# Is uphill speed worse for trail access than downhill speed?



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

I have debated posting this because it is anecdotal, but it has grated on me for a week now.

Last week on my regular Tuesday ride on the local trails I ride every single week I had this happen:

Was climbing a single track with my buddy right behind me, we came to a T intersection that is a very wide trail, almost a double track, possibly a fireroad back when the area was farmland.

There is good sightlines to the left and right, at least 100 yards in each direction.

On this trail to turn left at the T would take one on a downslope (gentle grade) and to turn right puts one on an upslope. I did not see any other riders and did not even think to look left(downhill).

We turn right and my buddy pulls up next to me so we can chat on the way to the top of the rise. About 30-40 feet into the new trail a guy on a Class 1 Ped-elec blows by us in the plants and makes some sort of apology or comment as he blows by us going at least 4x our speed.

This was my first ever rude interaction with someone riding an eBike.

But I think it is telling, many (not all) eBikers are going to start developing this attitude that they do not need to have trail etiquette and can blow by people in the bushes. He never rang a bell, he never slowed down to interact with us, he just came up and went around, never even slowing.

I saw him a few more times and he was flying up trails at a solid 3-4 times the speed I can climb them, and did a few loops of the same trails I was doing with my buddy that day. It happened to be pretty warm and the trails were not crowded, but what happens on a Saturday or Sunday when the trails have a bunch more hikers and riders and the occasional Horseback rider. The Pro-eBike guys who post here claim they do not behave that way, and I believe them, but they are not the only guys riding eBikes.

The man in question looked to be about the same fitness as me, similar sized beer bellies... so put him on a pedal bike with no motor assist and this is not an issue at all.
Get a bunch more guys like this on eBikes on the trails and you have a problem.

So, back to the thread title. Is uphill speed worse for access than downhill speed?


Maybe? (need more data)
Yes
No

I heavily lean toward yes on this matter, and last weeks "incident" pushes me further that direction, but to me the answer is still that we need more data. I am a forgiving person and when the eBike rider did stop near us at the top of the hill after some loops and said hello to us I kept my opinion to myself. But I was not happy with how he treated us. Maybe I should have said something, maybe next time I will, he could be new to the sport and just not understand why what he did was a very bad thing. Of course anyone can give the sport of MTB or eBiking a bad name, but there are some knowns at this point:


Trail users are used to downhill bikes approaching faster than an uphill rider.
MTBers who do not slow down when passing users riding downhill (either users going the same direction as them or the opposite) are bad for the sport.
Trail Managers have already closed trail systems to ALL bikes because of this sort of behaviour. (https://www.bicycling.com/news/a20032253/your-strava-data-could-be-used-to-ban-cyclists-from-trails/)
The potential for more bad interactions with other trail users will increase as more eBikes start riding the trails and pass other users on the climbs in the same way I was passed.
Closing speeds are an issue, especially on trails that have poor sightlines and blind turns. When I rode motocross bikes all of the worst crashes (that were not from jumping) came from head-on collisions on multi-directional trails. The same logic applies to bicycles and eBikes.
More Directional trails are a good start, but that does not stop users like the one I had an interaction with showing poor etiquette and passing in the brush. passing in the brush is very bad for access since Land Managers do not want trails widening from this sort of behaviour.

I am very interested to see how it goes in some of the parks around the country that have opened up eBiking on their trails. I think we are still in the very early stages of this entire discussion.

This interaction took place in San Diego County. How are things working out where you ride?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Maybe. By the time the numbers are correlated it'll be too late. Then there will be a reactionary solution instead of being proactive, as usual. To answer the question, any speed out of the norm is cause for concern, motor assist will only make excessive speeds going uphill more common, drawing attention to themselves. Really fast human powered riders are not that common, even among racers. Increasing those speeds with motor assisted travel is going to really stand out, putting a sharp point on the issue. keeping in mind that most e-motorbike riders know nothing of trail etiquette just like their human powered counterparts, adding more power to the equation only exacerbates already existing problems. As far as directional trails are concerned, good luck. Especially in areas that have shared trails, areas that it sometimes takes decades to get a new trail approved or in areas that trail access is being lost. Banning bikes outright is the more likely outcome when issues arise.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

My local LM's are almost all mtb riders, and some, very enthusiastically so. They are well aware of the speeds that you can ride a bike, and how much fun it is to go fast.

They also constantly receive complaints from other users about mtb riders being rude, going too fast, sneaking up (because we're so quiet) and scaring the bejusus out of them as we blast by out of nowhere. No doubt, some complaints are deserved, some are not, and sometimes blatantly invented, or more a matter of perspective. You think you're passing slowly, and they don't think you are.

So when you tell them you're going to make a certain unknown potentially large percentage of mtb riders even faster by adding a motor, which is the root cause of the majority of complaints they receive, they really don't care if you're only faster on the climbs, or in the flats, or DH. Higher closing speeds = more conflict in their eyes.

Add in what you reported, that each emtb rider will now be riding farther per ride, which in many dense urban trail networks means more laps, and more passing interactions and my LM's voted to pass.

"One of the things I love is how easy it makes exploring, I can leave it in turbo for the climbs and get 8-10 descents in an hour, where previously I would have got 3-4."

https://www.emtbforums.com/threads/kenevo-first-ride.772/

" I race enduro and absolutely love how an ebike lets me get 2x-3x as many descents as on a typical ride."

https://www.emtbforums.com/threads/new-to-emtb-but-converted-thoughts-and-questions.1135/

"I'm 200lbs and tend to keep the bike in turbo and go as fast as I can everywhere."

https://www.emtbforums.com/threads/well-im-loving-this-thing.1146/


----------



## Silent_G (Oct 30, 2010)

Greatly increased uphill speed is the #1 problem with ebikes. As the numbers of ebikes increases, so will this type of interaction. Just think about a group of Sierra Clubbers getting passed by an ebike going off trail.....It will get ALL bikes banned from trails as land managers and rangers will not be able to distinguish the difference. The industry is HAMMERING ebikes at us (I'm a shop owner) to which I always reply "I'm not a motor cycle shop". Then they try to justify/enlighten me with all the propaganda they have and at this point I tell them to leave. Plain facts of the matter: riding an ebike is cycling with a motor, motorcycling.


----------



## ACree (Sep 8, 2004)

If regular mountain bikers don't like sharing trails with ebikers (and increasingly, any other use that is in the way on a descent), other groups will dislike them even more. The difference is, to us, ebikes are a different user group. To the hikers and equestrians, we're all mountain bikers. Even though one set is human powered and one is motorized.


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

Klurejr said:


> l a guy on a Class 1 Ped-elec blows by us in the plants and makes some sort of apology or comment as he blows by us going at least 4x our speed....... he was flying up trails at a solid 3-4 times the speed I can climb them


So you were going 4-6 mph up hill, and he was going 4X faster @ 16-24 mph up hill or 3X faster @12-18 mph on his e-bike??
I don't think you are telling the truth....


----------



## veloborealis (Oct 25, 2009)

tom erb said:


> So you were going 4-6 mph up hill, and he was going 4X faster @ 16-24 mph up hill or 3X faster @12-18 mph on his e-bike??
> I don't think you are telling the truth....


It's not like he measured the speed. 12+ mph I can easily believe. I share the OPs concerns and agree with lbb and Harryman. Uphill speed is not worse for access, per se, but on top of existing downhill speed it "doubles" the problem. Increased interactions with other trail users and the ability to eshuttle far more trails for the descents create the potential for more negative impacts. I get the appeal of ebikes. They sound like a heck of a lot of fun, and I do not buy the argument that they, nonthrottle pedelecs anyway, cause more trail damage than mtbs. But allowing them on nonmotorized trails is a Pandora's Box of potential user conflict problems I'm hoping we can avoid.


----------



## Cotharyus (Jun 21, 2012)

tom erb said:


> So you were going 4-6 mph up hill, and he was going 4X faster @ 16-24 mph up hill or 3X faster @12-18 mph on his e-bike??
> I don't think you are telling the truth....


And I think you should give him the benefit of your doubt. While I was working on a new trail over a mountain in western NC, I fell on the way in on my bike one day and busted my knee up pretty good. Two days later, I was loaned a Kona Remote (size medium, I ride an XL) to see if it made getting up 2 miles of trail to where the machine I was running was parked any easier. I could move my hurt leg, but not apply any pressure to the pedals with it, so I was effectively pedaling with one leg, on flats with this e-bike on turbo mode. Going UP the hill, I was able to utilize some relatively large berms, riding at least half way up them, close to the point where they were completely vertical - average grade on the trail was probably 4-6% and in places I could just about get the assist to kick out because I was going 20mph. Up the hill. So, yeah, this guy, if he had two legs, could easily have been going 16-20 mph up a hill.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Klurejr said:


> blows by us in the plants


One of my big concerns around me, widening of trails due to increased passing.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

chazpat said:


> One of my big concerns around me, widening of trails due to increased passing.


