# Why Are E-Bikes Such a Touchy Subject in the U.S.?



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

https://www.vitalmtb.com/features/Why-Are-E-Bikes-Such-a-Touchy-Subject-in-the-U-S,2089

First of all, comparing the EU to the US is like comparing apples to oranges. The US has vastly more wilderness and a larger park system. And people aren't crammed in a small space. _Michael Ferrentino's_ comments in the audio miss the whole point calling emtb opponents selfish and uninformed, and the (5:30) "Americans have a cultural problem with sharing". *No, it's not about sharing*. It's about opening the door to more and more powerful mopeds on the trails. That's the bottom line... Once the door is open for the simplest of motors, gradually more and more powerful bikes will be introduced. If we've learned anything from the bike industry is that they love to introduce newer and better "technology" every year to pique the rider's wallets. The "classification" of motor bikes is a fallacy since there's no way for anyone to police or enforce these mythical standards on the trails and was created for political reasons. What will end up happening is "other interests" will end up grouping regular mountain bikes with emtb and base trail access decision on the merits of both groups as a single entity.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

I respectfully disagree. 

Brushless motor technology is mature. Slapping on a more powerful motor is a fairly trivial task in engineering. If it can be done, it's already been done.

The state of the art of portable battery technology is lithium-ion, with nothing else beyond the horizon. Proof is in the construction of multiple gigafactories around the world, which all started with Tesla's first gigafactory in Nevada. 

So while you predict that more powerful bikes will soon be introduced, I think the opposite will happen: the trend will be towards smaller motors with smaller batteries, which most importantly equates to lighter weight. There will be some decrease in cost as well, although saving a few hundred $ off a $3500+ ebike isn't going to make a sizable impact.

The e-bike all started with commuting, a point A-to-B task. That's why we see most e-bikes with 400-500WH batteries weighing 8 lbs and costing $750-$950. 

The e-MTB is a different animal. Most folks go from point A to point A. I foresee the trend being smaller 100-250WH batteries, saving 4-6 pounds, and keeping extra batteries in the car (if necessary) or extra batteries in the pack for long excursions. Even though the occasional 500+ watt boost is great for getting up steep sections, most e-MTB riders on this forum have reported keeping the assist planted in one of the "eco" modes between 100-200 watts.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Eric, nothing your said convinces me that emtb's and regular mountain bikes won't be grouped into one category of users. And nothing reassured me that there will be safeguards against preventing more powerful motors and bikes with throttles on the trails. Lighter and smaller batteries just make emtb's look more like regular bikes which further makes me think they will eventually be lumped in with mountain bikes as a single category of user.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Why are they so touchy? Answer: Ignorance, intolerance.

All of these other reasons are just fear mongering to justify the opponents point of views.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Regular bikes and e-assisted bikes can get lighter, faster, and more expensive, but it's the riders themselves that ultimately determine how fast they go and the intensity of "acceleration forces" (physics definition, changing speed/direction) going into the trail to damage it. A skilled & fit rider on an ebike will ride faster than a home gamer on the same ebike. That skilled & fit rider will still be limited in speed by the trail. Trails can limit a bike's speed by simply being twisty, narrow, and/or full of obstacles. A lighter bike is fun to ride. Going fast can be fun, as long as it's in your comfort zone, otherwise it's scary. Narrow technical single track is fun, extremely so with the right bike. Making the bike heavier with meaty DH stuff will impact the ride in a similar way it impacts a normal bike (sluggish)--you have to weigh the pros and cons when tuning equipment performance and come to a compromise, just like anything else.

Here's a look at bikes in the future according to an actual bike designer: Zukunftsvisionen Canyon

What I see is another "sunk cost fallacy". People have a lot emotionally invested in their current experience (on a bikes). They paid a lot to make such an experience finer, and stressed their funds, buying high end bits, perhaps carbon upgrades throughout, and are afraid of it becoming outdated. It's similar to all the hate around Apple. It's like the industry's moving on with bigger and better stuff and people don't want to get left behind, but they also don't want to dish out their cash for the latest and greatest. They try to cling to anything that supports their resistance against getting it. It's easy for some to continue to hate Apple, since they haven't tried it, can't afford it, and/or its standard levels just aren't attractive enough (regarding performance, value, etc.). This is just taken further with ebikes, compared to Boost and other new standards like wheel size, trying to outright ban them so there is no chance for them to take off and invoke jealousy.

Regarding the threat to trail access, bickering among trail users is the big threat, not trail erosion. Why can't people just be nice and civil, responsible for their actions? With more people on the trail, the more worn it gets, but nothing comes close to the erosion rain causes. Global warming allegedly creating storms with heavier precipitation (due to more evaporation) isn't helping, but switching from fossil fuels to e is one way to mitigate human influence, and I find merit in that. Ex. more motivation to ride to the trailhead, instead of hauling the bike to it. Don't be surprised seeing ebike users being around during trail maintenance efforts.

There's a saying that goes something like this: the world loves a lover, but the opposite is true, in that it hates a hater. What the haters don't realize is that ebikes are only going to get more attention the more they hate on them. If there's actually no real problem with the ebikes... It's one way to buy speed, just like buying carbon stuff is, except it only really goes fast uphill, slighter faster on flats, and compromises by handling like an excessively heavy bike going down and in the narrow twisty parts. That article the OP linked to mentioned that new ebike sales are outpacing regular new high-end bike sales. I wonder what there is about ebikes that's lovable. Is the ability to get assistance going uphill all there is to it? Does that novelty wear off, and leave you with a heavy bike with compromised geo/handling, which may be less preferable overall to a normal bike?

I predict that there will be efforts to cut the weight down in ebikes, like Eric suggests. I'll take it a step further and predict that normal mtb riders, even those who have previously said they will never get an ebike, will be starting to buy into ebikes within 5 years. I also predict that the bike industry changes some standards on both normal and e-assisted bikes within 5 years, based on tech they learned from researching ebikes.

I expect ebikes to get themselves banned, honestly. I'm pretty sure complaints like "biker was going uphill in an excessively fast manner that threatened the safety of fellow trail riders" can be figured out by land management organizations...


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

PinoyMTBer said:


> Why are they so touchy? Answer: Ignorance, intolerance.
> 
> All of these other reasons are just fear mongering to justify the opponents point of views.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


That's a rather dismissive attitude considering all that's been said. One of the problems with emtb advocates is precisely what you've stated. Instead of understanding and addressing the reasons for opposition proponents take such a dismissive stance that opponents are selfish and just good "sharers".


----------



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

PinoyMTBer said:


> Why are they so touchy? Answer: Ignorance, intolerance.
> 
> All of these other reasons are just fear mongering to justify the opponents point of views.


The same words could be used to describe people who refuse to acknowledge and understand that motor/no motor is an important delineation for many people but it would be mean spirited and divisive.

America isn't Europe, yet. The wildness of our parks and wilderness areas are a national treasure and there are many reasons why good (not intolerant or ignorant) people would like to see that preserved. Celebrate diversity!


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> America isn't Europe, yet. The wildness of our parks and wilderness areas are a national treasure and there are many reasons why good (not intolerant or ignorant) people would like to see that preserved. Celebrate diversity!


You presume that class 1 e-bikes will affect that pristine wilderness in some negative way. That has yet to be demonstrated.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> The same words could be used to describe people who refuse to acknowledge and understand that motor/no motor is an important delineation for many people but it would be mean spirited and divisive.
> 
> America isn't Europe, yet. The wildness of our parks and wilderness areas are a national treasure and there are many reasons why good (not intolerant or ignorant) people would like to see that preserved. Celebrate diversity!


 So you are a strong advocate for never allowing bicycles of any kind in our wilderness areas?


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Cuyuna said:


> You presume that class 1 e-bikes will affect that pristine wilderness in some negative way. That has yet to be demonstrated.


I'm not a fan of that argument either. I don't think the issue is as much about protecting the parks as it is about mountain bikes being in the same category of users as emtbs which will open up a whole Pandora's box of access issues as the BLM, National Park service, and National Forest service have all defined ebikes as OVH. I would hope we could all the on the same page regarding this.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

My answer is: because US laws weren't written intelligently as they were in the EU. If 250W/15.5 mph limits were actually the law (and there were severe penalties for manufacturers skirting those laws) I think a decent chunk of people would have no problem with e-bikes at all. 

I wouldn't (and don't) have a problem with bikes with that level of assist, which is plenty to have a "normal" mountain bike experience for the disabled/elderly/exercise averse and should create negligible extra impacts on other users. 

But thanks to having a federal government system with a lot of state/local power over this sort of thing, we have a mishmash of random laws, most of which put both power (750w) and speed (20mph) much higher than most people are comfortable with - totally appropriate for a bike path or bike lane (what the laws were written for), but a potential disaster on a MUT. 

It's the wild west out there for manufacturers, who don't have any meaningful fear of repercussions if they sell bikes that aren't legal, which is another problem (look at Luna openly advertising 3000w kits as "legal for offroad use only" and such). We don't like regulation as much in the US as in Europe, in general, and in this case, that's probably a bad thing. 

I think (personally) the best way forward is for the manufacturers themselves to push for more rules about Class 1 (or even to create a new class specifically for e-mtb) and more accountability. Then it's up to the folks who want to ride e-bikes to push for rule changes at the local level. A LOT of trails have already been taken off the table, though, and it's going to be really hard to get those back without a sustained and concerted effort (which should have started 5 years ago, c'est la vie). 

Enough success stories at the local level will eventually (IMO) allow changes in policy at the BLM/USFS/etc, assuming that the e-bike riders and manufacturers want it badly enough to put in the work.

-Walt


----------



## DL723 (Sep 25, 2017)

Lemonaid said:


> I'm not a fan of that argument either. I don't think the issue is as much about protecting the parks as it is about mountain bikes being in the same category of users as emtbs which will open up a whole Pandora's box of access issues as the BLM, National Park service, and National Forest service have all defined ebikes as OVH. I would hope we could all the on the same page regarding this.


Most of the Park memo's on ebikes reference the IMBA's stance and were written in 2015 or before. Makes sense they took a hard stance until more info on new tech could be gathered. But with the IMBA's update, I wouldn't be surprised if the Park system issued another update going the other direction. May not happen all at once, but wouldn't be surprised over the next year or two.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> My answer is: because US laws weren't written intelligently as they were in the EU. If 250W/15.5 mph limits were actually the law (and there were severe penalties for manufacturers skirting those laws) I think a decent chunk of people would have no problem with e-bikes at all.
> 
> -Walt


Do you propose a 15.5 MPH speed limit for bikes without assist as well?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

honkinunit said:


> Do you propose a 15.5 MPH speed limit for bikes without assist as well?


That's just the assist speed limit. Perhaps I wasn't clear, sorry about that. Obviously an e-bike (or normal bike) can go much faster than that downhill (or on the flats).

If unassisted riders were going uphill at 20mph, mountain bikes would all have been banned everywhere long ago. Adding more speed on MUTs is simply unacceptable. 15.5/250 keeps e-bikes in the same basic speed range as a normal mountain bike. That's a recipe for access success. More speed? Not so much.

-Walt


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Just read the comments by opponents - it is all "What If?" paranoia.

Personally, I don't give a crap about anyone's opinion who has never ridden a good Class 1 MTB on trails for a few hours. I see on vitalmtb that others share my view.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

honkinunit said:


> Just read the comments by opponents - it is all "What If?" paranoia.
> 
> Personally, I don't give a crap about anyone's opinion who has never ridden a good Class 1 MTB on trails for a few hours. I see on vitalmtb that others share my view.


A lot of headaches have been avoided by forward thinking. If the argument hold water why dismiss them?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> That's just the assist speed limit. Perhaps I wasn't clear, sorry about that. Obviously an e-bike (or normal bike) can go much faster than that downhill (or on the flats).
> 
> If unassisted riders were going uphill at 20mph, mountain bikes would all have been banned everywhere long ago. Adding more speed on MUTs is simply unacceptable. 15.5/250 keeps e-bikes in the same basic speed range as a normal mountain bike. That's a recipe for access success. More speed? Not so much.
> 
> -Walt


1. A true Class 1 eBike can't go 20 MPH up any kind of significant grade unless a pro level rider is putting out their 3-500 watts.

2. The difference between 15.5 MPH and 20 MPH is negligible. Why not make the limit 14.27 MPH? Or 16.1678 MPH?

3. Be careful with your speed limits, because if a 15.5 MPH speed limit uphill is imposed, why wouldn't a 15.5 MPH speed limit for all bikes downhill be imposed?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Lemonaid said:


> A lot of headaches have been avoided by forward thinking. If the argument hold water why dismiss them?


The arguments come from a position of total ignorance and blind hate, that's why.

I've never ridden a Harley, but if I had my way, I'd ban Harley's, because they are noisy and I've heard they suck compared to my Honda. Makes sense, right?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

honkinunit said:


> 1. A true Class 1 eBike can't go 20 MPH up any kind of significant grade unless a pro level rider is putting out their 3-500 watts.
> 
> 2. The difference between 15.5 MPH and 20 MPH is negligible. Why not make the limit 14.27 MPH? Or 16.1678 MPH?
> 
> 3. Be careful with your speed limits, because if a 15.5 MPH speed limit uphill is imposed, why wouldn't a 15.5 MPH speed limit for all bikes downhill be imposed?


1. I can take my cargo bike (75 pounds) with 3 kids riding on it (120# worth) up a 15% grade at 20mph on my 750w/20mph limit bike, which would be class 1 if it weren't for the throttle. No problem at all.

Subtract 150# of that weight and a casual Jane can go 20mph uphill in many places.

2. I don't think the difference between 15 and 20 mph is negligible at all. It's fine if you feel that way, but I think you'd be unhappy pretty quickly on many trails if everyone could easily go 20 anywhere they wanted to. And it's not us that matter - it's the hikers/dog walkers/families out for a stroll, who are far more numerous and *really* hate motorized stuff.

3. The best way to not end up with a speed limit (or just a ban on all bikes, really, because the speed limits would be too hard to enforce) is to make it very, very hard to go too fast on your bike. I've suggested in the past here that trail design can help a lot - more open sight lines, chicanes and speed control features can make a trail simultaneously slower AND more fun/safe for all users. But adding a motor, unless it's very constrained in power, will raise speeds across the board, and that probably is a nonstarter. Bikes are so much faster than hikers already that it's a constant problem.

-Walt


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Lemonaid said:


> That's a rather dismissive attitude considering all that's been said. One of the problems with emtb advocates is precisely what you've stated. Instead of understanding and addressing the reasons for opposition proponents take such a dismissive stance that opponents are selfish and just good "sharers".


Ouch! Did I hit a nerve?


----------



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

Cuyuna said:


> You presume that class 1 e-bikes will affect that pristine wilderness in some negative way.


And you presume that it wouldn't. Millions of outdoor enthusiasts don't have a voice here but I can assure you a significant portion of them value spaces that are primitive and motor-free, I realize that many people can't understand this sentiment but it's important to those who do. People have different opinions and objectives and IMO this country is still big enough to accommodate most everyone.


----------



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

WoodlandHills said:


> So you are a strong advocate for never allowing bicycles of any kind in our wilderness areas?


No, but I am an advocate for reserving the right to keep them out of many of them for previously mentioned reasons. I'm also an advocate for core areas in some wilderness preserves where humans can't intrude no matter what the mode of transport.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> 1. I can take my cargo bike (75 pounds) with 3 kids riding on it (120# worth) up a 15% grade at 20mph on my 750w/20mph limit bike, which would be class 1 if it weren't for the throttle. No problem at all.
> 
> Subtract 150# of that weight and a casual Jane can go 20mph uphill in many places.
> 
> ...


1. I've never seen a Class 1 pedal assist that would put out 750W. Sounds like you bought a "Class 1" that is skirting the rules. My Haibike with a Bosch CX Performance motor, the highest output one they sell, won't get me anywhere near 20 MPH on a 15% grade, even if I put all of my power into it, and I'm a stronger than average rider.

