. In this handbook, eMTBs refer exclusively to Class 1 e-bikes.


So my concern is that e-bike advocates are using Class 1 e-bikes to advocate for e-mountain bike access, but there is no commitment from e-bike manufacturers or e-bike riders to stop at Class 1.

I have no desire to win any arguments with those posting here, I just want to make sure those reading understand that the end game for e-mountain bike access does not stop at class 1.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

indytrekracer said:


> My credibility has nothing to do with posts on MTBR. My credibility comes from 15 years of working with land mangers and, showing that I am someone they can trust and work with. I have committed to them that I represent human powered mountain biking and they view e-bikes as motorized. I have no interest in going back on my word with them, so I am not advocating for e-bikes. Whether I advocate against them depends on where the e-bike community goes.
> 
> What I heard in the beginning was that only Class 1 bikes should be allowed on single track. I would puzzle out that Outer Bike pushed for class 2 access to come to Bentonville and the City took the financial benefit of Outbike into account in allowing Class 2 e-bikes. So to me that shows that the bike industry is not committed to limiting natural surface trails to class 1 e-bikes.
> 
> ...


No one questioned your credibility, again putting words in people's mouths. That seems to be a habit with you. It's great that you have volunteered in your local area. However, that does not equate to a guaranteed understanding of what is going on in other communities. Outerbike had zero to do with the way the rules were set up here. It's obvious you are not as familiar with the area as you are attempting to portray yourself so please stop.

Not only that but you're back to the same slippery slope argument that gets parroted repeatedly vis a vis e-bikes "well if this happens it will lead to this". Without proof that's nothing but opinion, conjecture and a fallacy.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

"WHAT IS AN eMTB?
An eMTB is a bicycle with a small electric motor that is
designed for the rigors of trail use. The presence of an electric
motor, typically powered by a rechargeable battery and no more
powerful than the motor of a hair dryer,"

ut:

From your P4B link. Yeah, they have about the same motors..... lol


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

That looks like the motor in my toothbrush! I wonder if I can charge it while I ride. Class 2 is 20mph like class 1 no? I’m cool with the throttle. I wasn’t at first, but I realized why be skeptical?


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

Maybe they meant one of these?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> That looks like the motor in my toothbrush! I wonder if I can charge it while I ride. Class 2 is 20mph like class 1 no? I'm cool with the throttle. I wasn't at first, but I realized why be skeptical?


Class 1 & 3 are exactly the same, just a different software setting for when the motor kicks out. 1 & 2 are only different in how you turn on the motor, which is ridiculous in light of how you can ghost pedal a class 1. You could sell one ebike, set up for any of the classes with minor modifications. The industry pretending class 1 is somehow better than class 2 is a joke.


----------



## hogfly (Mar 6, 2018)

E-Bike festival planned for Bentonville next year.

https://www.bicycleretailer.com/ind...al-planned-bentonville-next-year#.W92OsaROmEc


----------