Yep.

And for the record, we should all speak up when we see someone else riding this way (ebike or not). Tell that rider that their behavior is not acceptable.

You better believe that hikers and horse riders will complain to the land manager about an encounter like this. And they most aren't going to distinguish between types of bikes. If we say nothing, then all riders lose.

IME, 2 major factors allowed us to increase legal trail access in most places over the years (with the Wilderness/WSA issue as the major exception). The first step was the creation of the NORBA/IMBA etiquette rules and then self policing to gain them fairly wide adoption (to the extent that many land managers adopted them, or revised versions of them to suit the trails in question). The second was our sweat equity/knowledge regarding trail building and maintenance.

We need to continue to drive home the value of trail etiquette. That is getting pushed aside in some instances with the focus on downhill/enduro type riding. I love a good downhill, but I work hard to prevent that enjoyment from getting in the way of safe trail interactions. If I can't pleasantly greet others on the trail when I am passing, I am going too fast.

If ebikers can't self police this stuff, too, then I have no qualms about yelling at them for poor etiquette on the trail, and reporting that bad behavior to the land manager, in an effort to avoid being dragged under the bus when hikers and horse riders throw ALL of us under it.

Hell, even some land managers can't get bike categories straight. The local usfs facebook page posted a picture recently from some loaded pavement touring riders from the 80s (skinny tires, panniers, and all) and called them mountain bikers. I commented with a correction on that.

There have been some studies over the years looking at perceived danger of passing encounters, and EVERY. TIME. Increased closing speeds results in an increase in perceived danger.

Because nonmotorized climbing speeds are commonly so slow, even relatively small increases in climbing speed will make a big difference in closing speeds, especially when the closing traffic is going downhill.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

Trail conflicts are often generated by speed. When someone gets "blown by" they can upset. Bikes are already faster down hill than they used to be. Climbing bikes are only slight bit faster than to used to be, but E-bikes have the potential to be much faster climbing. 

Just a little example where climbing speed can cause conflicts. I was on two multi use trail. Bench cut and narrow. I was climbing a good clip maybe 8-9mph. Not crazy fast, not as slow as most people climb. (no e-bike just me my 200 ish watts of power). Anyway around some turns I hear a hose guy talking "Slow, Slow, Slow" I see him 200 yards up the trail. I continue to pedal for about 20-30 yards watching what he was going to do. I was not sure if he was talking to a rider behind him or not, but I am watching to see what he does. Since he is still in the trail. I stop 150 yards in front on a turn and start to pull off the horse rider starts to berate me for going too fast and not slowing down. I was on a climb and not going fast and stopped easily. He was upset I did not see him and stop as soon as he did. Well given the turns in the trail I was not looking across the drainage (90 deg to the trail) 400 yards up the trail to see "around the turn" He though I was going too fast. I looked at him like he was crazy. I was NOT going fast and stopped with plenty of room. Just because i was not going at walking pace does not mean I was fly? Now if that were a gentle down hill and I were going 15 mph that would be bit fast, but at 8-9 mph up hill I can stop in 2 bike lengths with ease and I am totally in control. However he did not think so and got really pissed off. 

Now had I been going 15 I have no idea how pissed he would have been. If I had more power I might have been able to do that climb at 15 mph. The thing that has mitigated many user conflicts is two fold. Most riders can't climb very fast so the quantity of riders flying up trails is minimal. Also those riders that do have that fitness tend to be more experienced and have better trail etiquette. Of course there are times we hear of "racer boy" flying by even other riders causing a certain level of "butt hurt". So if you have a way to take even more riders and possible less experienced riders and have them easily going 15 mph up hills that only the top 1% could do or even never you will get more conflicts. 

More conflicts means greater chance trails will be shut down to all bike access.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

It's pretty easy to get a demonstration in the differences between speeds in the ranges we're discussing, which are often discounted as "hey, it's just a few miles an hour difference, no big deal". Get up from your computer and:

1) Walk down the hall and into a wall. That's @ 3 mph. 

2) Run down the hall and into a wall. That's @ 10 mph. 

Think about walking or running around a corner into someone doing the same. Which would you prefer? That's what other users experience.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I've said it before and I'll say it again - the fact that mountain bikes are slow as hell going uphill (slower than trail runners unless the grade is really easy) is the only thing that allows us to share trail systems with hikers and other users. If you could go 15-20 everywhere, it would be a nightmare for everyone else. 

Slow climbing is the price we pay for access, IMO. And I for one am happy with that.

-Walt


----------



## ACree (Sep 8, 2004)

Harold said:


> Yep.
> 
> And for the record, we should all speak up when we see someone else riding this way (ebike or not). Tell that rider that their behavior is not acceptable.
> 
> ...


Trail etiquette is becoming a big issue in Western WA. We have had a bunch of new trails go in. Many have one or more directional trails. The result has been a lot of new riders that have learned on one way bike trails. They then go to two way trails and blast the DHs as if they were on a one way trail. FB groups are full of these conversations, and IMO, it'll either get fixed, or we'll start losing access to shared trails and be relegated to bike parks.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

ACree said:


> Trail etiquette is becoming a big issue in Western WA. We have had a bunch of new trails go in. Many have one or more directional trails. The result has been a lot of new riders that have learned on one way bike trails. They then go to two way trails and blast the DHs as if they were on a one way trail. FB groups are full of these conversations, and IMO, it'll either get fixed, or we'll start losing access to shared trails and be relegated to bike parks.


I have seen the same. Urban riders and park riders who are too used to directional trails don't adapt to bidirectional ones farther from civilization.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk


----------



## twd953 (Aug 21, 2008)

Going downhill you have gravity pushing you along. Going uphill you have gravity holding you back. If you hit something at say 15 mph, it doesn't really matter much whether you were going uphill or downhill when you hit it. 

However, your stopping distance will be longer at the same speed going downhill than it would be going uphill. That gives you a bit more reaction time to slow down/stop before having a collision or negative reaction with another trail user. 

So, one could argue that uphill speed isn't as bad as downhill speed. 

However, if you're talking interactions with other trail users, at this point most trail users are not expecting someone to approach them at speed from the downhill direction on a non-motorized trail. Obviously that statement doesn't apply to rolling terrain with short uphills you can carry momentum up, or very low gradient climbs (e.g. less than 3%) where fit riders can carry a lot of speed "uphill".

So, my opinion is that uphill speed isn't in and of itself worse for trail access, but combining uphill speed and downhill speed gives you twice the chance for high closing speed encounters with other trail users and therefore more opportunity for conflict.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

tom erb said:


> So you were going 4-6 mph up hill, and he was going 4X faster @ 16-24 mph up hill or 3X faster @12-18 mph on his e-bike??
> I don't think you are telling the truth....


I don't have a speedometer, nor a radar gun, so my experience is anecdotal. If I had to put numbers to it I would say we were riding about 5mph, and he was going about 15mph, so 3x the speed.

What I really want to do is demo a Pedelect and take it on all the trails I know very well and see exactly how much faster I can cover the distance when traveling uphill. I have years and years of data of my ability to climb segments of my local riding area in strava, on many segments I am right in the middle of the pack for climbing speeds and in the top 1/4 or 1/3 for descents. (roughly).

After seeing how fast this guy is able to ride uphill I bet I could easily cut the times for my climbs in half if not better when I have a motor to help propel me up the hills.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Klurejr said:


> I don't have a speedometer, nor a radar gun, so my experience is anecdotal. If I had to put numbers to it I would say we were riding about 5mph, and he was going about 15mph, so 3x the speed.
> 
> What I really want to do is demo a Pedelect and take it on all the trails I know very well and see exactly how much faster I can cover the distance when traveling uphill. I have years and years of data of my ability to climb segments of my local riding area in strava, on many segments I am right in the middle of the pack for climbing speeds and in the top 1/4 or 1/3 for descents. (roughly).
> 
> After seeing how fast this guy is able to ride uphill I bet I could easily cut the times for my climbs in half if not better when I have a motor to help propel me up the hills.


Lets, get it done. I will chip in a few bucks for you to demo and ebike and see what happens. You would be the best man for the job. (i am not kidding )


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

It is definitely worse for hikers and equestrians. They already hate us and any excuse to ban all bikes will give them more ammo. I hike as many days a week as I ride. Usually 3-4. As a hiker I get passed a lot by bikes at speeds, that as biker don't concern me but if I hated bikes, it would piss me off for sure. Now, you throw hundreds of more bikes(ebikers say they are coming) that can pass me up and down, ugh. I don't think by itself it is worse but add it to downhill speeds and we have a huge new problem.


----------



## veloborealis (Oct 25, 2009)

sfgiantsfan said:


> It is definitely worse for hikers and equestrians. They already hate us and any excuse to ban all bikes will give them more ammo. I hike as many days a week as I ride. Usually 3-4. As a hiker I get passed a lot by bikes at speeds, that as biker don't concern me but if I hated bikes, it would piss me off for sure. Now, you throw hundreds of more bikes(ebikers say they are coming) that can pass me up and down, ugh. I don't think by itself it is worse but add it to downhill speeds and we have a huge new problem.