2. I honestly don't know why you are so concerned about uphill/downhill. What difference does a theoretical 15.5 vs. 20 MPH uphill make when someone going the opposite direction can go 30 MPH completely silently, just by releasing the brake lever? Isn't it incumbent upon the rider to control their speed around other trail users regardless of what direction they are going?

3. A class 1 eBike is required to cut power at 20MPH. So class 1 eBikes do not "raise speeds across the board". I can go a lot faster downhill on my 6 inch travel enduro bike than I can on my hardtail eBike. Which bike is an issue?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

I agree with Walt (and think Harry has espoused the same) about the speed limit. Probably the rules won't change. Is it possible for off road areas to post speed limits (15 mph on flat trails, 10 mph on uphills) effectively (just a question, not an argument)? IMO, the best way to regulate e-MTB's on trails is by speed limits.


----------



## DL723 (Sep 25, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> And you presume that it wouldn't. Millions of outdoor enthusiasts don't have a voice here but I can assure you a significant portion of them value spaces that are primitive and motor-free, I realize that many people can't understand this sentiment but it's important to those who do. People have different opinions and objectives and IMO this country is still big enough to accommodate most everyone.


That argument is kind of weird one to make here.. It's the main reason there's strong opposition to any kind of bike in the wilderness. There's probably quite a few people who think all bikes detract from the primitive quality of areas designated wilderness.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

PinoyMTBer said:


> Ouch! Did I hit a nerve?


No, but I've probably ridden with you.. the mountain bike community is a small place.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I don't care how fast e-bikes go.
I don't care how much power e-bikes are allowed or not allowed to have.
I don't care if someone doesn't have to exercise as hard as they might on a mountain bike. 
I don't care how much trail wear they may or may not do.
I don't care if they are allowed on MUTs.

The only thing I care about is that if there are any problems with e-bikes, those problems never affect mountain bike access in any way. Keep the common-sense distinction crystal clear at the obvious motor/no-motor line, then let them stand or fall on their own.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Thought Walt was talking about the difference between Europe having controllers on ebikes cutting off assistance at 25 kph (15.5 mph), vs USA controllers cutting off at 20 mph (32 kph).

Whenever existing solutions face competition from new disruptive technology, they find ways to combat it, including spreading misinformation. Taxi business vs Uber. Retail vs superstores (walmart) vs online retailers (Amazon). Automobile industry vs Tesla. Heck, even Edison (DC) vs Tesla (AC) and fossil fuels vs renewables. It happened with bigger wheels in mtb, and disc brakes on road. The road guys were successful in delaying widespread use, to give their sponsors time to develop it on their own bikes. The mtbers were successful in discouraging fork and tire makers from investing in new bigger wheel optimized parts... brands saw a wave of demand come and go, but now that the hate's gone down, they're creating another wave with new products.

Calling it the wild west makes sense. Legislation take a while to make their way through the system protect things with true merit. Wording accuracy is important too. Inaccurate wording is what's keeping a lot of bills from being passed these days. Differentiating ebikes from regular bikes has already happened in some states. They're not considered to be just like mtbs. They're just saying that there's some overlap in which one category happens to be similar enough. Creating categories gives the industry a clear target to shoot for, when optimizing their designs for a certain user group. Seeing how category 1 gets such support for access, they can justify pitching their designs to people on normal bikes, and put effort in managing this cash cow. Some might even target/condemn modding outfits that threaten the segment.

Speaking about this kind of stuff just emphasizes the fact that ebikes are disruptive new tech. Speed differential is a valid concern. People can say DH bikes let riders go 35+ MPH, that people going 10 MPH would have to deal with, the same way people speak about the issue with ebikes going uphill (not likely with 250W motors, 750W sure). DH guys are kind of rare and are quickly past, not seeing them again for a while. E-mtbs can clog up a downsloping trail if they are being ridden by novices. I don't really see such a big threat from emtb. The speed differential between a cyclist and motor traffic on roads keeps many off of the road, but a big difference is in the weight. An ebike adds under 15 lbs for the motor and battery, not counting reinforcement of other parts. The rider can modulate their speed too, to pass with swiftness at an opportune moment when the trail allows it.

I wonder why there's no collision laws for pedestrian and sporting traffic. Should be like the ski slope etiquette, where the faster/skilled person should avoid the slower one. Could use something to protect people on foot or bike from being hit from the side of from behind, beyond negligence laws.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> And you presume that it wouldn't. Millions of outdoor enthusiasts don't have a voice here but I can assure you a significant portion of them value spaces that are primitive and motor-free, I realize that many people can't understand this sentiment but it's important to those who do. People have different opinions and objectives and IMO this country is still big enough to accommodate most everyone.





DL723 said:


> That argument is kind of weird one to make here.. It's the main reason there's strong opposition to any kind of bike in the wilderness. There's probably quite a few people who think all bikes detract from the primitive quality of areas designated wilderness.


JB's post makes 100% sense to me, I'm one of the people he's talking about. I'm also good with hiking trails that don't allow bikes.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

slapheadmofo said:


> I don't care how fast e-bikes go.
> I don't care how much power e-bikes are allowed or not allowed to have.
> I don't care if someone doesn't have to exercise as hard as they might on a mountain bike.
> I don't care how much trail wear they may or may not do.
> ...


Be good for the manufacturers to know. You can blur the lines as much as you want, they're still a separate entity; and if they impair MTB access, expect trouble.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> 3. Be careful with your speed limits, because if a 15.5 MPH speed limit uphill is imposed, why wouldn't a 15.5 MPH speed limit for all bikes downhill be imposed?


The local trails I ride have a 15mph speed limit, it is actually pretty common in California.

I have not seen any rangers enforcing it however.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> 1. A true Class 1 eBike can't go 20 MPH up any kind of significant grade unless a pro level rider is putting out their 3-500 watts.
> 
> 2. The difference between 15.5 MPH and 20 MPH is negligible. Why not make the limit 14.27 MPH? Or 16.1678 MPH?
> 
> 3. Be careful with your speed limits, because if a 15.5 MPH speed limit uphill is imposed, why wouldn't a 15.5 MPH speed limit for all bikes downhill be imposed?


1. So many ebikers claim "they are just bicycles" and "they just provide a little assist" so if that is the case, why do you need to be able to go 20mph up a significant upgrade when a real bicycle can't? This is the second time on this site I've seen someone post that the US should have followed the EU regulation of 15.5 mph with an ebiker then immediately responding that that is too slow. This just really makes me think it is about the motor and not about being a bicycle with a little help.

2. And that is a big fear, once class 1 ebikes are deemed ok, the argument goes to the difference between 20 and 25 is negligible so 25 MPH should be allowed and it goes on from there. Again, if you really just want to ride a bicycle with a little help, what is wrong with having to ride it at bicycle speeds?

3. Again, are you looking for a bicycle experience or for a motor to push you along faster than an actual bicycle would be traveling?

If ebikes would actually behave just like another bicycle on the trails, I would be a lot more open to them. But I keep seeing they have a desire for more speed.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

fos'l said:


> Be good for the manufacturers to know. You can blur the lines as much as you want, they're still a separate entity; and if they impair MTB access, expect trouble.


Pretty simple, and keeps MTBers from having to care one way or another about all the technicalities.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

chazpat said:


> 2. And that is a big fear, once class 1 ebikes are deemed ok, the argument goes to the difference between 20 and 25 is negligible so 25 MPH should be allowed and it goes on from there.


I was thinking the same thing. Reminds me of what someone else posted earlier about advocating for access for a certain group but only if they meet a certain classification. You eventually have situations like this.... "Why should my bike not be allowed since the only difference is it has a throttle?"



> "The problem, which seems to have been purposely created, is that this category of transportation has multiple groups and someone determined that at least one of the groups is not appropriate for multi use trails. That would be like saying 9 speeds are ok but any other speeds are not. Or certain breeds of horses are ok but others are not. Kinda of insulting to land managers"


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> No, but I am an advocate for reserving the right to keep them out of many of them for previously mentioned reasons. I'm also an advocate for core areas in some wilderness preserves where humans can't intrude no matter what the mode of transport.


 Then we agree on both of those sentences. Scary, isn't it?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

fos'l said:


> I agree with Walt (and think Harry has espoused the same) about the speed limit. Probably the rules won't change. Is it possible for off road areas to post speed limits (15 mph on flat trails, 10 mph on uphills) effectively (just a question, not an argument)? IMO, the best way to regulate e-MTB's on trails is by speed limits.


So you really think there should be an unlimited speed limit for MTBs and a 15 MPH speed limit for eMTBs?

That's insane.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> So you really think there should be an unlimited speed limit for MTBs and a 15 MPH speed limit for eMTBs?
> 
> That's insane.


I do not think that is what is is saying at all. If there a speed limit it would be for both motorized and non-motorized bikes. That is only fair.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

chazpat said:


> 1. So many ebikers claim "they are just bicycles" and "they just provide a little assist" so if that is the case, why do you need to be able to go 20mph up a significant upgrade when a real bicycle can't? This is the second time on this site I've seen someone post that the US should have followed the EU regulation of 15.5 mph with an ebiker then immediately responding that that is too slow. This just really makes me think it is about the motor and not about being a bicycle with a little help.
> 
> 2. And that is a big fear, once class 1 ebikes are deemed ok, the argument goes to the difference between 20 and 25 is negligible so 25 MPH should be allowed and it goes on from there. Again, if you really just want to ride a bicycle with a little help, what is wrong with having to ride it at bicycle speeds?
> 
> ...


1. I don't see anywhere that I said I needed to go any faster than a "normal" bicycle. Please show me where I said that.

2. You are paranoid. A class 1 ebike is now specifically defined in many US states to cut assist at 20 MPH, and People for Bikes is pushing to have that limit adopted across the country. The 20 MPH limit is arbitrary, just like 15.5 MPH, 55 MPH, 30 MPH, or 20 MPH in a school zone. Why choose an arbitrary limit on trails that is different than what is already legislated as the Class 1 ebike limit? What are we going to do, create a Class 0.75 for trails? It makes no sense. Just use 20 MPH.

3. I guarantee if you start pushing a specific SPEED LIMIT for uphill riding, that same SPEED LIMIT will be applied to all bikes in both directions by the powers that be. Just use the already legislated power cutoffs. Please explain what logic you would use with a non-cyclist to advocate that ONLY eBikes should be limited to 15.5 MPH uphill, while a non-eBike has an unlimited uphill speed, and both eBikes and non-eBikes have no downhill speed limit? And what is an "uphill" anyway? 1%? 3% 5% 15%?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Klurejr said:


> The local trails I ride have a 15mph speed limit, it is actually pretty common in California.
> 
> I have not seen any rangers enforcing it however.


15 MPH uphill AND downhill, right?

Which is why I am saying that if people go off the hook with silly "eBike only" speed limits, or "uphill only" speed limits, the people making the rules are just going to apply them across the board, to all bikes, uphill and downhill.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I'm thinking that 99.9999% of trails will never see any monitoring of user speeds whatsoever, so the whole discussion is pretty much a waste of time to begin with, unless your one of the unlucky few that has to ride in one of those areas where heavy-handed enforcement is common. So glad there's nothing like that going on within a couple thousand miles of here.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> 15 MPH uphill AND downhill, right?
> 
> Which is why I am saying that if people go off the hook with silly "eBike only" speed limits, or "uphill only" speed limits, the people making the rules are just going to apply them across the board, to all bikes, uphill and downhill.


15mph speed limit. The sign does not specify up vs down.

To be fair though, I am only able to ride uphill at 2-4mph depending on how steep it is. 15mph uphill is something I could only accomplish with a motor assisting me.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> 1. I don't see anywhere that I said I needed to go any faster than a "normal" bicycle. Please show me where I said that.


From this conversation (snipped quotes):



Walt said:


> My answer is: because US laws weren't written intelligently as they were in the EU. If 250W/15.5 mph limits were actually the law (and there were severe penalties for manufacturers skirting those laws) I think a decent chunk of people would have no problem with e-bikes at all.
> 
> I wouldn't (and don't) have a problem with bikes with that level of assist, which is plenty to have a "normal" mountain bike experience for the disabled/elderly/exercise averse and should create negligible extra impacts on other users.
> -Walt





honkinunit said:


> Do you propose a 15.5 MPH speed limit for bikes without assist as well?





Walt said:


> That's just the assist speed limit. Perhaps I wasn't clear, sorry about that. Obviously an e-bike (or normal bike) can go much faster than that downhill (or on the flats).
> -Walt





honkinunit said:


> 1. A true Class 1 eBike can't go 20 MPH up any kind of significant grade unless a pro level rider is putting out their 3-500 watts.
> 
> 2. The difference between 15.5 MPH and 20 MPH is negligible. Why not make the limit 14.27 MPH? Or 16.1678 MPH?


Maybe I misunderstood you but it sounded to me like you would not be happy with the EU standard in the US.



honkinunit said:


> 2. You are paranoid. A class 1 ebike is now specifically defined in many US states to cut assist at 20 MPH, and People for Bikes is pushing to have that limit adopted across the country. The 20 MPH limit is arbitrary, just like 15.5 MPH, 55 MPH, 30 MPH, or 20 MPH in a school zone. Why choose an arbitrary limit on trails that is different than what is already legislated as the Class 1 ebike limit? What are we going to do, create a Class 0.75 for trails? It makes no sense. Just use 20 MPH.


The point was that they should have used 15.5 like in the EU. Again, sounded to me like you wouldn't be happy with that speed, the difference between 15.5 and 20 MPH is not negligible at all. And 15.5 is closer to bicycle speed, and you are welcome to go faster with the motor cut out. Are you looking for assist in a bicycle-like experience or are you looking to go faster than a bicycle?



honkinunit said:


> 3. I guarantee if you start pushing a specific SPEED LIMIT for uphill riding, that same SPEED LIMIT will be applied to all bikes in both directions by the powers that be. Just use the already legislated power cutoffs. Please explain what logic you would use with a non-cyclist to advocate that ONLY eBikes should be limited to 15.5 MPH uphill, while a non-eBike has an unlimited uphill speed, and both eBikes and non-eBikes have no downhill speed limit? And what is an "uphill" anyway? 1%? 3% 5% 15%?


I don't think there should be speed limits but I also don't think there is any reason to provide more assist to get an ebike uphill faster than a regular bike if ebikers are really just wanting a little help with the bicycle like experience. If you want to go faster than a bicycle, you are wanting a motor experience.


----------



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

WoodlandHills said:


> Then we agree on both of those sentences. Scary, isn't it?


And even though we disagree on other things it doesn't mean that either of us are ignorant, intolerant, or mongering fear. Common ground> divisiveness.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

fos'l said:


> Be good for the manufacturers to know. You can blur the lines as much as you want, they're still a separate entity; and if they impair MTB access, expect trouble.


From what I've heard through the grapevine, P4B is preparing a position that emtbs are not mtbs, and should be treated as a different class of vehicle, so maybe the manufacturers are going to come at access from that direction now?


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Making the cut off too aggressive will just lead to rampant "modding" to circumvent the cut-off.

P4B (People For Bikes) already treats ebikes as different. They gave ebikes their own zone between regular bikes and other motorized vehicles. Their model is what went into legislation. What you refer to as Class 1, is an actual defined category due to their model. What's going on is that IMBA recognizes that there's some overlap with class 1 and normal bikes. People are being alarmists, thinking that more powerful motorized bikes will be bunched with mtb and lead to the worst case scenario for mtb...

US class 1 is diff than EU class 1. EU: 25 kph (15.5 mph) <= 250W. US: 20 mph (32 kph) <= 750W. This is just how they decided to define it over here.