I hear you.I also hike (10%) and bike (90%). When I hike its mostly with my wife and grandkids. We try to avoid trails that are popular with bikers because it's kind of annoying to have bikes passing all the time and worrying about who's coming around the next blind corner. Most of the trail users where I live are very courteous and coexist with other users remarkably well. Still, the tension is there, and I see and feel it from both sides. I've had hikers comment that they feel they are being run off (not literally) their favorite trails by increased biker traffic. My concern is that ebikes with their enhanced uphill speed and ability to eshuttle more trails will turn a minor annoyance for hikers into outright opposition to bikes on trails. Harder to criticize someone who is using their own power to climb a hill just like you, than someone who is being assisted by a motor.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I have a friend here in PC who had a spinal surgery this spring and can't ride offroad until next year, so he's been temporarily turned into a serious hiker. He's mentioned to me that e-bikes coming from behind are *really* disconcerting and annoying - and this is coming from a lifelong (30+ years) mountain biker. 

I have yet to be passed headed uphill, but I've had a moderately terrifying encounter when I was descending @15mph or so (normal safe descending speed on this trail that I know very well) and a group of e-bikes came around a corner uphill at at least 15 (normally people would climb at 5mph or so on this trail). I ended up in the bushes to avoid the lead rider - and I've *never* in 5 years of riding this trail failed to be able to stop for someone coming the other way. That extra 10mph is a killer when it comes to closing speed.

I get it, I would ride uphill fast too if I had a motor. But man, it's not safe for anyone if it's a 2-way trail. 

-Walt


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

Trail etiquette is personal choice that has nothing to do with whether someone is hiking, biking or ebiking. New mountain bikers as a whole are a problem with leaving the trail since they haven't learned any better yet. No doubt ebikes can get more beginners into mtbing. 

I do see closing speed being a possible problem with ebikes climbing so fast. It would either take wider trails or directional trails. 

I hike as well. Haven't had any ebikers pass me yet but I don't see how it would be any different. I've had plenty of fast XC racers come up behind me moving at 15+mph and a lot of them climb nearly as fast even on our steep hills. Not saying it can't be frightening for some people but just no different than a non assisted bike.

I understand many areas in our country are super sensitive about trail use but there is plenty of problem free ebike riding going on in Europe. I can't help but feel like 90% of the "issues" people keep bringing up are just bias opinions that people on normal mountain bikes do all the time. Like going off trail.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Fajita Dave said:


> Trail etiquette is personal choice that has nothing to do with whether someone is hiking, biking or ebiking. New mountain bikers as a whole are a problem with leaving the trail since they haven't learned any better yet. No doubt ebikes can get more beginners into mtbing.
> 
> I do see closing speed being a possible problem with ebikes climbing so fast. It would either take wider trails or directional trails.
> 
> ...


Most fast XC racers don't start out that way. Takes many miles on trails to become that fast. You can go buy an ebike and first day, be faster than 90% of people that ride real bikes.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Switchblade2 said:


> Walt I am curious what your injured mountain bike friend would think if the Ebiker made a voice signal of their presence while climbing (I do this all to time) to let him know they wanted to pass him? Would he still be pissed off at being passed?


I'm sure that would help. I haven't questioned him about this in detail, but based on where he's hiking, I'm guessing that sight lines play a role sometimes - at 15mph, you've got much less time to react than at 5mph (as we all know when descending).

Again, he's not pissed about being *passed* - he's surprised/startled by the bikes coming up from behind at high speed. Not particularly pleasant when you're out for a hike (go try hiking down a popular descending trail sometime...)

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Switchblade2 said:


> Walt I am curious what your injured mountain bike friend would think if the Ebiker made a voice signal of their presence while climbing (I do this all to time) to let him know they wanted to pass him? Would he still be pissed off at being passed?


I hike a lot and as a mountain biker, I can read how in control a rider is regardless of speed as they pass, so I'm not as concerned they're out of control and are going to hit me as a non rider might be. The annoying things about sharing the trail with riders is if they're going too fast for the sightlines, if they don't make the slightest attempt to acknowledge and accomodate you, slowing down or moving aside a bit, and if there are a zillion riders. I don't mind at all stepping aside to let riders pass, but if I feel like I'm spending half of my time not-hiking, it gets really old really fast.

The best things to make hikers happy is control your speed where you should, be interactive, (say hi, or thanks) and USE A BELL. I personally think Timberbells are the best. Having your first indication that a bike is closing on you is hearing a skid right behind you, is extrememly unerving.


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

Why would it be any different for a hiker? 15mph is 15mph which is a normal occurnace to reach on either bike. Only you can stop in half the distance going uphill at 15mph compared to downhill at 15mph.

If sight lines are the issue it still isn't an ebike problem. There are plenty of trails where most riders can out ride their sight lines and power isn't necessarily the limiting factor for speed. Riders with decades of experience outride their sight lines all the time and the world hasn't ended yet because of it.

I do see closing speed mtb vs mtb with an ebiker going uphill slightly increasing the chance of a head-on collision but it's not a dramatic difference. New riders need to learn the ropes wether on an ebike or not and it's up to the mtb community to help teach them without being jerks about it.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Fajita Dave said:


> Why would it be any different for a hiker? 15mph is 15mph which is a normal occurnace to reach on either bike. Only you can stop in half the distance going uphill at 15mph compared to downhill at 15mph.
> 
> If sight lines are the issue it still isn't an ebike problem. There are plenty of trails where most riders can out ride their sight lines and power isn't necessarily the limiting factor for speed. Riders with decades of experience outride their sight lines all the time and the world hasn't ended yet because of it.
> 
> I do see closing speed mtb vs mtb with an ebiker going uphill slightly increasing the chance of a head-on collision but it's not a dramatic difference. New riders need to learn the ropes wether on an ebike or not and it's up to the mtb community to help teach them without being jerks about it.


Hikers have a huge lobby, they exert a rather large influence on land matters.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Switchblade2 said:


> FD you post is one of the most logical ones on this thread.


Not really. No hiker wants bikes coming at them at 15 from both directions. Hikers get startled when you come up on them no matter what speed. I think it is a bs reason to ban any bikes but it's what they use and it works. Hikers are used to bikes coming at them at normal climbing speeds, double and triple them and there is now a whole new reason to hate bikes.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Look, being able to go DH speeds uphill just makes the *whole ride* into a potential conflict zone, rather than just the descending portion. Top speed isn't any higher, but you've massively increased the impact/annoyance to other trail users.

That's not to mention the 2-way bike traffic problem, which I've already experienced. 

That doesn't mean it's impossible to have e-bikes sharing the trails, but it's a big problem that will require (at the least) creative thinking and probably money/trail redesign in places to solve. 

-Walt


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Walt said:


> That doesn't mean it's impossible to have e-bikes sharing the trails, but it's a big problem that will require (at the least) creative thinking and probably money/trail redesign in places to solve.
> 
> -Walt


Once again Walt makes a very reasonable post that hits the nail on the head.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

twd953 said:


> Going downhill you have gravity pushing you along. Going uphill you have gravity holding you back. If you hit something at say 15 mph, it doesn't really matter much whether you were going uphill or downhill when you hit it.
> 
> However, your stopping distance will be longer at the same speed going downhill than it would be going uphill. That gives you a bit more reaction time to slow down/stop before having a collision or negative reaction with another trail user.
> 
> ...


This hits the nail on the head.

There have always been disparities of speeds since mountain bikes were invented. Right now, an experienced MTBr will easily ride a downhill trail 3X faster than a nervous newby. However, when that experienced rider sees that there is a collision with the newby that is imminent, it is far harder for him to slow/stop his bike than an eBiker going uphill under the same conditions. So, downhill speed is a FAR greater concern for safety than uphill speed.

I believe that all of those who are "concerned" about uphill speeds of eBikes, but have never railed about the downhill speed of increasingly capable MTBs are just being disingenuous. They are looking for an excuse to argue against eBikes and their opinions should be discounted accordingly.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Jim_bo said:


> This hits the nail on the head.
> 
> There have always been disparities of speeds since mountain bikes were invented. Right now, an experienced MTBr will easily ride a downhill trail 3X faster than a nervous newby. However, when that experienced rider sees that there is a collision with the newby that is imminent, it is far harder for him to slow/stop his bike than an eBiker going uphill under the same conditions. So, downhill speed is a FAR greater concern for safety than uphill speed.
> 
> I believe that all of those who are "concerned" about uphill speeds of eBikes, but have never railed about the downhill speed of increasingly capable MTBs are just being disingenuous. They are looking for an excuse to argue against eBikes and their opinions should be discounted accordingly.


Oh, I'm concerned about that too. What passes for an XC-ish trail bike these days is far more capable than the "downhill" bikes I was racing on 20+ years ago (my sweet GT LTS had a Judy XL with a massive 100mm of travel!! And Magura hydro rim brakes! Burly!).

E-bikes probably make that worse, since you can pack 10" of travel on, and run DH tires, without killing yourself to get the bike up the hill. In other words, every trail becomes a DH shuttle trail, effectively.

But it's certainly a problem for all mountain bikes.

-Walt


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> This hits the nail on the head.
> 
> There have always been disparities of speeds since mountain bikes were invented. Right now, an experienced MTBr will easily ride a downhill trail 3X faster than a nervous newby. However, when that experienced rider sees that there is a collision with the newby that is imminent, it is far harder for him to slow/stop his bike than an eBiker going uphill under the same conditions. So, downhill speed is a FAR greater concern for safety than uphill speed.
> 
> I believe that all of those who are "concerned" about uphill speeds of eBikes, but have never railed about the downhill speed of increasingly capable MTBs are just being disingenuous. They are looking for an excuse to argue against eBikes and their opinions should be discounted accordingly.


Don't need to look for excuses really, the excuse is built into each and every e-motorbike.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Walt said:


> Oh, I'm concerned about that too. What passes for an XC-ish trail bike these days is far more capable than the "downhill" bikes I was racing on 20+ years ago (my sweet GT LTS had a Judy XL with a massive 100mm of travel!! And Magura hydro rim brakes! Burly!).
> 
> E-bikes probably make that worse, since you can pack 10" of travel on, and run DH tires, without killing yourself to get the bike up the hill. In other words, every trail becomes a DH shuttle trail, effectively.
> 
> ...


Then this is clearly not an eBike issue. It is an MTB issue. Suggesting that eBikes have a contributory role is not more valid than suggesting that MTBs with 160mm travel have a contributory role. So this is inappropriate to even ponder in a thread that presumes uphill speeds are a risk to trail access. It seems clear that the answer to that question is clearly, "NO".


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> They are looking for an excuse to argue against eBikes and their opinions should be discounted accordingly.


King Jim_bo has spoken.... :lol:


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Harryman said:


> King Jim_bo has spoken.... :lol:


You may now rise....


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> Then this is clearly not an eBike issue. It is an MTB issue. Suggesting that eBikes have a contributory role is not more valid than suggesting that MTBs with 160mm travel have a contributory role. So this is inappropriate to even ponder in a thread that presumes uphill speeds are a risk to trail access. It seems clear that the answer to that question is clearly, "NO".


It clearly IS an eBike issue since pedal only bikes cannot travel uphill at 15+ mph.

I already acknowledged that DH speed is an issue that concerns both pedal and eBikes, but uphill speed is an eBike issue alone.

But we already knew some people might come into this thread and try to pretend that no eBikes will ever go uphill at such speeds and there is no way this presents an added risk to access. There seems to be a broken record when it comes to the blind devotion to eBikes and the belief that those who ride them will do no harm.


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

Are you sure you just aren't a super slow climber?

I kid I kid


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Mountain bikes have always struggled with excess speed. More suspension, better tires, and better protection have all made that problem worse in places. That has nothing to do with e-bikes. 

But e-bikes bring extra potential excessive speed problems (through both fast speeds uphill *and* the possibility to ride long travel/heavy DH sleds up climbs with ease to then bomb back down). They obviously have the potential to be disruptive to other users and even dangerous. I've experienced this personally. 

To be honest, if I could magically get rid of the last 25 years of mountain bike innovation, I'd do it. I can have loads of fun on a rigid or minimal travel 26" wheeled bike with rim brakes and 2" tires. Sure, I'll be slower on the DH. That's fine, it's still plenty of fun. 

That genie isn't going back in the bottle, though. Long term, my prediction is that mountain bikes (e or not) will mostly be ridden in bike parks and be banned from most trails.

-Walt


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Klurejr said:


> It clearly IS an eBike issue since pedal only bikes cannot travel uphill at 15+ mph.
> 
> I already acknowledged that DH speed is an issue that concerns both pedal and eBikes, but uphill speed is an eBike issue alone.
> 
> But we already knew some people might come into this thread and try to pretend that no eBikes will ever go uphill at such speeds and there is no way this presents an added risk to access. There seems to be a broken record when it comes to the blind devotion to eBikes and the belief that those who ride them will do no harm.


I think you are contradicting yourself. If speed disparity is the problem, then you have to admit that similar or greater speed disparities exist downhill with an mtb than uphill with an eBike. And given that we have established that stopping distances are far greater downhill, the likelihood of collision is greater downhill. So, if you rate hazards on a scale of 1 to 10, uphill eBike hazards may be a 3 where downhill mtb hazards would likely be a 6 or 7. So, if you accept the risks of downhill mtbs, then you would accept the risk of uphill ebikes. That is unless you are just inherently biased against ebikes.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> I think you are contradicting yourself. If speed disparity is the problem, then you have to admit that similar or greater speed disparities exist downhill with an mtb than uphill with an eBike. And given that we have established that stopping distances are far greater downhill, the likelihood of collision is greater downhill. So, if you rate hazards on a scale of 1 to 10, uphill eBike hazards may be a 3 where downhill mtb hazards would likely be a 6 or 7. So, if you accept the risks of downhill mtbs, then you would accept the risk of uphill ebikes. That is unless you are just inherently biased against ebikes.


Confine the discussion to uphill speeds and you'll be on point instead of just confused.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

life behind bars said:


> Confine the discussion to uphill speeds and you'll be on point instead of just confused.


If I confined the discussion to only uphill speeds then I too would be disingenuous and biased against ebikes. Your request is the same as saying, "just accept my opinion blindly without rational thought".


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> This hits the nail on the head.
> 
> There have always been disparities of speeds since mountain bikes were invented. Right now, an experienced MTBr will easily ride a downhill trail 3X faster than a nervous newby. However, when that experienced rider sees that there is a collision with the newby that is imminent, it is far harder for him to slow/stop his bike than an eBiker going uphill under the same conditions. So, downhill speed is a FAR greater concern for safety than uphill speed.
> 
> I believe that all of those who are "concerned" about uphill speeds of eBikes, but have never railed about the downhill speed of increasingly capable MTBs are just being disingenuous. They are looking for an excuse to argue against eBikes and their opinions should be discounted accordingly.


 So now you have downhill speeds both downhill AND uphill, how is this not going to be a problem on active multiuse trails?


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

leeboh said:


> So now you have downhill speeds both downhill AND uphill, how is this not going to be a problem on active multiuse trails?


The downhill speeds are by far the biggest hazard, yet no one cries about trail access based on this. Uphill speeds are insignificant when compared to downhill speed hazards. So the uphill speed issue is merely an attempt to demonize eBikes as part of an anti-eBike biased agenda.

When you are standing on the beach, no one cares that you have a handful of sand.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Jim_bo said:


> The downhill speeds are by far the biggest hazard, yet no one cries about trail access based on this. Uphill speeds are insignificant when compared to downhill speed hazards. So the uphill speed issue is merely an attempt to demonize eBikes as part of an anti-eBike biased agenda.
> 
> When you are standing on the beach, no one cares that you have a handful of sand.


Have you been to any kind of a meeting about access, ever? All people care about is speed.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> The downhill speeds are by far the biggest hazard, yet no one cries about trail access based on this. Uphill speeds are insignificant when compared to downhill speed hazards. So the uphill speed issue is merely an attempt to demonize eBikes as part of an anti-eBike biased agenda.
> 
> When you are standing on the beach, no one cares that you have a handful of sand.


Apparently the idea that uphill speeds have a certain expectation and that when it is exceeded by double or more is where problems arise seems to escape you. Or, you just choose to ignore it so that you can continue trolling the thread with your anti-regulation fantasy.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I guess you could reconfigure everything so that max allowed DH speed was 5-10mph, and uphill riders could go as fast as they wanted (though yielding to DH maybe?) It wouldn't be very fun to ride a non-e bike anymore, and probably not much fun to ride an e-bike either, but that would solve it. 

Indeed, going uphill at 15 is safer than going down at the same speed. But not by a whole lot. And not when the existing trail users mostly go downhill at that speed (and hikers/other users have built up expectations about where they'll see fast-moving bikes). 

In short, your argument is that since bikes are fast/dangerous/annoying a small fraction of the time, that it's ok if e-bikes are fast/dangerous/annoying *most* of the time. 

That makes zero sense. Bikes would be banned from a lot more places if everyone could go 15mph uphill. Our less-than-trail-running climbing speed is a *benefit* to access, and in fact I think of it as the price we have to pay. Speed that up a lot and many other users are just going to see us as quiet motorcycles.

-Walt


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Walt said:


> I guess you could reconfigure everything so that max allowed DH speed was 5-10mph, and uphill riders could go as fast as they wanted (though yielding to DH maybe?) It wouldn't be very fun to ride a non-e bike anymore, and probably not much fun to ride an e-bike either, but that would solve it.