I think there's genuine reason to be concerned. There's little enforcement on trails. If there's stuff going on like people using ebikes to get deep into places to conduct illegal activities, and it's ebikes that enable it, ebikes will be a target for control. Sadly, rules only keep good folk in line, and even good folk will break rules if they see "everyone else" doing it, such as breaking the speed limit. mtbers probably are just bystander victims in the crossfire as disruption alters things as we know it.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

P4B has a survey currently going on. Basic questions about biking riding in your area but a box at the end you can write in to let them know what you think:

https://corona.researchfeedback.net/wh/s.asp?k=150783940236


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

chazpat said:


> P4B has a survey currently going on. Basic questions about biking riding in your area but a box at the end you can write in to let them know what you think:
> 
> https://corona.researchfeedback.net/wh/s.asp?k=150783940236


Done, thanks.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Harryman said:


> From what I've heard through the grapevine, P4B is preparing a position that emtbs are not mtbs, and should be treated as a different class of vehicle, so maybe the manufacturers are going to come at access from that direction now?


Hooray for common sense.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Lemonaid said:


> It's about opening the door to more and more powerful mopeds on the trails. That's the bottom line... Once the door is open for the simplest of motors, gradually more and more powerful bikes will be introduced. If we've learned anything from the bike industry is that they love to introduce newer and better "technology" every year to pique the rider's wallets. The "classification" of motor bikes is a fallacy since there's no way for anyone to police or enforce these mythical standards on the trails and was created for political reasons. What will end up happening is "other interests" will end up grouping regular mountain bikes with emtb and base trail access decision on the merits of both groups as a single entity.


Yes. That is the problem.

If motors were not an issue we'd have allowed low power ICE motos on MTB and hiking trails before now. There is nothing magically different about an electric motor and an ICE motor.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

vikb said:


> Yes. That is the problem.
> 
> If motors were not an issue we'd have allowed low power ICE motos on MTB and hiking trails before now. There is nothing magically different about an electric motor and an ICE motor.


There's concern over fluid leaks contaminating the water table. Both are fire hazards, but there's IEEE standards that ensure Li-Ion batteries fail in a safe manner (don't eject during thermal runaway).


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

honkinunit said:


> So you really think there should be an unlimited speed limit for MTBs and a 15 MPH speed limit for eMTBs?
> 
> That's insane.


Are you just intentionally being obtuse? There's no speed limit, there's an assist cutoff. You can still pedal >15 mph if you want to, on any bike. The motor just cuts out after 15. Simple.

Look, the point is this: if e-bikes are considerably faster than normal mountain bikes, they won't work on most MUTs. If they are easier/less work, but similar speed, it'll be fine. 15.5mph and 250W (what a fit adult can generate on their own) seem like reasonable numbers, and (as per the title of the thread) they seem to be working ok in Europe. More power and speed will just mean permanent assignment to OHV trails, so adopting the EU rules is IMO the best way to have a chance at access.

-Walt


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

They are pretty strict about the 250W and 25 kph class 1 rating in the EU. They're allowed on trails, like a bike. Anything higher is treated unlike a bicycle. Lobbying efforts are making a push to keep the cut-off, but increase the power limit and include throttles, but there's resistance from some who don't realize that current standards are hampering utility/cargo bikes. There's also talks about getting more category classifications like the US has. The US seems to be ahead of the curve, IMO.

In some high density Chinese cities and NYC, ebikes are banned from the streets, since the riders themselves have shown total disregard for traffic rules. Regular bikes were not. ebikes were specifically singled out as a whole, no exception to low powered pedelecs.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Varaxis said:


> There's concern over fluid leaks contaminating the water table. Both are fire hazards, but there's IEEE standards that ensure Li-Ion batteries fail in a safe manner (don't eject during thermal runaway).


TThe fluid leak thing though possible isn't something that really adds up to squat.

Are Li-Po batteries never used on e-bikes? Those things go don't fail in a safe manner at all.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

vikb said:


> Yes. That is the problem.
> 
> If motors were not an issue we'd have allowed low power ICE motos on MTB and hiking trails before now. There is nothing magically different about an electric motor and an ICE motor.


 A bike with an ICE motor is *completely* different from a pedal assist bike.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> Are you just intentionally being obtuse? There's no speed limit, there's an assist cutoff. You can still pedal >15 mph if you want to, on any bike. The motor just cuts out after 15. Simple.
> 
> Look, the point is this: if e-bikes are considerably faster than normal mountain bikes, they won't work on most MUTs. If they are easier/less work, but similar speed, it'll be fine. 15.5mph and 250W (what a fit adult can generate on their own) seem like reasonable numbers, and (as per the title of the thread) they seem to be working ok in Europe. More power and speed will just mean permanent assignment to OHV trails, so adopting the EU rules is IMO the best way to have a chance at access.
> 
> -Walt


Why 15.5 MPH when 20 MPH is already the adopted class 1 limit? Class 1 ebikes are *not*considerable faster than normal mountain bikes. Neither a Class 1 ebike nor a "normal" mountain bike moves on its own power. Both require a human to pedal them, and the speed they go depends on the rider. I guarantee a pro MTB racer, whether it be uphill, downhill, or on flats, is faster than me on my ebike. I believe it was on velonews.com where I read a story about a race at Sea Otter where they had races where Class 1 pedal assist ebikes and "normal" MTBs were allowed, and "normal" MTB racers were sprinkled through the results including in the top five.

There is no way there is going to be a 15.5 MPH standard in the US now. That ship has sailed.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Harryman said:


> From what I've heard through the grapevine, P4B is preparing a position that emtbs are not mtbs, and should be treated as a different class of vehicle, so maybe the manufacturers are going to come at access from that direction now?


Let's hope that happens. I would be a step in the right direction. Up until now they've been doing their best to try and make them more similar than dissimilar. I hope they start an emtb advocacy group and I hope they get trail access where it's allowed and on their own merits. And let's keep the two modes completely separate and distinct.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Walt said:


> 1. I can take my cargo bike (75 pounds) with 3 kids riding on it (120# worth) up a 15% grade at 20mph on my 750w/20mph limit bike, which would be class 1 if it weren't for the throttle. No problem at all.
> 
> Subtract 150# of that weight and a casual Jane can go 20mph uphill in many places.
> 
> ...


I call BS on #1. My Specialized Turbo S Road Bike is 750w , top speed 28mph. I'm not an average Jane and there's NO WAY I'm going 20mph up a 15%grade. Are you Sagan?!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

honkinunit said:


> Why 15.5 MPH when 20 MPH is already the adopted class 1 limit?
> 
> There is no way there is going to be a 15.5 MPH standard in the US now. That ship has sailed.


Again, I'm not saying that the 15.5 standard *should* exist. I don't care either way if e-bikes are ever widely accepted on MUTs in the US. I'm saying that the US standard being so much faster/more powerful is a big reason that the bikes are less controversial in the EU.

You might be right that there will never be a 15.5 standard here. And there might never be legal access to many trails, too. Higher speed=more trouble. More power=more speed. It's that simple. If e-bikes provide a similar experience and similar impact on other users, they will eventually get more access. If not, they won't.

The EU is often held up here as a success story - and my point is that there is a reason for that: reasonable power/speed limits, and enforcement for the manufacturers. Might be worth imitating.

-Walt


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Class 1 20mph works for me. You’ll never do it uphill so really doesn’t matter. Most everybody I see riding goes as fast as they possibly can. Up, down, flat.. whatever. The trails and sight lines are the only speed enforcers.


----------



## DL723 (Sep 25, 2017)

Walt said:


> Again, I'm not saying that the 15.5 standard *should* exist. I don't care either way if e-bikes are ever widely accepted on MUTs in the US. I'm saying that the US standard being so much faster/more powerful is a big reason that the bikes are less controversial in the EU.
> 
> You might be right that there will never be a 15.5 standard here. And there might never be legal access to many trails, too. Higher speed=more trouble. More power=more speed. It's that simple. If e-bikes provide a similar experience and similar impact on other users, they will eventually get more access. If not, they won't.
> 
> ...


Using the European limits for eMTBs might not be the worst thing in the world. There are a few videos on youtube showing european eMTBs vs regular powered ones and the electric ones are still faster, overall. But the gains are basically going uphill. Going downhill there doesn't seem to be huge advantage and on flat areas, the assist limit is more of a hindrance. A 20 mph limit just widens that gap.

But having a 15 mph limit for all class 1 ebikes would throw a huge wrench in the commuting style ebikes. So it would have to be a emtb limit. Just not sure how that would be enforced other than maybe greater than 100 mm suspension travel makes it a mtb?


----------



## Bizman (Oct 11, 2010)

chazpat said:


> P4B has a survey currently going on. Basic questions about biking riding in your area but a box at the end you can write in to let them know what you think:
> 
> https://corona.researchfeedback.net/wh/s.asp?k=150783940236


Done, thanks for sharing it!


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> And you presume that it wouldn't. Millions of outdoor enthusiasts don't have a voice here but I can assure you a significant portion of them value spaces that are primitive and motor-free, I realize that many people can't understand this sentiment but it's important to those who do. People have different opinions and objectives and IMO this country is still big enough to accommodate most everyone.


 Yes, it's true that I have a different perspective. I'm as confident about the low impact of class 1 e-bikes as you are that they will somehow be destructive to the pristine wilderness.

Anyway, I think the majority of those people would just as soon ban _all _bikes from the primitive wilderness and I strongly doubt that they would differentiate between a class 1 e-bike and a conventional mountain bike.


----------



## newfydog (May 8, 2009)

You guys are spinning your wheels dissecting all the numbers. The real touchiness comes in a less logical manner.

I've been reading various haters raves, and they aren't so specific about speeds etc, they just are enraged that someone would use a motor. It is usually followed up by some chest beating about how many years I've been biking, and how many gnarly rides I do powered by my own studdly legs.

I am puzzled why they are upset about what someone else does for their fun. Perhaps they aren't very good at having fun. Perhaps someone passed them on an e-bike and deprived them the opportunity to show what a bike beast they are. I think they are the same people who worry about other folks driving the wrong type of car, drinking the wrong beer, or having weird sex.

I know from riding that we much prefer an ebike to a motorcycle, and that we ride them very much the same way we ride a regular bike. We just go farther, and have more fun for the same amount of effort. We use the lower power settings, the higher ones screw up the riding experience in most conditions. When we meet people on the trails they frequently don't even realize we're on ebikes. 

I'm sure there will be a-holes on supercharged bikes who detract from people's experience, but the problem won't be the bike, it will be the a-hole. They will be jerks whether on an e-bike or on a regular bike trying to top their Strava time on a busy trail.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

newfydog said:


> You guys are spinning your wheels dissecting all the numbers. The real touchiness comes in a less logical manner.
> 
> I've been reading various haters raves, and they aren't so specific about speeds etc, they just are enraged that someone would use a motor. It is usually followed up by some chest beating about how many years I've been biking, and how many gnarly rides I do powered by my own studdly legs.
> 
> ...


 Not hate, ego bruising or such. Not legal where I ride in MA. And real concerns about losing mt bike access.


----------



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

Cuyuna said:


> Anyway, I think the majority of those people would just as soon ban _all _bikes from the primitive wilderness and I strongly doubt that they would differentiate between a class 1 e-bike and a conventional mountain bike.


I'm one of _those_ people. I like mountain biking, hiking, backpacking, river running, go kart racing, and lots of other things, maybe someday I'll be into electric bicycles too but not at this time. There's an appropriate place for every activity and sometimes they overlap and sometimes not. As much as I love mountain biking I'm grateful for places where they're prohibited because I respect other people who desire a different experience. There's room for all.

I've said it before but tracks on the ground aren't the only impact left behind. Also I now support banning all bikes from primitive wilderness areas because the "slippery slope" that many people feared is proving to be a reality. Mountain bike supporters assured everyone that the line was etched in stone, human powered and _no motors_ but they were wrong.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

Cuyuna said:


> Anyway, I think the majority of those people would just as soon ban _all _bikes from the primitive wilderness and I strongly doubt that they would differentiate between a class 1 e-bike and a conventional mountain bike.


Exactly the point - the probability that user groups won't differentiate mountain bikes form e-bikes IS the issue. You've summed up exactly what the whole point is, while somehow failing to grasp its significance. Camel nose....


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> I'm one of those people.


I'm one of those people too.



watermonkey said:


> Exactly the point - the probability that user groups won't differentiate mountain bikes form e-bikes IS the issue. You've summed up exactly what the whole point is, while somehow failing to grasp its significance. Camel nose....


No, your confusion comes from the fact that I don't_ share your opinion_ of its significance.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> I'm one of _those_ people. I like mountain biking, hiking, backpacking, river running, go kart racing, and lots of other things, maybe someday I'll be into electric bicycles too but not at this time. There's an appropriate place for every activity and sometimes they overlap and sometimes not. As much as I love mountain biking I'm grateful for places where they're prohibited because I respect other people who desire a different experience. There's room for all.
> 
> I've said it before but tracks on the ground aren't the only impact left behind. Also I now support banning all bikes from primitive wilderness areas because the "slippery slope" that many people feared is proving to be a reality. Mountain bike supporters assured everyone that the line was etched in stone, human powered and _no motors_ but they were wrong.


 Agree to disagree, maybe we need another thread? The whole mechanized transport in wilderness referring to bikes? Bullshit. Mt bikes weren't even around. They were allowed until the Sierra club $$$ got active. Read the original wilderness act? The whole idea was human power. To get out and enjoy. They allow horses to chew up the trail, packs of them, but bikes are an issue? Hmmm. No chainsaws and wheelbarrows? How does one do trail work or clear windstorm/blowdowns/fire damaged trees? And mechanized transport? Does that included oarlocks, ski bindings, hiking poles? Seems crazy. I DO get the whole concept of wilderness, bikes should be allowed on a case by case process. Maybe to start with just some connecting routes. Think about a bikepacker. Seems the perfect set up. All the hikers would be congregated at the trail head areas, bikes packers can really get out there and cover some distance. Like away from the day hikers and crowds. Thats my take. So stepping in piles of horse **** and hiking on chewed up trails are OK, but a bikepacker just ruins everyones experience? Hmmm.


----------



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

leeboh said:


> Agree to disagree, maybe we need another thread?


Yeah probably another thread, but if you read my post you'd see that my contention for not allowing them is that electric bikes are apparently on their way to being legally classified as bicycles and I am wholeheartedly opposed to opening the door for motorized transport within wilderness boundaries.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

^^^ Agreed. Hence the need for clear separation of them, and IMBA has muddied the waters greatly.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Cuyuna said:


> Yes, it's true that I have a different perspective. I'm as confident about the low impact of class 1 e-bikes as you are that they will somehow be destructive to the pristine wilderness.
> 
> Anyway, I think the majority of those people would just as soon ban _all _bikes from the primitive wilderness and I strongly doubt that they would differentiate between a class 1 e-bike and a conventional mountain bike.


Yip

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=272974363222961&id=104924783361254


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

I'd like to leave at this table that part of the outrage (better term than "hate") has to do with the intrinsic definition of what bicycling as a sport is. (Leaving out the utility as a means for transportation)

At some level having 2 wheels is a definition but further refinements includes pedals and generally being "human powered".

It should be unnecessary to say that adding a motor is beyond the sport's definition but in this day and age it seems like "anything goes". ("I'm wearing a dress so I get to use the Lady's Room")

At some level an analogy might be like having girls in the Boy Scouts or boys in the Girls Scouts; probably no harm but it totally screws with traditional definitions.

Another analogy might be what defines sport fishing; generally hook and line as opposed to gill nets or electric shock or dynamite. Respecting definitions matters.

Trying to include e-bikes in the sport of bicycling spits in the face of American traditional values and perhaps this is why all the outrage here as opposed to Europe. Don't like American traditional values? Move to Europe!

I'm all for establishing e-biking as a separate sport; separate from bicycling and separate from motorcycling.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

Varaxis said:


> ....If there's actually no real problem with the ebikes... It's one way to buy speed, just like buying carbon stuff is, except it only really goes fast uphill, slighter faster on flats, and compromises by handling like an excessively heavy bike going down and in the narrow twisty parts...