I think you're just being obtuse here.



> Indeed, going uphill at 15 is safer than going down at the same speed. But not by a whole lot. And not when the existing trail users mostly go downhill at that speed (and hikers/other users have built up expectations about where they'll see fast-moving bikes).


 I disagree. I think going downhill is MUCH more dangerous as stopping distances are FAR greater.



> In short, your argument is that since bikes are fast/dangerous/annoying a small fraction of the time, that it's ok if e-bikes are fast/dangerous/annoying *most* of the time.


That's not what I said... although through your biased filter, that may have been what you read.



> That makes zero sense. Bikes would be banned from a lot more places if everyone could go 15mph uphill. Our less-than-trail-running climbing speed is a *benefit* to access, and in fact I think of it as the price we have to pay. Speed that up a lot and many other users are just going to see us as quiet motorcycles.
> 
> -Walt


I could explain this all again, but you'd just read it with the same biased filters again. My point is still that you are cherry picking issues. If you are concerned about MTB safety and its impact on access, there are many MTB specific concerns you should have that take the priority of your attention. eBikes going uphill is NOT the longest pole in that tent by far.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Jim_bo said:


> If you are concerned about MTB safety and its impact on access, there are many MTB specific concerns you should have that take the priority of your attention. eBikes going uphill is NOT the longest pole in that tent by far.


Hey, I've experienced it firsthand! It might not be the biggest problem mountain bikes have, but it's a new problem that e-bikes bring with them, and it might be a big enough problem to keep them from getting access to a lot of trails.

I honestly don't see the point of denying that the problem exists. It just makes you seem uninterested in how things work in the real world. E-bikes have been banned in Park City partly because of the potential problems, and partly because the people advocating them seem to be a little nuts at times. If you don't approach this sort of situation with some humility, you end up losing long term - these are solvable problems (ie, new e-bike code of conduct says you yield to everyone in both directions? More directional trails?) with a little thought.

-Walt


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> I disagree. I think going downhill is MUCH more dangerous as stopping distances are FAR greater.


yes, when purely discussing DH speed verses a stationary object to Uphill Speed vs a Stationary object. Also "FAR Greater" is pure speculation until you have some numbers to back it up. Depends on the grade of the climb, the surface conditions, etc. Stopping distance down hill is greater, but he gap between it and uphill stopping distances is going to change depending on many factors.

The trails are not full of stationary trail users.

Oncoming speed of 2 moving objects is the issue.

If a bike is traveling DH at 15mph (the posted speed limit for bikes in my local riding area) and someone is climbing at 2-4mph the head on speed is 17-19mph.

If a bike is traveling DH at 15mph and someone is climbing at 15mph the head on speed is now 30mph.

Without a motor to assist, uphill speed is not an issue, with a motor to assist, uphill speed is an issue.

It is really that simple. Without a motor, no one is having this discussion.

Since some land managers are allowing eBikes on MUT's, it will be interesting to see how it plays out.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> The downhill speeds are by far the biggest hazard, yet no one cries about trail access based on this. Uphill speeds are insignificant when compared to downhill speed hazards. So the uphill speed issue is merely an attempt to demonize eBikes as part of an anti-eBike biased agenda.
> 
> When you are standing on the beach, no one cares that you have a handful of sand.


 My point, was that now the same 15 mph downhill speed( for example) now can be obtained going uphill with an e bike. Demonize? Um, no. Just facts. Not biased. Just not legal where I ride. So now you carry beach sand with you? Save the dunes!


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Walt said:


> Hey, I've experienced it firsthand! It might not be the biggest problem mountain bikes have, but it's a new problem that e-bikes bring with them, and it might be a big enough problem to keep them from getting access to a lot of trails.
> 
> I honestly don't see the point of denying that the problem exists. It just makes you seem uninterested in how things work in the real world. E-bikes have been banned in Park City partly because of the potential problems, and partly because the people advocating them seem to be a little nuts at times. If you don't approach this sort of situation with some humility, you end up losing long term - these are solvable problems (ie, new e-bike code of conduct says you yield to everyone in both directions? More directional trails?) with a little thought.
> 
> -Walt


Again, I didn't deny anything, but your biased filter probably saw that I did.

I only recognized that eBikes do not introduce speed as a hazard where speed hasn't been a hazard all along. So, you have never been advocating banning MTBs based on speed, so when a new niche of bike comes in with a speed hazard that is significantly less than the hazard that already exists, it should not be a driving factor. There are no data that supports your uphill speed safety concerns. You are only speculating in a way that suits your bias.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> There are no data that supports your uphill speed safety concerns.


Only physics but that's a poor source for data apparently.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Klurejr said:


> yes, when purely discussing DH speed verses a stationary object to Uphill Speed vs a Stationary object. Also "FAR Greater" is pure speculation until you have some numbers to back it up. Depends on the grade of the climb, the surface conditions, etc. Stopping distance down hill is greater, but he gap between it and uphill stopping distances is going to change depending on many factors.


You are right... there must be numbers to back up a real discussion otherwise it is merely speculation. But you can't simply make up numbers and say that discussion should be based on them as if they are actual and legitimate.



> The trails are not full of stationary trail users.


For eBikes or MTBs.... so what?



> Oncoming speed of 2 moving objects is the issue.
> 
> If a bike is traveling DH at 15mph (the posted speed limit for bikes in my local riding area) and someone is climbing at 2-4mph the head on speed is 17-19mph.
> 
> ...


You seem to be the king of the cherry pickers.

First, you pick your local trails as if they are a standard. However, the discussion of access has largely been based on blanket policy for federal lands. No one has ever argued that local land managers shouldn't be able to implement regulations that are specific to a geographic area. I live in the Mojave desert, so your local conditions mean nothing to me.

Second, you cherry pick your local area because it seems to be an anomoly in that it has an actual speed limit. I've never even seen a trail with a speed limit. And then, you use your speed limit as an assumed speed. But you fail to recognize that if it is legitimate to have a 15mph downhill speed limit, you could also have a 5mph uphill limit. You also fail to recognize that 15mph is an easy speed to achieve on flat ground, so MTBs going in opposite directions at the speed limit would have the same closing speed as in your made up scenario, yet you don't argue for the limitations of MTBs.

Then you wrap it up nicely by taking your cherry picked, made up data; assumed worst case scenarios; only considered scenarios where eBikes could be a factor; and then reach a conclusion as if it is fact. Bah!

FYI: I am a mechanical engineer. One part of my job is performing safety analyses. And while you concoct scenarios that may have catastrophic results, you fail to consider likelihoods of such events. Additionally, you fail to critically examine MTB's safety concerns so that you can provide a true comparison of them with eBikes. By your absurd logic, I could make an argument that no one should be allowed to go outside at all because a meteor could fall from the sky and hit you on the head. But without considering likelihoods and without comparing the full risk analysis to other acceptable risks, it is just meaningless.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> Then you wrap it up nicely by taking your cherry picked, made up data; assumed worst case scenarios; only considered scenarios where eBikes could be a factor; and then reach a conclusion as if it is fact. Bah!


Actually, this is how I concluded my post, you even quoted me in your reply to me:



Klurejr said:


> Since some land managers are allowing eBikes on MUT's, it will be interesting to see how it plays out.


This was implying that we really don't know what is going to happen. I gave one anecdotal example in the original post. That example might play out over and over again all over the country and lead to problems, or it might have been a fluke, only time will tell.

But without motors we are not even having this discussion.

Out of curiosity, where in the Mojave are you? I spent my teenage years in Tehachapi, and rode my dirt bike all over the place in the Mojave.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

I live close to Tehachapi. I ride my mountain bike there last weekend.


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

Apologizing in advance for this book I just typed 

I have no intentions of owning an e-bike but this thread makes me want to move to Europe. Amazingly none of these catastrophic e-bike vs mtb vs hiker issues seem to be a problem over there. 

I think it's perfectly fair to say anywhere that is sensitive with mtb trail access should just straight up ban e-bikes at least for the time being. It would be stupid to risk access for all cycling just so people can ride e-bikes. To the original post anyone venturing off trail is bad for any trail even if access isn't an issue and it isn't specific to any user. I see tons of hiking paths leaving the main trail in our national park where mtbs aren't allowed. At a mtb only directional trail system there are tons of paths around even moderate obstacles on a diamond trail with a huge sign saying "Do not leave the trail, if a section is to hard walk it." Leaving the trail and damaging surrounding foliage is not an e-bike problem.

In terms of safety I had lots of free time today so I decided to do a braking test in my backyard trails which are Virginia clay. Obviously skill level will make braking distance vary by a drastic amount and there are plenty of variables. My testing was crude but I think it was great real world testing. Bike is a 31lbs 2015 GT Sensor with 150mm F, 130m R travel and fairly new DHF tires. All tests were 100% emergency braking on smooth trail with multiple attempts to get a solid average. On flat ground at 15mph my braking distance was 17ft. On a 6% uphill grade at 15mph it was 11ft (got the speed from the downhill before it). Downhill at 15mph, 6% grade was 25-27ft. Small errors on downhill braking made the distance massively further (6ft+). Stopping uphill had very little variability even if I could have stopped harder. Didn't test braking uphill at 5mph because it would only be about 2ft.

So downhill braking at the same 15mph is almost 3 times further than uphill and it's much more difficult to perform that optimum stopping distance. My little experiment suggests Jim_Bo's assertion is correct that downhill speeds are the overwhelming concern regarding trail safety for all users whether on an e-bike or not.

Although someone speeding uphill on an e-bike with a 6% grade at 15mph will stop roughly 9ft further than a mtb at 5mph. I feel like that stopping distance is not at all a problem with approaching hikers. Especially when you consider the braking distance of any downhill rider's speed with approaching hikers which is currently viewed as being acceptable but leans on the line of dangerous. It could be a problem for two mtbers approaching each other. However, any mountain biker riding downhill can have a dramatically higher potential to cause damage than any e-biker traveling uphill. I don't see the e-biker traveling uphill being the significant problem here.

To make sharing with e-bikes viable I do think some small changes to many trail systems would need to happen but by no means would it be anything major. I also think those changes would make mtbing safer in general so everyone benefits from it. Most of the trails around here in central VA would be perfectly safe to share with e-bikes. Best course of action would be a case by case basis depending on the area and sensitivity to access. This shouldn't be a "ban all e-bikes because they're deadly" kind of thing that the majority of the mtb community makes it out to be. I feel like views against e-bikes are greatly exaggerated. I feel like the reality is there are simply some kinks to work out.

Even though I'm not in any way against e-bikes potential for fire does need to be taken into consideration. Even though the chances of one catching on fire are ridiculously low it is still a potential that normal mtbs don't have. In the west where large forest fires are already a problem it would suck to add another potential cause. I'm sure arson and lightning would still be the major fire starters but we don't need to add to the chances of starting more.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Fajita Dave said:


> Apologizing in advance


Changing trails in some places can take decades. Some trail networks have deed restrictions that limit or plainly exclude motorized travel of any kind. Some trail networks cross a myriad of public and private land and will probably never see change other that the outright ban on bicycles. It is a very complex issue with complex solutions when there are solutions but the gist of it is that e-motorbikes are not appropriate usage for many trail networks, just like bicycles aren't. Blanket access will NEVER happen no matter how many changes are proposed. Cliffs notes: e-motorbikers better start advocating for their own and do it in a cohesive and sensible manner because it's going to be a long drawn out affair. Meanwhile the Sierra Club and the like have been working against them for 5 years. That is if you don't want to be relegated to motorized trails, bike parks and eimba ride centers. Carry on.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> I live close to Tehachapi. I ride my mountain bike there last weekend.


My brother in law just started riding and he and my wifes sister still live up there. Have you tried the Leigh trails? Look pretty good. When I was a teen in the 1990's I did not ride MTB. I had a Dirt Bike and rode all over the place up there, mostly fireroads that connected all through town. Also did a ton of riding out in the hills between the city of Mojave and the windmills. You can ride for hours up there without seeing other trail users.



Fajita Dave said:


> I have no intentions of owning an e-bike but this thread makes me want to move to Europe. Amazingly none of these catastrophic e-bike vs mtb vs hiker issues seem to be a problem over there.


https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/04/french-mayor-warns-holidaymakers-illegal-electric-bikes/


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

life behind bars said:


> Changing trails in some places can take decades. Some trail networks have deed restrictions that limit or plainly exclude motorized travel of any kind. Some trail networks cross a myriad of public and private land and will probably never see change other that the outright ban on bicycles. It is a very complex issue with complex solutions when there are solutions but the gist of it is that e-motorbikes are not appropriate usage for many trail networks, just like bicycles aren't. Blanket access will NEVER happen no matter how many changes are proposed. Cliffs notes: e-motorbikers better start advocating for their own and do it in a cohesive and sensible manner because it's going to be a long drawn out affair. Meanwhile the Sierra Club and the like have been working against them for 5 years. That is if you don't want to be relegated to motorized trails, bike parks and eimba ride centers. Carry on.


I already mentioned that in my post. Anywhere with sensitive access should simply ban e-bikes at least for the moment. Letting e-bikes everywhere isn't going to work here in the U.S. like it did in Europe even if all mountain bikers were in favor of it.

Trail access to e-bikes is a simple issue with no complexity. Either the local area finds them acceptable and allows them or not. If mtbing is a sensitive issue then don't allow e-bikes. If mtbing is widely accepted and even encouraged than e-bikes aren't going to cause anyone to lose access.

Trails don't need to be wider, sight lines around sections normally with limited sight lines need to be opened up a little which benefits all trail users anyway. It does not require modifying entire trail systems.

The newest trails being built here by the Shenendoah Vally Bicycle Club are intentially built a bit wide. Simply so vegetation doesn't enclose the trail making it unusable in summer months. It just so happens this also makes sharing with e-bikes very easy. I've only seen one so far but I'm sure there is a decent number of people riding them around here. The ones that I know of are experienced riders who switched to an e-bike.

I'm not sure if there are enough people riding e-bikes yet for their views to carry any weight. They just don't have the numbers to fight for access but I agree they need to do everything they can.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Fajita Dave said:


> I already mentioned that in my post. Anywhere with sensitive access should simply ban e-bikes at least for the moment. Letting e-bikes everywhere isn't going to work here in the U.S. like it did in Europe even if all mountain bikers were in favor of it.
> 
> Trail access to e-bikes is a simple issue with no complexity. Either the local area finds them acceptable and allows them or not. If mtbing is a sensitive issue then don't allow e-bikes. If mtbing is widely accepted and even encouraged than e-bikes aren't going to cause anyone to lose access.
> 
> ...


 " A simple issue with no complexity" Yikes. Anything but. What happens when they start poaching motorized trails? Seen them around already. MA and New England have lots of mt bike areas, less so for motorized access. There are a very complex mish mash rules for state, local, and forest/park land use. Add in conservation deed restrictions against motorized vehicles as well as some private land holdings. Some trails run across several of these at a time, and everything changes once you cross a town border. Please look outside your local area and observe that it's not so simple.


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

leeboh said:


> " A simple issue with no complexity" Yikes. Anything but. What happens when they start poaching motorized trails? Seen them around already. MA and New England have lots of mt bike areas, less so for motorized access. There are a very complex mish mash rules for state, local, and forest/park land use. Add in conservation deed restrictions against motorized vehicles as well as some private land holdings. Some trails run across several of these at a time, and everything changes once you cross a town border. Please look outside your local area and observe that it's not so simple.


As my post clearly stated any LOCAL area needs to deem whether they're legal to ride on trails or not. If people are illegally riding e-bikes on non motorized trails that is a problem that area's community and law enforcement needs to address.

Many areas have trails with restricted access to certain users. E-bikes will be no different. There is a area here we're trying to gain access to but a certain wealthy neighbourhood wants to keep them walking only for their personal use. Until recently you weren't even allowed to run there. Another area is still restricted to walking only because it was the land owners request who donated the land.

One thing that never helps anyone is a rediculous exaggeration of any users impact. Pedal assist bikes have no more impact on the trail than anyone else and significantly less than equestrian. Hikers love to exaggerate the impact of us mountain bikers when trying to get our access shut down. It's important for all parties involved to be factual and realistic instead if starting a torch lit mob.

How do you poach motorized trails on an e-bike?


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Nice work Dave. 

One of my main problems is the uphill speed. Yes, of course it takes much longer to stop on downhills then uphills. Basically the only way a downhill rider can compensate is to slow down. Its freaking hard for me to get uphill, especially on my SS. I don't want to have to make up for that extra 9 feet by slowing down. Probably more than 9 ft if you add in reaction time, who knows if the uphill guy is even looking at you etc. Im just guessing but I would have to slow down to 10mph or less to feel safe on most of the trails I ride here to make up for that difference.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

One of the biggest problems with this whole discussion is that people aren't on the same plane. Pro eBikers tend to discuss overarching policies, in particular BLM and USFS policies that apply to federal land and are applicable to most everyone here. Anti eBikers tend to talk about "on my local trails" and "how fast I can climb a hill", etc. 

No pro-eBiker has said (that I have seen) that local LM's should not be able to manage based on specific, local conditions. But it seems the anti eBikers keep dragging the discussion of overall policy back to themselves or their local trails or their local LMs.

Gotta get on the same page if a discussion is going to be useful.