Hahaha...really, dude? You can cut the weight of a mountain bike in half and you're still using most of your power to move your weight, not the bikes, up the hill. If the motor lets you go really fast uphill then that's kind of the point, you're taking most of the difficulty out of the sport and it is not equivalent to buying a carbon frame. I have a 21-pound rigid bike with a titanium frame, carbon fork, carbon rims, and a once top-of-the-line XX1 drivetrain...and I still struggle up some hills.

I'm not exactly busting on Ebikes. There's nothing wrong with them...but they aren't bicycles and maybe don't belong on a mountainbicycing forum.

And Ebikes are not "introducing more people to our sport," as the latest talking point maintains. If you put a motor on it it's a different sport, not "our sport."


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

> And Ebikes are not "introducing more people to our sport," as the latest talking point maintains. If you put a motor on it it's a different sport, not "our sport."


And the fact there's an ebike section on the premier mountain biking forum could be sending the wrong message and confuse a lot of people.

There needs to be a long thick neon line drawn between the two.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

As far as I can see, the only bicycle that reflects traditional American values is the fatbike, since every red-blooded American knows that bigger is better. And the only way to make a fatbike more American is to put a motor on it.

Surely you aren't claiming the a carbon fiber contraption made in China that can only be enjoyed by anorexic ectomorphs epitomizes American values? If so, you need to get out more and visit a shopping mall, a WalMart or an NFL game, put the two side-by-side and ask which they wanted to ride back to their SUV in the parking lot.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

What does Lance Armstrong ride?


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Ailuropoda said:


> Hahaha...really, dude? You can cut the weight of a mountain bike in half and you're still using most of your power to move your weight, not the bikes, up the hill. If the motor lets you go really fast uphill then that's kind of the point, you're taking most of the difficulty out of the sport and it is not equivalent to buying a carbon frame. I have a 21-pound rigid bike with a titanium frame, carbon fork, carbon rims, and a once top-of-the-line XX1 drivetrain...and I still struggle up some hills.
> 
> I'm not exactly busting on Ebikes. There's nothing wrong with them...but they aren't bicycles and maybe don't belong on a mountainbicycing forum.
> 
> And Ebikes are not "introducing more people to our sport," as the latest talking point maintains. If you put a motor on it it's a different sport, not "our sport."


 What happens when the tax paying public perceives "our sport" to be Slow And Silent Two-wheelers That Can Share Trails With Hikers And Horses? Because most of the public do not care one bit about "religious wars" between the various sects of two wheelers.......


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

WoodlandHills said:


> As far as I can see, the only bicycle that reflects traditional American values is the fatbike, since every red-blooded American knows that bigger is better. And the only way to make a fatbike more American is to put a motor on it.


Exactly what William Harley and Arthur Davidson (and others) did over 100 years ago.

Brilliant!

You do know what we call their innovation, right!?!?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Moe Ped said:


> What does Lance Armstrong ride?


 An e bike with the cheater motor in the downtube? Seen some of the vids from the tour de farce with the bike on the side after a crash, with the wheel spinning crazy fast? Wait, what?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

WoodlandHills said:


> As far as I can see, the only bicycle that reflects traditional American values is the fatbike, since every red-blooded American knows that bigger is better. And the only way to make a fatbike more American is to put a motor on it.
> 
> Surely you aren't claiming the a carbon fiber contraption made in China that can only be enjoyed by anorexic ectomorphs epitomizes American values? If so, you need to get out more and visit a shopping mall, a WalMart or an NFL game, put the two side-by-side and ask which they wanted to ride back to their SUV in the parking lot.


 If you think walmart and single drivers in suv 's are what the USA is all about? I fear for the next generation. Yikes.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> The whole mechanized transport in wilderness referring to bikes? Bullshit. Mt bikes weren't even around.


Saying bikes don't qualify as mechanized transport sounds a lot like when certain e-bike folks used to try to argue that a motor isn't really a motor.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Read the original version of the wilderness act, then get back to me. There were no mt bikes at the time, and they were permitted in the wilderness until certain hiking groups spoke up. Check out the STC page.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Read the original version of the wilderness act, then get back to me. There were no mt bikes at the time, and they were permitted in the wilderness until certain hiking groups spoke up. Check out the STC page.


BWCA is designated under the WPA. Sail boats, sail boards, paddleboats, pontoon boats, bicycles, wheeled carts, and portage dollies aren't allowed except in rare circumstances. Mechanical assistance is rarely permitted. Up until a few years ago, that included rowboats with oarlocks. Those are still prohibited by the printed regs, but the rangers' policy manual now states that they don't enforce the rowboat provision.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> Read the original version of the wilderness act, then get back to me. There were no mt bikes at the time, and they were permitted in the wilderness until certain hiking groups spoke up. Check out the STC page.


Kinda like there were no e-bikes when the Motorized Vehicle guidelines were established?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

So my coal fired, steam boiler fat bike is good to go? Only weighs 92 lbs, keeps the chili hot too.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Kinda like there were no e-bikes when the Motorized Vehicle guidelines were established?


It was actually in 1965 when the Sierra Club and Wilderness Society petitioned to change the draft regulations to include bikes. The legislators at the time shut them down and intentionally allowed for bikes (unconfined recreation) to exist in Wilderness. The term Mountain Bikes was first coined in 1964.

Motor boats are used in both the boundry waters and the river of no return Wilderness. It would be a huge benefit to Wilderness and the National Forest to have controlled dirt bike allowances. Historical human access gets lost in many places where combustion bikes are banned as the trails get unusable from downfall.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Ailuropoda said:


> Hahaha...really, dude? You can cut the weight of a mountain bike in half and you're still using most of your power to move your weight, not the bikes, up the hill. If the motor lets you go really fast uphill then that's kind of the point, you're taking most of the difficulty out of the sport and it is not equivalent to buying a carbon frame. I have a 21-pound rigid bike with a titanium frame, carbon fork, carbon rims, and a once top-of-the-line XX1 drivetrain...and I still struggle up some hills.
> 
> I'm not exactly busting on Ebikes. There's nothing wrong with them...but they aren't bicycles and maybe don't belong on a mountainbicycing forum.
> 
> And Ebikes are not "introducing more people to our sport," as the latest talking point maintains. If you put a motor on it it's a different sport, not "our sport."


What exactly do you picture as an ebike in your hypothetical scenario?

Am I being short sighted, thinking of the emtbs that have been officially featured on this very site, and other mtb sites? The ones with 250W pedal assist motors from Bosch, Brose, Yamaha, Shimano, from name mtb brands, such as Specialized, Trek, etc., which fit the class 1 classification?

Do you understand how much power 250W is, compared to the power output in your own legs? Do you recognize that there are multiple assist levels that use less than max power? There's also power-to-weight ratio to consider.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Harryman said:


> https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=272974363222961&id=104924783361254





Cuyuna said:


> No, your confusion comes from the fact that I don't_ share your opinion_ of its significance.


Not opinion. Fact.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> Not opinion. Fact.


I'm a little skeptical of the "facts" presented by an organization with the name "North Country Trail Defenders".


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Varaxis said:


> What exactly do you picture as an ebike in your hypothetical scenario?
> 
> Am I being short sighted, thinking of the emtbs that have been officially featured on this very site, and other mtb sites? The ones with 250W pedal assist motors from Bosch, Brose, Yamaha, Shimano, from name mtb brands, such as Specialized, Trek, etc., which fit the class 1 classification?
> 
> Do you understand how much power 250W is, compared to the power output in your own legs? Do you recognize that there are multiple assist levels that use less than max power? There's also power-to-weight ratio to consider.


Because $$$.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Cuyuna said:


> I'm a little skeptical of the "facts" presented by an organization with the name "North Country Trail Defenders".


The fact I am getting at is other user groups are already lumping eBikes in with regular MTB's and using the justification that because they are so hard to tell apart just BAN THEM ALL.

That is one thing many of the users on this site were fearful would happen, and now it is happening. Other user groups, no matter how ridiculous it might be, feel that allowing any eBike to have access is a slippery slope to bikes that are closer to a motorcycle, and so they are preaching full bans.

So when a user says "camels nose" they are not just projecting an opinion about how eBikes might be viewed, they are stating a fact that user groups do view it that way.

I don't think it is right, but it is happening. Without eBike specific advocacy groups this sort of thing will happen in other locations.

I for one would hate to see my MTB access revoked because of a user group such as the "North Country Trail Defenders" decided it was too hard to tell an eBike from a regular bike and just BAN THEM ALL sort of attitude.

There has to be a better solution.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

leeboh said:


> If you think walmart and single drivers in suv 's are what the USA is all about? I fear for the next generation. Yikes.


 Ask those MAGA hat wearing folks at WalMart if they think they believe in traditional American values, I'm thinking they will probably say "Yes". Ask them if lifted diesel pickups and big motors reflect traditional American values. I suspect you will get a hearty "hell yeah,". I also think they will say that spandex and Lycra wearing bicyclists are elitists too worried about keeping the low class riff-raff off the trails.

Basically I think America is about what most of the people who live there think it's about. Not what a small elite think it is. And there are a lot more WalMart people than MTB people, so who is the elite and who is not?
But I could be wrong.......


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Klurejr said:


> The fact I am getting at is other user groups are already lumping eBikes in with regular MTB's and using the justification that because they are so hard to tell apart just BAN THEM ALL.
> 
> That is one thing many of the users on this site were fearful would happen, and now it is happening. Other user groups, no matter how ridiculous it might be, feel that allowing any eBike to have access is a slippery slope to bikes that are closer to a motorcycle, and so they are preaching full bans.
> 
> ...


 Maybe ban OEM eMTBs and permit only DIY eMTBs with big ugly, easy to see, Bafang motors hanging from the bottom bracket. No way to confuse one of them with an ordinary MTB.......


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> Ask those MAGA hat wearing folks at WalMart if they think they believe in traditional American values, I'm thinking they will probably say "Yes". Ask them if lifted diesel pickups and big motors reflect traditional American values. I suspect you will get a hearty "hell yeah,". I also think they will say that spandex and Lycra wearing bicyclists are elitists too worried about keeping the low class riff-raff off the trails.
> 
> Basically I think America is about what most of the people who live there think it's about. Not what a small elite think it is. And there are a lot more WalMart people than MTB people, so who is the elite and who is not?
> But I could be wrong.......


Google "walmart spandex"; lots of Walmart shoppers have this in common with cyclist.


----------



## newfydog (May 8, 2009)

Moe Ped said:


> Another analogy might be what defines sport fishing; generally hook and line as opposed to gill nets or electric shock or dynamite. Respecting definitions matters.
> 
> Trying to include e-bikes in the sport of bicycling spits in the face of American traditional values and perhaps this is why all the outrage here as opposed to Europe. Don't like American traditional values? Move to Europe!
> .


Perhaps one of the most ignorant posts I've ever read on the internet.

Please, who defines American Values? Is inclusiveness one of them, or is that out of fashion these days?

PS, in much of Europe, fishing regulations are much more restrictive than here in the oh- so traditional homeland.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

newfydog said:


> Perhaps one of the most ignorant posts I've ever read on the internet.
> 
> Please, who defines American Values? Is inclusiveness one of them, or is that out of fashion these days?
> 
> PS, in much of Europe, fishing regulations are much more restrictive than here in the oh- so traditional homeland.


Perhaps I should say the same about yours?

Seems you may not have the depth to get my point. Nor my sense of humor.

You're OK with including gill netting with sport fishing? After all they're both just forms of fishing.

The e-bike discussion continues...


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

News flash: Miniature golf will now be considered to be golf. Table tennis will now be considered to be tennis.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Yeah probably another thread, but if you read my post you'd see that my contention for not allowing them is that electric bikes are apparently on their way to being legally classified as bicycles and I am wholeheartedly opposed to opening the door for motorized transport within wilderness boundaries.


Yes, but in your post above you say "room for everyone " you mean, except ebikers? We pay taxes and the same bs everybody else does, plus ride normal bikes. Sierra club can go Wipe their ass with their hand and wish there was a logger to cut the tree and make TP! The reality is that most "purists" are a bunch of hipocritical knuckleheads.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

The sky is falling!! No, it’s not. A different sport is entering the arena. It’s a change for sure and no one likes change. There’s good people that enjoy riding Ebikes and most of them have been a cyclist for years. There was a reason every major manufacture started producing Class 1 Ebikes with no throttle’s years ago. It’s obviously going to be on a case by case basis everywhere for acceptance on MUT’s. The LM are going to have to step up and understand this new sport. Some will post no ebikes, others won’t.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> Yes, but in your post above you say "room for everyone " you mean, except ebikers? We pay taxes and the same bs everybody else does, plus ride normal bikes. Sierra club can go Wipe their ass with their hand and wish there was a logger to cut the tree and make TP! The reality is that most "purists" are a bunch of hipocritical knuckleheads.


Yes room for everyone, electric bike riders included, not room for everyone within wilderness boundaries of course but then again wilderness zones aren't everywhere. I'm fine with walking in wilderness areas, I love riding my bike but I'm not so obsessed that I'm immobile without it.

I would never presume that just because a horse is or person on foot is allowed somewhere then by god I should be allowed to bring my bicycle there too but that seems to be the attitude here, all or nothing.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Cuyuna said:


> I'm a little skeptical of the "facts" presented by an organization with the name "North Country Trail Defenders".




Every side has their bad apples.

On the e-bike side, you have the 3-5000W e-moto riders "disguised" as bike riders (not fooling anyone).

On the anti-e-bike side, you have the kooks like these North County Trail Defenders, who are actually hurting their cause by burning bridges and being unreasonable.


----------



## newfydog (May 8, 2009)

I'm sure you're right. I totally missed the relevance of your brilliant analogies of bathrooms and boy scouts as related to biking, nor did I appreciated your deep understanding of European culture. I'm sure you suggested moving there based on the fact you have lived and worked in Europe, and speak three or four of the languages.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

newfydog said:


> I'm sure you're right. I totally missed the relevance of your brilliant analogies of bathrooms and boy scouts as related to biking, nor did I appreciated your deep understanding of European culture. I'm sure you suggested moving there based on the fact you have lived and worked in Europe, and speak three or four of the languages.


In the absence of context, I'm puzzled by this post.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Please don't say that e+ individuals state that e-MTB's are permissible everywhere (maybe KJ can add it to the "stickee"). Clearly there are places where they don't belong. On the other hand, there are places where I ride (MTB) and see an average of 1-2 bikes every 10-20 mile ride, fewer during the week. These aras might be a good place to allow access. BTY, JMO, I have no problem prohibiting access to any bikes in Wilderness areas.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

fos'l said:


> Please don't say that e+ individuals state that e-MTB's are permissible everywhere (maybe KJ can add it to the "stickee"). Clearly there are places where they don't belong. On the other hand, there are places where I ride (MTB) and see an average of 1-2 bikes every 10-20 mile ride, fewer during the week. These aras might be a good place to allow access. BTY, JMO, I have no problem prohibiting access to any bikes in Wilderness areas.


Around here, and on all state trails, class 1 e-bikes are permitted anywhere conventional mountain bikes are permitted. Since 2012. It has generated a negligible amount of local drama over all that time. I was surprised at the vehemence that it causes on this forum. I just never viewed e-bikes as a big deal.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Please don't say that e+ individuals state that e-MTB's are permissible everywhere (maybe KJ can add it to the "stickee"). Clearly there are places where they don't belong.


This is cryptic but it seems like you might be referring to me? If so I think you may have misunderstood my post.

That said there are individuals here who have stated that e-bikes should be allowed everywhere.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

Really, I don't care that much about Trail access. Most of the trails I ride are multi-use anyway and I don't see how eBikes would be a problem. 

But eBikes are a separate "sport."


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

Also, I despise the word "impact." Mountain bikes and eBikes are not meteors. A few dents in the mud here or there and a minuscule amount of erosion off of a trail is not an environmental catastrophe. I have been riding some of the same trails for almost twenty years and they are still there, none the worse for the wear. 

Every time it rains here the creeks turn red with thousands of tones of eroded silt. I just can't get worked up over a few pounds of dirt displaced for a trail every few years. 

The fact that we do get worked up shows that we have surrendered the terms of the debate to the totalitarian environmentalists.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> That said there are individuals here who have stated that e-bikes should be allowed everywhere.


I think it would be more accurate to say that some individuals here are saying that class 1 e-MTBs should be allowed everywhere that conventional mountain bikes are allowed.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> This is cryptic but it seems like you might be referring to me? If so I think you may have misunderstood my post.
> 
> That said there are individuals here who have stated that e-bikes should be allowed everywhere.


Having owned Ebikes for sometime now, I believe they should be allowed everywhere. Strava freaks are more of a concern.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Ailuropoda said:


> Also, I despise the word "impact." Mountain bikes and eBikes are not meteors. A few dents in the mud here or there and a minuscule amount of erosion off of a trail is not an environmental catastrophe. I have been riding some of the same trails for almost twenty years and they are still there, none the worse for the wear.
> 
> Every time it rains here the creeks turn red with thousands of tones of eroded silt. I just can't get worked up over a few pounds of dirt displaced for a trail every few years.
> 
> The fact that we do get worked up shows that we have surrendered the terms of the debate to the totalitarian environmentalists.


 Not everyone rides in Louisiana. On deltas that flood yearly. Look beyond your local trails. And "don't care about trail access ?" Nice.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Please don't say that e+ individuals state that e-MTB's are permissible everywhere (maybe KJ can add it to the "stickee").


I'll let them speak for themselves.



Gutch said:


> Having owned Ebikes for sometime now, I believe they should be allowed everywhere


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

^Yes sir! Just a matter of perspectives. I have been a logger and forester for most of my adult career, and I feel bikes are the least thing to worry about.


----------



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

Yep, a matter of perspective, your own farts never stink.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Why are ebikes such a touchy subject? Beyond the potential environmental impacts, and the potential for adverse treatment of regular mtbs being lumped in with e-machines, ebikes are an anathema to everything that makes Mountain Biking something worth doing.

To me, mountain biking is about getting out into the wilderness, confronting nature in its most primitive form, and pushing your body to overcome the obstacles in your path. I don't want it to be easy. I don't want the assistance of a motor the same way I don't want sanitized, dumbed-down trails that make it easier to ride. I want a challenge.

Add a motor to the bike and you remove the fundamental basis of that challenge. It becomes easy. It becomes something anyone can do. I don't mind sharing the trails with the few who are willing to put in the effort, but I do mind sharing with those who cheat the trail gods with a motor.

You want to ride your motor bike? There are places for you, and hey, many of them are even paved for your convenience. You want to ride your e-machine? Go there. Stay out of my nature.

_** to be fair, the above is a purely emotional reaction. As to allowing ebikes from a legal perspective, so long as they don't damage the environment or the trails, I think it would be fine. I don't really like it, and I think ebikers are lazy cheating bastards, but hey, it's your life, and if you're not hurting me or my trails, go ahead and be a lazy cheating bastard. **_


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

kpdemello said:


> To me, mountain biking is about getting out into the wilderness, confronting nature in its most primitive form, and pushing your body to overcome the obstacles in your path. I don't want it to be easy. I don't want the assistance of a motor the same way I don't want sanitized, dumbed-down trails that make it easier to ride. I want a challenge.


And everybody who wants to "get out into the wilderness" should share your perspective for doing so, right?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

KPDEMELLO- Wow, if you feel that deeply, I strongly suggest you boycott every manufacturer and component maker that supports Ebikes. Just how pure are you?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Cuyuna said:


> And everybody who wants to "get out into the wilderness" should share your perspective for doing so, right?


In an ideal world, yeah. But hey, so long as you're not damaging anything out there, go ahead and cheat the trail gods. But I hope your ebike battery catches fire while you're a comfortable distance away from it.



Gutch said:


> KPDEMELLO- Wow, if you feel that deeply, I strongly suggest you boycott every manufacturer and component maker that supports Ebikes.


Nah.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Yep, a matter of perspective, your own farts never stink.


That's funny! My wife says the same thing. ?


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> Yep, a matter of perspective, your own farts never stink.


Really depends on what I have been eating.....


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Cuyuna said:


> I think it would be more accurate to say that some individuals here are saying that class 1 e-MTBs should be allowed everywhere that conventional mountain bikes are allowed.


 Exactly!


----------



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

Cuyuna said:


> And everybody who wants to "get out into the wilderness" should share your perspective for doing so, right?


What about people who wish to venture into the wilderness in a 300hp air conditioned 4wd? Do you share their perspective?


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

kpdemello said:


> Why are ebikes such a touchy subject? Beyond the potential environmental impacts, and the potential for adverse treatment of regular mtbs being lumped in with e-machines, ebikes are an anathema to everything that makes Mountain Biking something worth doing.
> 
> To me, mountain biking is about getting out into the wilderness, confronting nature in its most primitive form, and pushing your body to overcome the obstacles in your path. I don't want it to be easy. I don't want the assistance of a motor the same way I don't want sanitized, dumbed-down trails that make it easier to ride. I want a challenge.
> 
> ...


 Again with the "cheating" stuff....... If there is no race, who is cheating? What sort of competition is going on here? How does a 64 year old guy going for a trail ride on his eMTB cause anyone to feel to so threatened as to refer to a human they do not know as "a lazy cheating bastard"? I just do not understand this........


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> What about people who wish to venture into the wilderness in a 300hp air conditioned 4wd? Do you share their perspective?


No, of course not. Who in this thread is promoting driving 4wd automobiles on mountain bike trails? Are you trying to equate a class 1 e-MTB to a 300hp air conditioned 4wd? That doesn't even make sense.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

WoodlandHills said:


> Again with the "cheating" stuff....... If there is no race, who is cheating? What sort of competition is going on here? How does a 64 year old guy going for a trail ride on his eMTB cause anyone to feel to so threatened as to refer to a human they do not know as "a lazy cheating bastard"? I just do not understand this........


Immaturity and lack of bike etiquette.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

WoodlandHills said:


> Again with the "cheating" stuff....... If there is no race, who is cheating? What sort of competition is going on here? How does a 64 year old guy going for a trail ride on his eMTB cause anyone to feel to so threatened as to refer to a human they do not know as "a lazy cheating bastard"? I just do not understand this........


Yeah, if you don't get it after reading my post above, you probably never will.

But to illustrate it a different way, it's kind of like people who take the car road up to the top of mount Washington, versus the people who hike it. The former are just tourists, and while I don't begrudge them their little visit, I don't really respect their activity much. But the hiker who hiked up from the bottom? That guy has my respect.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> What about people who wish to venture into the wilderness in a 300hp air conditioned 4wd? Do you share their perspective?


Only if it's lifted with a big ass winch and a cooler full of beer.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> The sky is falling!! No, it's not. A different sport is entering the arena. It's a change for sure and no one likes change. There's good people that enjoy riding Ebikes and most of them have been a cyclist for years. There was a reason every major manufacture started producing Class 1 Ebikes with no throttle's years ago. It's obviously going to be on a case by case basis everywhere for acceptance on MUT's. The LM are going to have to step up and understand this new sport. Some will post no ebikes, others won't.





Gutch said:


> Having owned Ebikes for sometime now, I believe they should be allowed everywhere. Strava freaks are more of a concern.


Unless you have ridden everywhere, I don't think you can knowledgeably make the second post I quoted above but your earlier statement makes a lot more sense to me.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

kpdemello said:


> Yeah, if you don't get it after reading my post above, you probably never will.
> 
> But to illustrate it a different way, it's kind of like people who take the car road up to the top of mount Washington, versus the people who hike it. The former are just tourists, and while I don't begrudge them their little visit, I don't really respect their activity much. But the hiker who hiked up from the bottom? That guy has my respect.


No offense meant, but seriously....who cares?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

The OP... he asked why ebikes were such a touchy subject, and I answered. And you, apparently, because you keep responding to my posts.

I just thought of another example. I once heard a story about a person who would drive her car 100 yards from her front door to her office because she was too lazy to walk. It drove her coworker crazy. That is what an ebiker seems like to a regular MTBer.


----------



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

Cuyuna said:


> No, of course not. Who in this thread is promoting driving 4wd automobiles on mountain bike trails? Are you trying to equate a class 1 e-MTB to a 300hp air conditioned 4wd? That doesn't even make sense.


Ha ha, that was the exact response I predicted! Of course I'm not saying that a 4wd off road vehicle is the same as an e-bike, are you saying an e-bike is the same as hiking boots? You may think boots and electric bikes have an identical impact but many 4wd enthusiasts don't understand how their impact is any different either, just a wider trail is all.

Sound familiar?


----------



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

Gutch said:


> Only if it's lifted with a big ass winch and a cooler full of beer.


Yes!


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

I'm fine with letting ebike go wherever they're allowed so long as they are categorized as something completely separate user from mountain bikes and don't share the same access priveledges. They are free to lobby for access on their own merits but not too infringe on access already granted to mountain bikes. And it would be nice if the bike companies stop acting like ebikes and mountain bikes are the same even though since laws were passed to make ebikes easier to ride without licence and registration.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> The OP... he asked why ebikes were such a touchy subject, and I answered. And you, apparently, because you keep responding to my posts.
> 
> I just thought of another example. I once heard a story about a person who would drive her car 100 yards from her front door to her office because she was too lazy to walk. It drove her coworker crazy. That is what an ebiker seems like to a regular MTBer.


News flash! We also ride MTB's! Holy crap dude.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> Unless you have ridden everywhere, I don't think you can knowledgeably make the second post I quoted above but your earlier statement makes a lot more sense to me.


Fair enough. I do believe they should be allowed everywhere (Class 1) that a mtb is. They won't be, but they should.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> News flash! We also ride MTB's! Holy crap dude.


So you only cheat some of the time?

Or like the lady in my example, sometimes you walk the 100 yards to work, and sometimes you drive it, depending on how lazy you feel that day?


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Gutch said:


> Fair enough. I do believe they should be allowed everywhere (Class 1) that a mtb is. They won't be, but they should.


I'll only believe that class 1 bike are possible if they make the bike incapable of exceeding it's limit by the use of hardware methods only. Software limits are easy to bypass. Even so motorized bikes should not be considered in the same relm as normal mountain bikes.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> So you only cheat some of the time?
> 
> Or like the lady in my example, sometimes you walk the 100 yards to work, and sometimes you drive it, depending on how lazy you feel that day?


I've ridden with some hardcore riders thru the years, but I'm certain you are the baddest dude on the mountain. Congrats. Yeah, I cheat all the time! Fun as ****.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Good for you. Glad you're living your best life. 

But my opinion still stands, and I think most regular MTBers share it, which is why I think eMBTs are such a touchy subject in the U.S.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> Good for you. Glad you're living your best life.
> 
> But my opinion still stands, and I think most regular MTBers share it, which is why eMBTs are such a touchy subject in the U.S.


Fair enough, nobody likes change- but it's inevitable.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Ha ha, that was the exact response I predicted! Of course I'm not saying that a 4wd off road vehicle is the same as an e-bike, are you saying an e-bike is the same as hiking boots? You may think boots and electric bikes have an identical impact but many 4wd enthusiasts don't understand how their impact is any different either, just a wider trail is all.
> 
> Sound familiar?


Now we're talking hiking boots? Your intellectual agility is dizzying.

No, I'm saying a class 1 e-MTB has the same impact as a conventional mountain bike.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Fair enough, nobody likes change- but it's inevitable.


Maybe, but here's to hoping that ebikes become about as popular as mopeds.


----------



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

Cuyuna said:


> Now we're talking hiking boots? Your intellectual agility is dizzying


It is quite impressive, thanks for noticing!


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

kpdemello said:


> Maybe, but here's to hoping that ebikes become about as popular as mopeds.


Actually, Ebikes are becoming way more popular than mopeds. Globally too!


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> It is quite impressive, thanks for noticing!




.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

kpdemello said:


> Yeah, if you don't get it after reading my post above, you probably never will.
> 
> But to illustrate it a different way, it's kind of like people who take the car road up to the top of mount Washington, versus the people who hike it. The former are just tourists, and while I don't begrudge them their little visit, I don't really respect their activity much. But the hiker who hiked up from the bottom? That guy has my respect.


 But are the people who drive up in their cars "lazy cheating bastards" and if not why am I? Perhaps the real issue is your emotional reaction in one instance and not the other? Logic seems to not come into it?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

kpdemello said:


> The OP... he asked why ebikes were such a touchy subject, and I answered. And you, apparently, because you keep responding to my posts.
> 
> I just thought of another example. I once heard a story about a person who would drive her car 100 yards from her front door to her office because she was too lazy to walk. It drove her coworker crazy. That is what an ebiker seems like to a regular MTBer.


That's what it seems like to YOU, and you don't speak for all of us.

I've climbed Mt Washington a number of times. In the dead of winter. EVen bivied up there in -20 degree conditions with 100+ mph winds. 
I've also driven up it, and taken the cog railway. 
BFD. Not everyone is so evangelically one-dimensional.

Reminds me of some (very few) of the mountain bikers that roll through the local pumptrack I've been building for some years now. Some of the network of mountain bike trails (that I also have a major part in building and maintaining) pass right by it.

Though most riders know exactly who I am, sometimes I'll run into some of those self-appointed 'hardcore' MTBRs who, when they see a grown man in sweat-and-dirt covered jeans and a torn wife-beater, drinking beers, throwing dirt, and rolling around on a 20" bike with a bunch of BMX groms, obviously dismiss me as someone not worthy of even acknowledging. Those are the ********s that never get the 411 on the connections to miles of secret stashes they're riding past, or offered a beer, or any of the other perks that go along with not being a wanna-be elitist dink. Some people really need to get over themselves and stop making so many snap judgments about others.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

WoodlandHills said:


> But are the people who drive up in their cars "lazy cheating bastards" and if not why am I? Perhaps the real issue is your emotional reaction in one instance and not the other? Logic seems to not come into it?


Yeah that's kind of my point. The reason ebikes are met with such vitriol by many in the MTB community is because of a gut, emotional reaction that many MTBers, including myself, have toward them.

Sure, there's logical reasons behind a lot of it, too, like trail impact, environmental impact, etc. But if we're honest, the vitriol is largely based in emotion.

Here's another example. Imagine a person driving a scooter around a local Wal-Mart, even though that person is fully capable of walking. The person is just too lazy to do so. That's how a lot of MTBers see eMTBers. I'm certainly not alone in thinking this way.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Yep, a matter of perspective, your own farts never stink.


The forest products companies here are good stewards of their land. Plus I ride their logging roads. I used to be in the industry myself.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

leeboh said:


> Not everyone rides in Louisiana. On deltas that flood yearly. Look beyond your local trails. And "don't care about trail access ?" Nice.


I've ridden many places. Mountain bikes have even less "impact" in other places.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> That's what it seems like to YOU, and you don't speak for all of us.
> 
> I've climbed Mt Washington a number of times. In the dead of winter. EVen bivied up there in -20 degree conditions with 100+ mph winds.
> I've also driven up it, and taken the cog railway.
> ...


Good?!


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> .................Those are the ********s that never get the 411 on the connections to miles of secret stashes they're riding past, or offered a beer, or any of the other perks that go along with not being a wanna-be elitist dink. Some people really need to get over themselves and stop making so many snap judgments about others.


"Wannabe elitist dink". I like that. It sums up that aspect of the argument nicely.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

SHM, thanks for the great rebuttal to the vitriol, name-calling (thought it wasn't allowed) and rancor from narrow-mindedness. Unfortunately, the individuals on my local forum are the same as this guy. They regale at someone who gave an old man (not me this time) riding an e-bike a hard time or who, with a bunch of his friends, terrorized another individual on an e-MTB.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

honkinunit said:


> So you really think there should be an unlimited speed limit for MTBs and a 15 MPH speed limit for eMTBs?
> 
> That's insane.


Speed limit and assist limit are different things, mmkay?