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Nice work Dave.
> 
> One of my main problems is the uphill speed. Yes, of course it takes much longer to stop on downhills then uphills. Basically the only way a downhill rider can compensate is to slow down. Its freaking hard for me to get uphill, especially on my SS. I don't want to have to make up for that extra 9 feet by slowing down. Probably more than 9 ft if you add in reaction time, who knows if the uphill guy is even looking at you etc. Im just guessing but I would have to slow down to 10mph or less to feel safe on most of the trails I ride here to make up for that difference.


It's definitely worth pointing out my braking experiment was under nearly ideal conditions. It was with multiple runs and I took my shortest braking distances along with reaction time not being factored in. It was also on hero dirt from the rain we had earlier.

I think it's also worth pointing out that reaction time and conditions will have a much greater effect on stopping distance to whoever is descending. Traveling faster you will travel further before the brakes are applied taking reaction time into account. Muddy or super dry conditions with less traction will have much less effect on braking distance uphill since gravity is still helping stop you and will be exponentially longer downhill. In my test very marginal errors in braking drastically increased distance. Just a split second front tire lock or the rear lifting will easily add 6-10ft but it had almost no effect uphill.

I definitely agree it sucks having a downhill run interrupted when it just took an hour to climb up it! With that being said even if everyone but me were on an e-bike I don't think I would change my downhill riding. More users overall on a trail would be a much bigger problem.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> One of the biggest problems with this whole discussion is that people aren't on the same plane. Pro eBikers tend to discuss overarching policies, in particular BLM and USFS policies that apply to federal land and are applicable to most everyone here. Anti eBikers tend to talk about "on my local trails" and "how fast I can climb a hill", etc.
> 
> No pro-eBiker has said (that I have seen) that local LM's should not be able to manage based on specific, local conditions. But it seems the anti eBikers keep dragging the discussion of overall policy back to themselves or their local trails or their local LMs.
> 
> Gotta get on the same page if a discussion is going to be useful.


Yep, I keep talking about my local trails in reaction to pro ebikers discussing overarching policies, that one size fits all.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> One of the biggest problems with this whole discussion is that people aren't on the same plane. Pro eBikers tend to discuss overarching policies, in particular BLM and USFS policies that apply to federal land and are applicable to most everyone here. Anti eBikers tend to talk about "on my local trails" and "how fast I can climb a hill", etc.
> 
> No pro-eBiker has said (that I have seen) that local LM's should not be able to manage based on specific, local conditions. But it seems the anti eBikers keep dragging the discussion of overall policy back to themselves or their local trails or their local LMs.
> 
> Gotta get on the same page if a discussion is going to be useful.


 Federal land, BLM, USFS in New England? Not so much. Are there huge amounts East of the Mississippi?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Fajita Dave said:


> As my post clearly stated any LOCAL area needs to deem whether they're legal to ride on trails or not. If people are illegally riding e-bikes on non motorized trails that is a problem that area's community and law enforcement needs to address.
> 
> Many areas have trails with restricted access to certain users. E-bikes will be no different. There is a area here we're trying to gain access to but a certain wealthy neighbourhood wants to keep them walking only for their personal use. Until recently you weren't even allowed to run there. Another area is still restricted to walking only because it was the land owners request who donated the land.
> 
> ...


 My typo, NON motorized trails.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> One of the biggest problems with this whole discussion is that people aren't on the same plane. Pro eBikers tend to discuss overarching policies, in particular BLM and USFS policies that apply to federal land and are applicable to most everyone here. Anti eBikers tend to talk about "on my local trails" and "how fast I can climb a hill", etc.
> 
> No pro-eBiker has said (that I have seen) that local LM's should not be able to manage based on specific, local conditions. But it seems the anti eBikers keep dragging the discussion of overall policy back to themselves or their local trails or their local LMs.
> 
> Gotta get on the same page if a discussion is going to be useful.


 For me here in MA, all trails are local. As it is. Almost every town has conservation areas, some open to bikes, some not. Add in open space and some private land owners, Trustees of the Reservation come to mind here in MA. Lots of state forest and parks, some with a state wide guideline, others with some local rules and regs. One page, good luck with that. Would be better for a state wide or federal agency discussions.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Is there any support for an e-bikes yield to other riders in both directions rule? Ie, if you collide head on with a descending rider on your e-bike, it's on you (since you at least theoretically can go really fast uphill)? I personally don't mind pulling aside for someone who is enjoying some DH flow as long as there's space/time to do it, and I imagine it would be even easier on an e-bike where getting up to speed again is relatively easy to do.

I'm not sure it's practical, but if it was, that would solve a lot of problems (in theory at least). Combine with designating more trails directional for bikes?

You could still scare the living daylights out of hikers, though.

-Walt


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

leeboh said:


> For me here in MA, all trails are local. As it is. Almost every town has conservation areas, some open to bikes, some not. Add in open space and some private land owners, Trustees of the Reservation come to mind here in MA. Lots of state forest and parks, some with a state wide guideline, others with some local rules and regs. One page, good luck with that. Would be better for a state wide or federal agency discussions.


If your opinion is based only on your state, then yes, it should be discussed in a state forum.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

leeboh said:


> Federal land, BLM, USFS in New England? Not so much. Are there huge amounts East of the Mississippi?


It doesn't matter to be honest. If you are talking to New England specifically you are talking to a fraction of the land in the country. Additionally, there are places in New England that have successfully combined e-bikes and bikers so it's not exactly a foreign concept there either.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Walt said:


> Is there any support for an e-bikes yield to other riders in both directions rule? Ie, if you collide head on with a descending rider on your e-bike, it's on you (since you at least theoretically can go really fast uphill)? I personally don't mind pulling aside for someone who is enjoying some DH flow as long as there's space/time to do it, and I imagine it would be even easier on an e-bike where getting up to speed again is relatively easy to do.
> 
> I'm not sure it's practical, but if it was, that would solve a lot of problems (in theory at least). Combine with designating more trails directional for bikes?
> 
> ...


I would be on board with that. I don't ride an e-bike but putting myself in that position I don't see why I would mind.

The hiker issue isn't one I'm terribly exposed to just because of the paradigm where I ride.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

This is why I will never use my e-bike (conversion) in a popular area, ever. When I see people I will probably go to pedal-only. I will only haul ass alone up hills/mountains when I can see at least a few hundred feet ahead, otherwise it will be at the usual 5 mph, maybe a bit faster now. No need to get to the mountaintop that fast. I'm lucky that I live right next to Jamul CA where there are about 10 people per square mile, it's an e-bike dream.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> If a bike is traveling DH at 15mph and someone is climbing at 15mph the head on speed is now 30mph.


What pedal-only bike can do 15 mph uphill, can you give some examples?


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Walt said:


> To be honest, if I could magically get rid of the last 25 years of mountain bike innovation, I'd do it. I can have loads of fun on a rigid or minimal travel 26" wheeled bike with rim brakes and 2" tires. Sure, I'll be slower on the DH. That's fine, it's still plenty of fun.
> 
> Can we at least keep 8-speed cassettes and hydraulic brakes? thanks
> 
> That genie isn't going back in the bottle, though. Long term, my prediction is that mountain bikes (e or not) will mostly be ridden in bike parks and be banned from most trails. -Walt


Two types of trails: popular and virtually abandoned. I like virtually abandoned, it's much simpler, only the occasional hello, and hardly any chance of being banned. Popular = the more humans concentrate in one place, the more problems there are. This isn't unique to e-bikes, mountain bikes, bikes in general. It happens with EVERY subject. More people together = more arguing. You guys should quit pretending that e-bikes are the only problem in the world. Our country is losing its democratic core values as we type and we are arguing about bicycles on trails. Some of us need to put that fact in perspective.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Walt said:


> I have a friend here in PC who had a spinal surgery this spring and can't ride offroad until next year, so he's been temporarily turned into a serious hiker. He's mentioned to me that e-bikes coming from behind are *really* disconcerting and annoying - and this is coming from a lifelong (30+ years) mountain biker.
> 
> I have yet to be passed headed uphill, but I've had a moderately terrifying encounter when I was descending @15mph or so (normal safe descending speed on this trail that I know very well) and a group of e-bikes came around a corner uphill at at least 15 (normally people would climb at 5mph or so on this trail). I ended up in the bushes to avoid the lead rider - and I've *never* in 5 years of riding this trail failed to be able to stop for someone coming the other way. That extra 10mph is a killer when it comes to closing speed.
> 
> ...


I'm going to try and stick with fire roads uphill if I can help it. I would imagine it's dangerous to the e-biker themselves to go up a twisty trail with blind spots at 15 mph, just like it is on a pedal-only bike 15 mph downhill on the same trail. Just because the e-bike can go faster doesn't mean it's going to handle better, if anything it will handle worse because of the excess weight. They are taking a risk going that fast too.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Walt said:


> Oh, I'm concerned about that too. What passes for an XC-ish trail bike these days is far more capable than the "downhill" bikes I was racing on 20+ years ago (my sweet GT LTS had a Judy XL with a massive 100mm of travel!! And Magura hydro rim brakes! Burly!).
> -Walt


Not to get off topic but this is the one thing I don't understand about the other veterans on here in other forums outside this one. There is this trendy, perfectionistic sense that all bikes that are suddenly 'outdated', because the industry goes in a new direction every six months, are now by definition unfit to ride on dirt. And many if not most of the elitists that think this used to ride the same bikes they now condemn! I've seen the sarcastic pushback about this on other threads. When 11-speeds came out, some of the replies were "Oh, 3x10-speeds are outdated now, they are complete crap, watch, soon there will be 'data' that says they are even dangerous to ride".