My problem with e-bikers thus far in Michigan is only from personal experience. I've had a handful of experiences with them. The trails I've seen them at have multiple "no e-bike" signs. It seems rather clear to me. I usually ask them if they know that e-bikes are not allowed. Everyone I've run into has attempted to defend their use of e-bikes, most due to some injury. Guess what, I've got a lingering back injury that causes regular pain since 2001 and have torn both ACL, a meniscus, labrum, and broken glenoid over the years. I don't feel that gives me an excuse to ride where I'm prohibited or a need to ride an e-bike. Just admit that you were wrong and head back to the trailhead.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

fos'l said:


> Please don't say that e+ individuals state that e-MTB's are permissible everywhere (maybe KJ can add it to the "stickee"). Clearly there are places where they don't belong. On the other hand, there are places where I ride (MTB) and see an average of 1-2 bikes every 10-20 mile ride, fewer during the week. These aras might be a good place to allow access. BTY, JMO, I have no problem prohibiting access to any bikes in Wilderness areas.


Not directed at anyone in particular and erroneous because, in my naivety I didn't think anyone subscribed to this. IMO this "demand" will hamper e-access.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

fos'l said:


> SHM, thanks for the great rebuttal to the vitriol, name-calling (thought it wasn't allowed) and rancor from narrow-mindedness. Unfortunately, the individuals on my local forum are the same as this guy. They regale at someone who gave an old man (not me this time) riding an e-bike a hard time or who, with a bunch of his friends, terrorized another individual on an e-MTB.


This is an interesting response. I was actually trying to capture how I and other MTBers feel about this, and explain it, not spout vitriol. The OP asked about why ebikes are a touchy subject, so I was trying to explain how I and others see it.

It seems that you tend to care quite a bit that some MTBers don't care much for eMTBers, but you don't really seem to care why. I find that odd. As to name calling, does "wannabe elitist dink" not count? Or is it okay because it was done by people you agree with?

As for old guys riding e-mtbs, that whole "i'm feeble so I need e-assist" is really a silly and baseless argument. I've ridden with guys in their 50's and 60s and they did just fine without a motor. Also, this guy has no legs and still didn't resort to using an e-motor-bike:


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

kpdemello said:


> This is an interesting response. I was actually trying to capture how I and other MTBers feel about this, and explain it, not spout vitriol. The OP asked about why ebikes are a touchy subject, so I was trying to explain how I and others see it.
> 
> It seems that you tend to care quite a bit that some MTBers don't care much for eMTBers, but you don't really seem to care why. I find that odd. As to name calling, does "wannabe elitist dink" not count? Or is it okay because it was done by people you agree with?
> 
> As for old guys riding e-mtbs, that whole "i'm feeble so I need e-assist" is really a silly and baseless argument. I've ridden with guys in their 50's and 60s and they did just fine without a motor. Also, this guy has no legs and still didn't resort to using an e-motor-bike


Gee, were you really complimenting e-MTB riders when you called us "lazy bastards". Also get a kick out of individuals who think anyone in their 50's and 60's is old --- keep going and maybe the light will come on. Probably you missed the point, but many e-MTBers ride their e-bikes occasionally because it's a blast, something that narrow-minded individuals will never discover. The only thing you did was pretend to answer the question while using your response to vilify and excoriate.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

fos'l said:


> Gee, were you really complimenting e-MTB riders when you called us "lazy bastards". Also get a kick out of individuals who think anyone in their 50's and 60's is old --- keep going and maybe the light will come on. Probably you missed the point, but many e-MTBers ride their e-bikes occasionally because it's a blast, something that narrow-minded individuals will never discover. The only thing you did was pretend to answer the question while using your response to vilify and excoriate.


Never said I was?

Look, I don't really care how you get your jollies, whether that be with e-bikes or something else, so long as you're not harming me or anyone else. But e-bikes are regarded with suspicion and contempt by many in the MTB world. You can call that narrow minded or whatever other names you feel like, but it isn't going to win over anybody in the anti-e camp. Maybe you think you don't care about that, but the way you're cheering on the 'rebuttal' in your post above makes me think you care more than you realize.

I find that odd, too, that you'd get worked up over what some guy on the internet thinks of your silly hobby.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

kpdemello said:


> Never said I was?
> 
> Look, I don't really care how you get your jollies, whether that be with e-bikes or something else, so long as you're not harming me or anyone else. But e-bikes are regarded with suspicion and contempt by many in the MTB world. You can call that narrow minded or whatever other names you feel like, but it isn't going to win over anybody in the anti-e camp. Maybe you think you don't care about that, but the way you're cheering on the 'rebuttal' in your post above makes me think you care more than you realize.
> 
> I find that odd, too, that you'd get worked up over what some guy on the internet thinks of your silly hobby.


Please read through some of the other threads in this forum, though a lot of us are not personally big fans of ebikes and have major concerns, we would prefer you not try to speak for us. Not trying to start anything here, but fos'l is actually pretty level headed, please read his post that was added to the ebike forum rules.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ryguy79 said:


> Speed limit and assist limit are different things, mmkay?
> 
> My problem with e-bikers thus far in Michigan is only from personal experience. I've had a handful of experiences with them. The trails I've seen them at have multiple "no e-bike" signs. It seems rather clear to me. I usually ask them if they know that e-bikes are not allowed. Everyone I've run into has attempted to defend their use of e-bikes, most due to some injury. Guess what, I've got a lingering back injury that causes regular pain since 2001 and have torn both ACL, a meniscus, labrum, and broken glenoid over the years. I don't feel that gives me an excuse to ride where I'm prohibited or a need to ride an e-bike. Just admit that you were wrong and head back to the trailhead.


I ride mtb, Ebikes, roadbikes, and hotwheels(jk!) well maybe a spin on my sons green machine.. and I completely agree, they are poaching and know better. Don't make excuses, just flat out admit they are riding them because of the fun factor. That's why I ride them.


----------



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

Ailuropoda said:


> The forest products companies here are good stewards of their land. Plus I ride their logging roads. I used to be in the industry myself.


Again, it's a matter of perspective. Ask some of the local (non-human) residents how they feel about it.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

chazpat said:


> Please read through some of the other threads in this forum, though a lot of us are not personally big fans of ebikes and have major concerns, we would prefer you not try to speak for us. Not trying to start anything here, but fos'l is actually pretty level headed, please read his post that was added to the ebike forum rules.


Who's we? I mean, who are you trying to speak for besides yourself? You disagree with anything I've said, feel free to so state.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Again, it's a matter of perspective. Ask some of the local (non-human) residents how they feel about it.


You obviously don't understand the forest products industry. The next time you wipe, thank a logger.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

kpdemello said:


> Yeah that's kind of my point. The reason ebikes are met with such vitriol by many in the MTB community is because of a gut, emotional reaction that many MTBers, including myself, have toward them.
> 
> Sure, there's logical reasons behind a lot of it, too, like trail impact, environmental impact, etc. But if we're honest, the vitriol is largely based in emotion.
> 
> Here's another example. Imagine a person driving a scooter around a local Wal-Mart, even though that person is fully capable of walking. The person is just too lazy to do so. That's how a lot of MTBers see eMTBers. I'm certainly not alone in thinking this way.


You've never ridden an eMTB on a trail have you?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

kpdemello said:


> Never said I was?
> 
> Look, I don't really care how you get your jollies, whether that be with e-bikes or something else, so long as you're not harming me or anyone else. But e-bikes are regarded with suspicion and contempt by many in the MTB world. You can call that narrow minded or whatever other names you feel like, but it isn't going to win over anybody in the anti-e camp. Maybe you think you don't care about that, but the way you're cheering on the 'rebuttal' in your post above makes me think you care more than you realize.
> 
> I find that odd, too, that you'd get worked up over what some guy on the internet thinks of your silly hobby.


I don't care what you think about e-MTB (which I do about 10-15% of the time riding off road) and could give a crap less about changing your mind,
but I don't like to be called a "lazy bastard". As a constructive exercise, why don't you head for a local bar, locate the biggest motorcyclist there and call him that. Then, when you pick yourself off the ground and collect all your missing teeth, you can tell him you're "jesh" surprised his skin is so thin.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

kpdemello said:


> Who's we? I mean, who are you trying to speak for besides yourself? You disagree with anything I've said, feel free to so state.


Just reading the ebike threads a good bit, it seems a good number of us really only want a few things from the ebikers (most of this has been regurgitated over and over, hence my suggestion to read the old threads):

1) Please don't call them bicycles or try to convince others that they are "just modern bicycles". Maybe that is emotional but I just think people should be properly recognized for what they do. I went to an engineering university but I'm not an engineer so I don't call myself one, I graduated from the college or architecture but not with a degree in architecture so I don't call myself an architect. If I played miniature golf I would not tell people I was a golfer (ok, maybe for a minute as a joke). Ebikes aren't for me but there's nothing wrong with someone being an ebiker but there's also no reason to pretend they are something different. I don't care if some government body decides they will be managed the same as bicycles, still doesn't change what they are.

2) eBikers shouldn't try to gain access to mountain bike trails by sliding in as bicycles. A lot of mountain bikers have spent a lot of time advocating for mountain bike trails and building and maintaining trails and there is a fear that if ebikes are suddenly lumped in as bicycles, "mountain bikes now have motors" will be harmful to our sport. Ebikers need to form their own groups and stand on their own.

3) A lot of us believe the land managers should determine if ebikes are allowed on their trails or not. One infamous ebiker on here posted photos of some of the trails he rode in Texas (illegally) and to me, they looked like dirt roads. Now I do not know those trails and all of the details, but I believe some trails would be fine with ebikes but not all trails.

There is also a lot of fear due to ebikes being easily modded and the fact that it is difficult to distinguish the different classes of ebikes from each other and that ebikers will use that to get away with riding illegally. But the arguments that ebikers are "lazy" or that they (class 1) tear up the trails have been discussed to death in this forum. I don't really have an emotional reaction to them if they are cool with the above because I don't consider them to be doing the same thing I am doing.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Again, it's a matter of perspective. Ask some of the local (non-human) residents how they feel about it.


Oh for God's sake. Sixty years ago Louisiana was one stretch of uninterrupted cotton fields stretching from the Mississippi to the Red River. Now it's mostly forest. Lumber is a cash crop no different than any other and forests in our state are due to the timber industry. There is no "old growth" in our state, even in the State Parks.

I really don't care if some wildlife is killed, injured, or displaced by logging. That's the way it is. It's a natural resource (that is planted by man) and it can be used. Might as well get offended that combines kill a lot of small birds and insects in the horizon-to-horizon wheat fields of Idaho.

Animals have no opinions.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

But your opinion of what makes a person worthy of respect is not important to anyone but you. The e-bike discourse has nothing to do with your views on the value of exercise.

As a civil society, we established and empowered government to protect certain rights.

What separates motorized from non motorized travel is fairly clear. The argument is over how and where these differences should be diminished.

How will government rule on motorized vs non motorized travel, that is the question.

What I find curious is that, until e-bikes were developed, the separation between motorized and non motorized vehicle access was clear. Why would this change simply because e-bikes are smaller, quieter, or less polluting than their gas powered brethren?

Not really getting anywhere are we?

I did try ...



kpdemello said:


> Yeah, if you don't get it after reading my post above, you probably never will.
> 
> But to illustrate it a different way, it's kind of like people who take the car road up to the top of mount Washington, versus the people who hike it. The former are just tourists, and while I don't begrudge them their little visit, I don't really respect their activity much. But the hiker who hiked up from the bottom? That guy has my respect.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

chazpat, thanks for the post; you and I (probably plenty more) are in concert (now, now, suicide doesn't solve anything.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

kpdemello said:


> Who's we?


I'm 'we' also.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Nurse Ben said:


> But your opinion of what makes a person worthy of respect is not important to anyone but you. The e-bike discourse has nothing to do with your views on the value of exercise.


I get that, but... hey did you listen to the recording in the op? The very first guy talks about this gut reaction that people have to e-bikes. This is what I am talking about. If people have a gut, visceral reaction to an activity that is negative, that is going to play into how that activity is treated. It's something that will have to be overcome in the e-bike discourse.

Honestly it's not all that different from how regular MTBs were first perceived. Some people still perceive unpowered MTBs in this negative way, as I recall reading about this psycho couple recently out in the pacific northwest that was sabotaging trail and literally setting traps to injure mountain bikers.

Again, this all goes back to the OP's original question - why are eMTB's a touchy subject. I think what it comes down to is that eMTBs are seen as a dangerous other entity, something different and not like what regular MTBers do. I think it's very similar to how hikers and land managers looked at MTBs originally. What the MTB community did, with pretty good success, was demonstrate to hikers and other users how they were similar and had similar goals (human powered, sustainability, environmental preservation, etc).


----------



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

Ailuropoda said:


> Animals have no opinions.


Then I'll disregard your post.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

A respectful forester or logger that practices sustained forestry skills is going to be very conscious of wild life. I know I was, also don't enjoy trappers or hunters, but understand some is necessary. After working in the woods daily thru snow and all sorts of weather you tend to enjoy seeing the animals and less so humans!


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

kpdemello said:


> Again, this all goes back to the OP's original question - why are eMTB's a touchy subject. I think what it comes down to is that eMTBs are seen as a dangerous other entity, something different and not like what regular MTBers do.


No, I think you made it quite clear earlier that you don't like the idea of e-MTBers taking the "lazy way" to the top of the mountain. You don't see them as dangerous. You see them with disdain and disgust.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

EricTheDood said:


> No, I think you made it quite clear earlier that you don't like the idea of e-MTBers taking the "lazy way" to the top of the mountain. You don't see them as dangerous. You see them with disdain and disgust.


Splitting hairs, but okay.

The point that apparently went whooshing over your head was that ebikes are a touchy subject because I and others view them this way. It's not an opinion that can't be changed, but it certainly seems like an uphill battle.

You know what though, I'll give you a sample response that you could have made: "Sure, we who ride eMTBs don't work as hard as regular MTB riders. So what. We're just out to have fun, and we think eMTBs are fun. The same way motocross is fun, lift-served skiing is fun, and even lift-served downhill mountain biking is fun. Those sports all involve motors. Why can't we have our fun on eMTBs?"

I could respond to that in a civilized way. Maybe we could even reach some sort of understanding. But instead, the responses I'm getting here are that I'm a narrow-minded elitist dink, and no one cares about my opinion. That sort of response does not encourage discussion in my opinion.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Even though my wife rides an ebike, I still don’t see how an electric motor driven vehicle is any different than a gas motor driven vehicle. If e-bikes are allow on a trail, why aren’t gas powered bikes. Splitting hairs doesn’t change the facts.

Tesla’s are not gas powered, does that mean that laws made during the evolution of gas powered vehicles should not apply to electric cars?

Back to the beginning... human powered means not motorized.

I think the existing trails rules should remain as they are: non motorized and motorized. ebikes are motorized, they can use the same trails as an ATV or moto. Problem solved.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Nurse Ben said:


> I think the existing trails rules should remain as they are: non motorized and motorized. ebikes are motorized, they can use the same trails as an ATV or moto. Problem solved.


I am not sure why this can't be the universal solution? Maybe because e-MTBs are electric, and therefore seen as "green," something to be encouraged by the environmentally conscious, and made special exception for? I also think e-MTBs blur the line between motorized and non-motorized, or at least that is what e-MTB advocates would have us believe.

I think it might be that blurring of the line that produces such a visceral emotional reaction. It seems deceptive in nature.


----------



## justin70 (Sep 17, 2007)

So many emotions trying to be couched as logical arguments on both sides.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

kpdemello said:


> did you listen to the recording in the op? *The very first guy talks about this gut reaction that people have to e-bikes*. This is what I am talking about. If people have a gut, visceral reaction to an activity that is negative, that is going to play into how that activity is treated. It's something that will have to be overcome in the e-bike discourse.


I have carefully read everything posted here and I have to agree with kpdemello on this point.

This thread is not about "should" ebikes have access or anything along those lines. It is all about how the general public perceive them with or without being informed as to what they really are.

One person might hear "motor" and automatically think "lazy".

Another person might hear "motor" and think "fast n fun"

Another might hear "motor" and think "fast and dangerous" or "fast and destructive"

Perception for most IS reality, it is up to eBike stewards, primarily manufactures IMO, to be those stewards and take the lead in changing public perception.

It is not only the minds of regular MTBers that need to be changed.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

The public perception is that ebikes are regular mtbs.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

T-O-O-L and I don’t mean Park tool.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

justin70 said:


> So many emotions trying to be couched as logical arguments on both sides.


I don't see too much of that on the pro e-bike side, at least here.

Seems the vast majority of e-bikers that have chimed in are perfectly willing to accept the fact that e-bikes are different than mountain bikes.

Most of the non-e-biking 'regulars' who comment here with concerns are likewise not of the ilk that arrogantly proclaim personal superiority based on nothing more than someone's personal preferences when it comes to leisure time activities either. That takes a special kind of dink IMHO. Special, but obviously not uncommon.

Who knew so many people feel the urge to be part of the Exercise Police? 
Lame.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Linktung said:


> The public perception is that ebikes are regular mtbs.


What are you basing that on?

facts, numbers of any sort?


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/jeff...ke-findings-results-1061378.html#post13420912

Basing that on the fact that they look and act like a regular mounntain bike. I have been accused of riding an ebike when I wasn't on one and accused of not riding an ebike while I was on one.

Technically speaking an electronic shifting bike is motorized as well. The definition of motorized includes adding a motor for operation.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

> 65% of park visitors are unable to detect the presence of a Class 1 e-bike.


So because 65% of 375 people surveyed at one park in one part of the country are unable to detect the presence of a class 1 eBike you feel that is the same as your statement "The public perception is that ebikes are regular mtbs."

That is not the same at all.

Take a look at the sampling for "Acceptance by Trail Type"

34% say only on paved roads
10% say not at all
14% say not sure
2% say nature surface only (I am not sure what that means, the study did not provide definitions for that)

Add those up and 60% of those users are not sure or against eBikes being on Trails. That means based on this one study, the Majority of public perception in this case is "against" eBikes on trails.

Even look at the 92 people who demo'd an ebike, even after riding one:

20% not sure
10% no
20% paved only
4% MTN (still not sure what this is, but does not fall into the "all" category)

So that is 54% that could be against ebikes on trails.

That survey shows that the minority favors eBikes on all trails.

This study is just one small sampling, and does not actually address your comment above at all.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

When asked if a a bike was electric 65 percent got it wrong....sorry if the sample size is small, and hosnestly I do not care what folks in other parts of the country think.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Linktung said:


> The public perception is that ebikes are regular mtbs.


 Said no one ever.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Linktung said:


> When asked if a a bike was electric 65 percent got it wrong....sorry if the sample size is small, and hosnestly I do not care what folks in other parts of the country think.


That is not the same thing.

Being sneaky about having a motor and tricking people is not the same thing at all.

Also you should care what other parts of the country are doing as it has the potential to set the standard for where you live.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

The standard for where I live is set by people not giving a damn what type of bicycle you are riding...perhaps in some other parts of the country where the riding is crap people have nothing better to do then check out what type of bike you are riding. I am not sneaky about what type of bike I am riding nor are other people. Have you ridden an ebike on your local trails? If not how would you know what the public perception is?


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Have you ridden an ebike on your local trails? If not how would you know what the public perception is?


That has nothing to do with this discussion. But yes I have ridden a eBike on my local trails. Riding one does not grant the rider an overall bearing on what public perception is. It grants them an extemely small sampling of the few other users they encounter, that is not the general public by any means.

I think what you are trying to say is that the public does not care because they do not know others are riding eBikes because most ped-elec bikes look so similar to regular MTBs. Is that what you are getting at?

The study above shows that the public does care once they are informed what eBikes are AND the small sampling showed that some changed their mind once they rode one.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

What I am getting at is people do not bother to determine the nuanced qualities of your ride. Not that it matters, because when asked to observe an ebike they still get it wrong. The people in the study had a fifty fifty shot at getting the answer right yet somehow got it wrong more then fifty percent. The vast majority of ebikers I see are violating the law, in plain view, by a populace largely informed of what an ebike is, and yet I have never heard of someone getting a ticket.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

justin70 said:


> So many emotions trying to be couched as logical arguments on both sides.


There's no emotion in this opinion:

The law is the law. If a trail is posted as non motorized, then that is the law.

No emotion necessary to follow the rules. People who break the rules or rationalize why laws don't apply to them, that is the source of opinion and emotion.

The problem with e-bikes is that their are people and an industry who want e-bikes on non motorized trails, they are also the ones wanting to change the law.

I'm not sure how emotion factors into existing law, however, if ebikers want to change the law, then there will be a debate and it will likely be emotional.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Well put.

I would add that a survey of trail users is not the same as asking the populace to vote on changing laws.

It would not be surprising if the folks who said "no big deal" felt differently when exposed to both sides of a campaign to change a law limiting access.



Linktung said:


> What I am getting at is people do not bother to determine the nuanced qualities of your ride. Not that it matters, because when asked to observe an ebike they still get it wrong. The people in the study had a fifty fifty shot at getting the answer right yet somehow got it wrong more then fifty percent. The vast majority of ebikers I see are violating the law, in plain view, by a populace largely informed of what an ebike is, and yet I have never heard of someone getting a ticket.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Linktung said:


> http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/jeff...ke-findings-results-1061378.html#post13420912
> 
> Basing that on the fact that they look and act like a regular mounntain bike. I have been accused of riding an ebike when I wasn't on one and accused of not riding an ebike while I was on one.
> 
> Technically speaking an electronic shifting bike is motorized as well. The definition of motorized includes adding a motor for operation.


 The definition of motorized means the motor is manner of propulsion.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Does your computer have access to Google?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Are we going back to " I have a fan on my handle bar, it's a motorized bike ?" I refer you to some of the definitions here regarding forum posting rules. The Di2i motor runs off some tiny battery and yes, it has a tiny motor. You now telling me it's an e bike and it makes the bike go 20 mph? I would also refer you to the title of the first post. Uggg.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

According to Google's definition of motorized, an electronically shifted bike (motors used for operation) is in fact, motorized.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Linktung said:


> According to Google's definition of motorized, an electronically shifted bike (motors used for operation) is in fact, motorized.


 How about we use the definition set forth here, by fed, state, county, DOT, BLM, and USFS for starters. Or continue being obtuse?


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Sure, but those agency's definition of motorized does not hinge on propulsion either, hence the ban on chainsaws in Wilderness.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

OK, great. You ride a manual power chainsaw through the woods? The subject I thought was e bikes? You're straying.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Sure, but those agency's definition of motorized does not hinge on propulsion either, hence the ban on chainsaws in Wilderness.


Wilderness rules carry a distinction between motorized equipment , motorized vehicles, motor boats and bicycles. (All are disallowed, but listed separately).

Oh, and I've got limited patience for useless circular semantic games; use some common sense. Talking about Wilderness rules is pointless, as no bikes either with or without motors are allowed there anyway. Likewise, the whole 'if I tape an electric can-opener to my bike, that means it's motorized' is just flat out stupid. Let's try and keep the conversation somewhat within the bounds of reason. Thanks.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

leeboh said:


> OK, great. You ride a manual power chainsaw through the woods? The subject I thought was e bikes? You're straying.







Well, there's this. My primary mode of transport in the frozen Wilderness...before it got banned.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Well this thread has veered off into complete ridiculousness.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

ryguy79 said:


> Well this thread has veered off into complete ridiculousness.


Hard to imagine.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

watermonkey said:


> Well, there's this. My primary mode of transport in the frozen Wilderness...before it got banned.


Dude, you endo and your face is cut in half! Leatherface??!!


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

kpdemello said:


> I could respond to that in a civilized way. Maybe we could even reach some sort of understanding. But instead, the responses I'm getting here are that I'm a narrow-minded elitist dink, and no one cares about my opinion. That sort of response does not encourage discussion in my opinion.


Perceived "laziness" is not one of the many issues surrounding e-MTB trail access, so there is no incentive to reach an understanding with you.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

EricTheDood said:


> Perceived "laziness" is not one of the many issues surrounding e-MTB trail access, so there is no incentive to reach an understanding with you.


The jogger/hiker on the trail may disagree with you.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

EricTheDood said:


> Perceived "laziness" is not one of the many issues surrounding e-MTB trail access, so there is no incentive to reach an understanding with you.


By the same token, your desire to ride an e-bike on non-motorized trails is not something I really see a point in supporting, and my antipathy towards both your activity and your attitude makes me rather want to fight it. So there's that.

Oh, and if all you got out of my posts is that I think your activity is "lazy" then you kind of missed a lot of the nuance about how I feel about mountain biking and getting out into nature in general. To be blunt, I don't think motorized vehicles of any kind belong in conservation land, parks, or wilderness areas.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Lemonaid said:


> The jogger/hiker on the trail may disagree with you.


Maybe.

But the equestrian won't.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

kpdemello said:


> I think ebikers are lazy cheating bastards, but hey, it's your life, and if you're not hurting me or my trails, go ahead and be a lazy cheating bastard.





kpdemello said:


> you kind of missed a lot of the nuance about how I feel about mountain biking


Can you not see how the "nuance" in your writing is heavily overshadowed by your previous statements?

Backpedaling never works.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

EricTheDood said:


> Perceived "laziness" is not one of the many issues surrounding e-MTB trail access, so there is no incentive to reach an understanding with you.


This thread is not about access, it is about why eBikes are a touchy subject, and one of those is many people feel it is a form of "cheating" to use a motor to assist your pedaling. Don't cherry pick just a few of his posts, go back and read them all, he was directly addressing the audio recording linked in the first post.

He was simply stating that he feels that way and knows many others that feel the same. Nothing wrong with that.

I have ridden eBikes and they are fun, but I would never get one because I don't want to cheat myself. I personally want to earn that climb with power from my own body. I ride with others that feel the same way. I have nothing against those who choose differently from me, but if asked why I would not buy an eBike, that is my answer. Also they cost too much.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I don't care personally how you have your fun. But I agree that there is a general perception that e-bikes are "lazy" (both among cyclists and the general public) and that is a significant hurdle to overcome, fair or not. 

You have to remember that mountain bikes in general aren't super popular with other trail users. We're tolerated at best in most places on MUTs. Add the motor, add (potentially, depending on the rider) more speed, add the perception of laziness, and you've got a recipe for hostility. 

-Walt


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Damn. 

I'll just continue mountain biking on trails designated for human or equestrian power only. 

I'll make sure to document the first time I see an ebiker come out to an access meeting or a trail work day. How long have these things been out? Decades? Yep. I've still never seen one. I've run out of fingers counting the times I've caught ebikers poaching trails. This is why they're hated around here.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Walt said:


> You have to remember that mountain bikes in general aren't super popular with other trail users. We're tolerated at best in most places on MUTs. Add the motor, add (potentially, depending on the rider) more speed, add the perception of laziness, and you've got a recipe for hostility.
> 
> -Walt


I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Silentfoe said:


> Damn.
> 
> I'll just continue mountain biking on trails designated for human or equestrian power only.
> 
> ...


As long as ebikes and mountain bikes remain completely different users I'm fine with them. It would be interesting to see what happens when ebikers start working for the trail access they feel so entitled to and how many will actually show up to those access meeting and donate their time and money on trail work and maintenance, and participate in their local advocacy groups.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

I've worked on trails and did the rest for 30+ years, so paid my dues, think e-bikes should be accepted on their own merit and don't give a rats ass what the "purists" think the 10% of the time I'm legally riding my e-bike. This guy called me and my wife (who has ridden an e-bike off road fewer than five times out of thousands of rides) lazy bastards. Accordingly, I have nothing but disgust and contempt for him and am glad we'll never be in the same camp.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

EricTheDood said:


> Can you not see how the "nuance" in your writing is heavily overshadowed by your previous statements?
> 
> Backpedaling never works.


LOL you edited out the majority of that post and cherry picked the part that in all honesty was sort of tongue in cheek. Its like you're trying to be offended.



fos'l said:


> This guy called me and my wife (who has ridden an e-bike off road fewer than five times out of thousands of rides) lazy bastards. Accordingly, I have nothing but disgust and contempt for him and am glad we'll never be in the same camp.


Yo dude I don't know you or your wife. Why is this so personal for you? I'm just some guy on the internet talking about ebikes.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

kpdemello said:


> Yo dude I don't know you or your wife. Why is this so personal for you? I'm just some guy on the internet talking about ebikes.


Just some guy on the internet disparaging e-bikers.

You already called him and his wife lazy cheaters that don't have your respect because they ride ebikes. I suspect that that has something to do with his irritation.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Oh good heavens how will he or his wife ever survive this savage event. It's too bad both he and you were tragically born without a sense of humor.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

kpdemello said:


> Oh good heavens how will he or his wife ever survive this savage event. It's too bad both he and you were tragically born without a sense of humor.


Oh! Now I get it...when you labeled e-bikers as lazy cheaters that you don't respect, you were just just joking right?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Except in your case. I totally meant it in your case.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

fos'l said:


> ... think e-bikes should be accepted on their own merit


Yep. Starting from scratch and not pretending to be bicycles or piggy backing on the efforts of other trail users before them.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Silentfoe said:


> Yep. Starting from scratch and not pretending to be bicycles or piggy backing on the efforts of other trail users before them.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Absolutely, and I've said that for a long time.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

There is no justification for breaking the law. Even if you built every trail in your community, it is still illegal to ride a motorized vehicle on a non motorized trail. Trail builders don’t t make the rules, we build the trails.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

If you're referring to my comment, why don't you learn to read? I emphasized that one should ride where it's legal in a previous post, and maintain that frequently.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> Yep. Starting from scratch and not pretending to be bicycles or piggy backing on the efforts of other trail users before them.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


 I am confused, isn't this exactly what MTBs did in the beginning? Piggy-back on the trails constructed by hikers and equestrians? First by poaching and then by agitating for legal access, expanding that legal access and then building MUTs for everyone to use ONCE THEY WERE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE LEGALLY.

With legal access Outlaws become Good Citizens and poachers can become trail crews by having skin in the game. So why should Class 1s be any different than the MTBs that so upset folks back at the birth of this sport?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

WoodlandHills said:


> I am confused, isn't this exactly what MTBs did in the beginning? Piggy-back on the trails constructed by hikers and equestrians? First by poaching and then by agitating for legal access, expanding that legal access and then building MUTs for everyone to use......


You're right. And? We have now been fighting an access battle for 40 years. We have a lot of enemies but we've made big strides. In some places we have a very tenuous hold on access. We aren't going to lose that by letting ebikes ruin it all by making the same mistakes the original mountain bikers did.

Just because it happened in the past, doesn't make it ok now. Your point holds no water.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> You're right. And? We have now been fighting an access battle for 40 years. We have a lot of enemies but we've made big strides. In some places we have a very tenuous hold on access. We aren't going to lose that by letting ebikes ruin it all by making the same mistakes the original mountain bikers did.
> 
> Just because it happened in the past, doesn't make it ok now. Your point holds no water.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


 That sounds a lot like "we got ours, but now the door is shut to anyone else" and "don't do what sucessfuly worked for us in the past"...........


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

WoodlandHills said:


> That sounds a lot like "we got ours, but now the door is shut to anyone else" and "don't do what sucessfuly worked for us in the past"...........


Yep. Pretty much.

Nothing wroong with that. This isn't a civil rights issue. It's trail access.

Adding a motorized vehicle that looks like a mountain bike will jeapordize our access.

There's a reason the Sierra Club has already endorsed IMBAs latest ebike statement. Because now they can tell land managers that when they allow mountain bikes, they are allowing motorized vehicles.

I won't apologize for telling ebikers to pave their own way forward. And neither does any other mouubtain biker.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Modern mountain bike access in fact did not come about because of poaching. Rather the opposite. People think that Marin is the model (bikes quickly banned, then poaching) but that ludicrous - there's basically no trail access in the Bay Area for bikes.