Whenever someone posts that there is a new Chinese $400 carbon frame out there, or they want to get their kid a $400 bike, there are about 100 people that reply "Don't do it, he'll get killed, the bike will instantly disintegrate the moment it touches dirt, it will fall apart right under him within a few miles, better off buying a single speed or gravel bike, etc." Really. That $400 XC bike in 2018 is the same bike that cost $2000 25 years ago, that was the cool 'advanced' bike with disk brakes and a cassette. So 25 years ago it rules the trails and now it's not fit for even leaving the pavement. Like the dirt became 100 times more advanced since the 1990's. Nice logic. 30 years ago everyone would kill to have what costs $500 today. Maybe all that formaldehyde-laced Budweiser has dulled their memory or something.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

richj8990 said:


> That $400 XC bike in 2018 is the same bike that cost $2000 25 years ago, that was the cool 'advanced' bike with disk brakes and a cassette. So 25 years ago it rules the trails and now it's not fit for even leaving the pavement. Like the dirt became 100 times more advanced since the 1990's. Nice logic. 30 years ago everyone would kill to have what costs $500 today. Maybe all that formaldehyde-laced Budweiser has dulled their memory or something.


Not necessarily, that bike 25-30 years ago most likely had a much more robust frame. It was designed to be ridden harder than an entry level bike. The $400 XC bike is designed to be what it is, an entry level XC bike whose design parameters reflect that. Yes, the components are out of this world better but the frames are most likely two completely different animals.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

richj8990 said:


> Not to get off topic but this is the one thing I don't understand about the other veterans on here in other forums outside this one. There is this trendy, perfectionistic sense that all bikes that are suddenly 'outdated', because the industry goes in a new direction every six months, are now by definition unfit to ride on dirt.


Hey, that's not how I feel at all. Mountain bikes got "better" in that they go faster. They didn't get more fun. Then again, I was a lot more capable of having fun 25 years ago...

You're on a consumerreview.com site where people obsess about gear. The gear matters a lot less than the trails and the friendships and the experiences, of course, but those things aren't as fun to put on your gram scale and argue about.

-Walt


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

richj8990 said:


> Not to get off topic but this is the one thing I don't understand about the other veterans on here in other forums outside this one. There is this trendy, perfectionistic sense that all bikes that are suddenly 'outdated', because the industry goes in a new direction every six months, are now by definition unfit to ride on dirt.


You mean like the gravel bikes you rail against at every opportunity? And then attempt to disparage others with "elitist"? Credibility = zero.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

richj8990 said:


> Not to get off topic but this is the one thing I don't understand about the other veterans on here in other forums outside this one. There is this trendy, perfectionistic sense that all bikes that are suddenly 'outdated', because the industry goes in a new direction every six months, are now by definition unfit to ride on dirt. And many if not most of the elitists that think this used to ride the same bikes they now condemn! I've seen the sarcastic pushback about this on other threads. When 11-speeds came out, some of the replies were "Oh, 3x10-speeds are outdated now, they are complete crap, watch, soon there will be 'data' that says they are even dangerous to ride".


This from the guy who insists that 26ers can't be ridden on some trails, that you can't ride with V-brakes nor mechanical discs and that you have to follow the trend of wider tires to ride real trails?


----------



## Fajita Dave (Mar 22, 2012)

Walt said:


> Is there any support for an e-bikes yield to other riders in both directions rule? Ie, if you collide head on with a descending rider on your e-bike, it's on you (since you at least theoretically can go really fast uphill)? I personally don't mind pulling aside for someone who is enjoying some DH flow as long as there's space/time to do it, and I imagine it would be even easier on an e-bike where getting up to speed again is relatively easy to do.
> 
> I'm not sure it's practical, but if it was, that would solve a lot of problems (in theory at least). Combine with designating more trails directional for bikes?
> 
> ...


I think e-bikes yeilding under all circumstances would sort of be the natural progression of our current trail etiquette. I feel like the downhill rider still needs to be responsible about their speed so it's kind of a grey area. I'm not one who should talk about responsible downhill speeds either.

I tend to yield to downhill riders myself and most people around here do the same. When I've stopped downhill to yield for climbers they tell me to come through.

I've scared hikers while hiking. There's some hikers who get scared over basically anything and e-bikes wouldn't make any difference. I used to ride with a bell and use it all the time. I found it confused 80% of hikers and they stand in the middle of the trail looking around confused. To some extent I can understand as I go for hikes to "get lost" in the woods but you need some situational awareness.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

I think a policy that ebikes yield to other bikes is a pipedream, although it could be one of those policies that makes people feel like the powers that be are being responsible. If I was an emtb rider, I'd take the position that I'll yield to other users, including other riders, just like I do on a mtb. Respectfully, and when it makes sense, not when a sign tells me to. It's not that I'm an idiot, but IME, when encountering another user, one or both of you make an attempt to give way. Often, the pedestrian does, even though they don't have to, or the uphill rider may, because it's easier for them, or they can see you're having fun and don't want to spoil it. It's often more logical for one user to get out of the way, and that user usually does.

Unless it's equestrians, they never give ground.

Concerning closing speeds, I've had more than a few close encounters on the most popular downhill trail here, which is narrow, steep, loose gravel, and for mtbs, essentially a DH only trail. I've seen one person riding up it in over 30 years of riding down it. It's moto legal, and they ride it in both directions. Recently, it's become known as a hiking trail, and in spite of the two wheeled traffic, people do hike it. About the worse hiking trail around for that reason, but whatever.

I don't have data on speeds, I don't track any of my rides even. I'm guessing that motos climb it at 5-15mph, mostly at 10 or under. They can't go very fast, it's tight and narrow for a moto. Descending, a mtb is faster than they can manage for example. Bikes descend at likely 10-15ish. It's twisty, loose and technical in spots, no long straightaways where you can let it rip.

With almost everyone riding 4 strokes these days, you can't hear motos climbing over the noise you make, so they appear without warning, and I've had a few close calls where you both skid past each other, bars overlapping. It's scary. I usually stop a few times to see if I can hear them coming. With hikers, it's rare that I even have to panic stop, the closing speed is low enough that there's time.

I'm not suggesting that this is an absolute piece of evidence that ebikes are incompatible, just submitting my experiences on the same trail with closing speeds between users traveling at different speeds. FWIW, no one has died or been seriously injured to my knowledge in collisions on this trail, I've heard of a few collisions and minor injuries over the years. Lots of soiled undies though.

Since I don't have data, here's some vids of typical riders on the same trail.

Moto





Mtb - FF to 2:00
[video]https://www.trailforks.com/video/5783/[/video]

Since this is one of the few ebike legal trails here, I'm interested to see if we start seeing emtbs climbing it, it'd be less like torture with a motor, that's for sure.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

richj8990 said:


> What pedal-only bike can do 15 mph uphill, can you give some examples?


I was speaking of bikes with a motor going 15mph uphill, not a pedal only bike.

I deleted a few posts where a forum member was hurling insults and trying to skirt the language filters, I also deleted the posts of those who quoted said user. Please make your points without insulting other forum users.


----------



## KenPsz (Jan 21, 2007)

I know many here want to make this a e-bike only "problem" and discussion but everything here I have experienced first hand with non-motorized bikes. A douche bag is a douche bags and I have lost count of the number of times "serious" bikers in a group have run me off the trail as they are going up or down because I was in their way for their "serious" ride.

Those interactions are now why I have a cow bell on my bike and sound like the ice cream man. So those douche bags know I'm there and hopefully slow down. As a added positive hikers are super happy and meet me with a smile and a hello as they hear me coming up, instead of the stealth non-motorized ninja bike at speed. 

We as bikers need to push better trail etiquette across the board.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

KenPsz said:


> I know many here want to make this a e-bike only "problem" and discussion but everything here I have experienced first hand with non-motorized bikes. A douche bag is a douche bags and I have lost count of the number of times "serious" bikers in a group have run me off the trail as they are going up or down because I was in their way for their "serious" ride.
> 
> Those interactions are now why I have a cow bell on my bike and sound like the ice cream man. So those douche bags know I'm there and hopefully slow down. As a added positive hikers are super happy and meet me with a smile and a hello as they hear me coming up, instead of the stealth non-motorized ninja bike at speed.
> 
> We as bikers need to push better trail etiquette across the board.


"we" already do.


----------