In all the places where you can actually ride a mountain bike legally, there was basically never any significant poaching. And what there was didn't result in legal trail access. Instead, bikes started showing up on trails when there weren't *any rules at all about them* (so it wasn't "poaching") and then various negotiations resulted in formal/legal access. 

The place where the most poaching happened (Marin) is now the place you can't ride a mountain bike. Coincidence?

-Walt


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

I am still confused by eBike opponent's positions.

1. "It has a motor". So does a bike with Di2 shifting.

2. "They go too fast." How fast *any* bicycle goes depends 100% on the rider. Period. If you want to argue speed capability, no one on earth would choose a Class 1 ebike over a good Enduro bike on a downhill. If we are going to ban bikes based on the capability of the bike to go a certain speed, then let's all go back to riding full rigid bikes with 26x1.9" tires to save ourselves and other trail users. Or, just establish speed limits. 

3. eBikes tear up trails. Pure bullshit. I'm not even going to bother with this one. 

Beyond those arguments, it is all about fear. 

Another confusing argument: eBikes are fine on paved bike paths, but not on trails. WTF? I can see zero logic behind that argument. Is the issue that danger to other trail users is higher on a trail than a paved bike path? I disagree. A class 1 ebike is going *slower* overall on a trail than it is on a paved path. If you are against ebikes on the trail, for "safety" reasons, then it is illogical to be in favor of them on a paved multi-use trail, just like it is illogical to be in favor of *any* bicycle on a paved multi-use trail. How can "normal" bicycles co-exist with walkers, runners, baby strollers and tottering drunks on a paved path? Oh, it is all about riders taking personal responsibility to share the trail safely. I get it. Just like MTBs on a paved path. Just like an ebike on a paved path, or a dirt trail.

It is all about the the *rider* of the bike, not the bike itself. If a rider is a douche on an MTB, they will probably be a douche on an ebike, in a car, hiking on a trail, in line at the bar, everywhere. A respectful MTB rider or road rider will be respectful on an ebike as well. Having a few hundred watts of pedal assist doesn't change the rider.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Dude, I agree with you except #1. Di2 is not an ebike. Tools are gonna be tools. I know I’m still a tool no matter what I ride!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

honkinunit said:


> A respectful MTB rider or road rider will be respectful on an ebike as well. Having a few hundred watts of pedal assist doesn't change the rider.


Sure, and by this logic we should allow any and all vehicles on any trail.

I think we all know that won't work.

-Walt


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

More non ebikers on this thread than ebikers! Can NON Ebikers understand this simple point that some mtbrs are also ebikers? Y’all act like whoever owns an ebike has no f—-g clue about the cycling scene. That’s how narrow minded some people are.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Gutch said:


> More non ebikers on this thread than ebikers! Can NON Ebikers understand this simple point that some mtbrs are also ebikers? Y'all act like whoever owns an ebike has no f--g clue about the cycling scene. That's how narrow minded some people are.


Maybe because this an ebike forum on a mounting biking site when in actuality they are two different activities. And some ebikers don't understand this.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Lemonaid said:


> Maybe because this an ebike forum on a mounting biking site when in actuality they are two different activities. And some ebikers don't understand this.


Hmm, hold handlebars, sit on seat and pedal? Two different activities hardly. How much time have you spent on an ebike?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Hmm, hold handlebars, sit on seat and pedal? Two different activities hardly. How much time have you spent on an ebike?


Actually, forget it- idc.


----------



## hobbit (Apr 23, 2007)

I acknowlege that this is a touchy subject.
I ride a class 1 in Europe where they are the same as regular MTBs and allowed anywhere a regular MTB is allowed but.... I wouldn't want this permission extended to other classes of ebikes where you don't have to pedal.
For me an ebike overcomes the climbs I hate and allows me to hurtle downhill in exactly the manner I would on a normal bike on the same trails as a normal MTB. With the exception of the climbs most of my riding on an ebike merely leaves me enough energy to really rage it on the downhill rather than being bolloxed by the climb to the start.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

hobbit said:


> I acknowlege that this is a touchy subject.
> I ride a class 1 in Europe where they are the same as regular MTBs and allowed anywhere a regular MTB is allowed but.... I wouldn't want this permission extended to other classes of ebikes where you don't have to pedal.
> For me an ebike overcomes the climbs I hate and allows me to hurtle downhill in exactly the manner I would on a normal bike on the same trails as a normal MTB. With the exception of the climbs most of my riding on an ebike merely leaves me enough energy to really rage it on the downhill rather than being bolloxed by the climb to the start.


 Can you explain how a throttled class 2 would change this scenario? You do understand that one can still pedal while using a throttle for assistance?


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

hobbit said:


> I ride a class 1 in Europe where they are the same as regular MTBs and allowed anywhere a regular MTB is allowed but.... I wouldn't want this permission extended to other classes of ebikes where you don't have to pedal.


I suspect that, ultimately, that's the way it will end up in the US too as the negligible difference in trail impact between class 1 e-bikes and conventional mountain bikes becomes increasingly apparent. The standard European classification will likely become more prevalent in the US, and the hysterical fear of class 1 e-bikes' effect on trails and trail access will likely prove to be unfounded. It's a waiting game.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> More non ebikers on this thread than ebikers! Can NON Ebikers understand this simple point that some mtbrs are also ebikers? Y'all act like whoever owns an ebike has no f--g clue about the cycling scene. That's how narrow minded some people are.


I agree on some counts but conversely electric bike enthusiasts should realize that for some peoples concerns about them, mine for one, experience with riding one is irrelevant, and failing to understand that is equally narrow minded.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> I agree on some counts but conversely electric bike enthusiasts should realize that for some peoples concerns about them, mine for one, experience with riding one is irrelevant, and failing to understand that is equally narrow minded.


The ONLY legit concern is trail access period. Everything else is BS.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> The ONLY legit concern is trail access period. Everything else is BS.


Trail access for who?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Trail access for who?


The risk of trails being closed due to Ebikes. Or mtb trails open to Ebikes.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> The risk of trails being closed due to Ebikes. Or mtb trails open to Ebikes.


That seems a little narrow minded to me.


----------



## gooseberry1 (Mar 16, 2016)

Silentfoe said:


> Yep. Pretty much.
> 
> Nothing wroong with that. This isn't a civil rights issue. It's trail access.
> 
> ...


Again it's about access and all the years mt bikers have had to work to gain access and ebikes need to run the same issues mt bikes have had.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

IMO, there is a difference where I reside, Orange County, CA. When I started riding MTB in the early 80's I just went to the local parks ASSUMING it was allowed (must have been since there were no rules against it, AFAIK). Later, (probably when there were a significant number of bikes) we had meetings about access that seemed to be productive and there is little, if any, conflict today. e-MTB's are prohibited in state and county parks (AFAIK, physically challenged riders are permitted), so it will be difficult or impossible to gain access especially with the vocal MTB community fighting it here. A possible solution may be to ask the Rangers to allow "us" to build separate trails in some(a) parks, but I doubt that will be allowed. Also the e-community is still too small to mount much of an effort.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> That seems a little narrow minded to me.


Sorry couldn't help you out, but idc!


----------



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

Gutch said:


> Sorry couldn't help you out, but idc!


I am crushed but I understand, it's difficult to explain a bs post.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Actually, it wasn’t a bullshit post. Every non ebiker comes up with the usual arguments about Ebikes, and the only one that carries weight is trail access, not trail damage, laziness etc. Funny, I remember climbing Mt Tam 24ish years ago on a downhill Foes “weasel.” Probably same weight as my Levo!


----------



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

Gutch said:


> Actually, it wasn't a bullshit post.


That's one persons opinion. I'm not worried about trail damage or laziness either, my concern regarding them carries weight for me though and I'm not the only one. So your post is wrong, and therefore bs.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

How can it be wrong? An ebiker that has trail access/loss concerns? I’m not following you, have you been inhaling too much JB weld?!!


----------



## hobbit (Apr 23, 2007)

My bad - got no issue with class 2 either.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> have you been inhaling too much JB weld?!!


Could be, I thought you were the one that was high but those damn flashbacks dog me sometimes. I guess I misunderstood you, now that I've reconsidered I think everyone's concern that isn't your only concern is total bs, mine especially.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Could be, I thought you were the one that was high but those damn flashbacks dog me sometimes. I guess I misunderstood you, now that I've reconsidered I think everyone's concern that isn't your only concern is total bs, mine especially.


Honey..., go grab my bong! I'm royally confused now. I just got done figuring out how much wood a woodchuck could chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood, then you go and hit me with this.. Too much!


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Mr Moderator, please be appropriate and respectful, you are supposed to model good behavior. If you quote the content you are criticizing, it helps with context. There are dozens of posters to this thread, no one knows who you are talking to...



fos'l said:


> If you're referring to my comment, why don't you learn to read? I emphasized that one should ride where it's legal in a previous post, and maintain that frequently.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Nurse Ben said:


> There is no justification for breaking the law. Even if you built every trail in your community, it is still illegal to ride a motorized vehicle on a non motorized trail. Trail builders don't t make the rules, we build the trails.


Hope this helps. Mt Poster's comment was offered next after my post. As I stated, if it pertains to me, the poster needs to read what I've written previously, namely that I don't support riding where it's prohibited. I don't think it takes a genius to figure that out Mr Poster. If you weren't referring to me, I wasn't referring to you. Only you know for sure, but I have my suspicions. Maybe Mr Poster should have identified what his comment was in reference to, or if it was a random thought that he regurgitated.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> I am still confused by eBike opponent's positions.
> 
> 1. "It has a motor". So does a bike with Di2 shifting.


This is a specious argument as the motor is not used to propel the bike. In any case, I imagine these electronic shifters are present in an incredibly small percentage of actual MTBs on the trails, and if they are banned from non-motorized trails I think most MTBers would be perfectly fine with that. I know I would, as I don't plan to use one of them ever.



honkinunit said:


> 2. "They go too fast." How fast *any* bicycle goes depends 100% on the rider. Period.


Well therein lies the problem. With an e-bike, it depends on the motor. Class 1 can only get up to a certain speed, aparently, but class 2 and 3 and beyond allow them to go much faster with the same rider. So with an ebike, how fast the bicycle goes depends on the MOTOR, which is why it should be banned from non-motorized trails.



honkinunit said:


> 3. eBikes tear up trails. Pure bullshit.


Based on what evidence? But even if you're right, they still have a motor. For a whole host of reasons, motors don't belong on non-motorized trails.



honkinunit said:


> It is all about the the *rider* of the bike, not the bike itself. If a rider is a douche on an MTB, they will probably be a douche on an ebike, in a car, hiking on a trail, in line at the bar, everywhere. A respectful MTB rider or road rider will be respectful on an ebike as well. Having a few hundred watts of pedal assist doesn't change the rider.


By the same logic, why can't ATVers or motocross bikers be allowed on non-motorized trails so long as they are respectful, stay under a certain speed or install limiters on their machines? If it's all about the rider, why not let everything on non-motorized trails?

To me it's two things: 1) it's about capability, and ebikes have the capability to go much faster with much more power than unpowered bikes; and 2) it's about a philosophy/mindset/ideal that wilderness areas should stay primitive and not be invaded by motors.

#2 is one of the biggest reasons MTBs faced such a hard road, because people saw (and many still see) them as disruptive machines that didn't belong in the wilderness. MTBers were able to establish that their use of these human powered machines was not inconsistent with the concept of leaving wilderness areas primitive. A big reason behind that is that they are fully human powered, and really are relatively simple machines. To me, that's a much harder argument with ebikes, which use a motor for propulsion.

I hope perhaps I have helped clear up some of your confusion.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

kpdemello said:


> This is a specious argument as the motor is not used to propel the bike. In any case, I imagine these electronic shifters are present in an incredibly small percentage of actual MTBs on the trails, and if they are banned from non-motorized trails I think most MTBers would be perfectly fine with that. I know I would, as I don't plan to use one of them ever.
> 
> Well therein lies the problem. With an e-bike, it depends on the motor. Class 1 can only get up to a certain speed, aparently, but class 2 and 3 and beyond allow them to go much faster with the same rider. So with an ebike, how fast the bicycle goes depends on the MOTOR, which is why it should be banned from non-motorized trails.
> 
> ...


I generally agree with your post; I'm of the #2 philosophy/mindset. "Wildlands" is perhaps a better descriptor; "wilderness" and "Wilderness" can be 2 separate things. The capital "W" denotes a legal designation. I'm OK with e-bikes on some _wilderness trails_, not OK with e-bikes on any _Wilderness trails_.

A minor quibble; in most areas (USA anyway) Classes 1 and 2 share the same power/speed restrictions---Class 2 having throttles while Class 1 is pure pedelec. Class 3 has the higher top speed limit.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

fos'l said:


> Hope this helps. Mt Poster's comment was offered next after my post. As I stated, if it pertains to me, the poster needs to read what I've written previously, namely that I don't support riding where it's prohibited. I don't think it takes a genius to figure that out Mr Poster. If you weren't referring to me, I wasn't referring to you. Only you know for sure, but I have my suspicions. Maybe Mr Poster should have identified what his comment was in reference to, or if it was a random thought that he regurgitated.


Fos'l, just use the "reply with quote" button! You confused *everyone* (me included).

-Walt


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

"Why Are E-Bikes Such a Touchy Subject in the U.S.?"

Everything is a touchy subject. Why not E-bikes?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Moe Ped said:


> I generally agree with your post; I'm of the #2 philosophy/mindset. "Wildlands" is perhaps a better descriptor; "wilderness" and "Wilderness" can be 2 separate things. The capital "W" denotes a legal designation. I'm OK with e-bikes on some _wilderness trails_, not OK with e-bikes on any _Wilderness trails_.


Agreed the term wilderness can be confusing in these discussions; I should have used wildlands or even just "non-motorized trails" to be less confusing.


----------



## Raymo853 (Jan 13, 2004)

My prediction: as eBikes get better, lighter, less expensive, and hard to differentiate from pedal only bikes, land mangers will have no choice but to consider banning all bikes to keep eBikes off trails and MUT. 

I assume one of the other replies said something similar, but no way did I read any but the first few replies.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> This is a specious argument as the motor is not used to propel the bike. In any case, I imagine these electronic shifters are present in an incredibly small percentage of actual MTBs on the trails, and if they are banned from non-motorized trails I think most MTBers would be perfectly fine with that. I know I would, as I don't plan to use one of them ever.
> 
> Well therein lies the problem. With an e-bike, it depends on the motor. Class 1 can only get up to a certain speed, aparently, but class 2 and 3 and beyond allow them to go much faster with the same rider. So with an ebike, how fast the bicycle goes depends on the MOTOR, which is why it should be banned from non-motorized trails.
> 
> ...


This Lazy Fat Bastard loves Di2! There is no better shifting period.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Walt said:


> Fos'l, just use the "reply with quote" button! You confused *everyone* (me included).
> 
> -Walt


Sorry, wasn't trying to obfuscate; I'll be more diligent in the future.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

Raymo853 said:


> My prediction: as eBikes get better, lighter, less expensive, and hard to differentiate from pedal only bikes, land mangers will have no choice but to consider banning all bikes to keep eBikes off trails and MUT.
> .


Or....as eBikes get better, lighter, less expensive, and hard to differentiate from pedal only bikes, and fail to demonstrate trail damage, land mangers will shrug and allow class 1 e-bikes on all of their natural surface trails.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

MSU Alum said:


> "Why Are E-Bikes Such a Touchy Subject in the U.S.?"
> 
> Everything is a touchy subject. Why not E-bikes?[/QUOT With the local Mt bike Club they are but not with other users of a public trail like hikers and horse ppl and other Mt bikers even park rangers and land mangers can be open to e bike usage . With the support of my local park manger and the local Mt bike club president e bikes have been allowed on our trails and its been a positive experience for all of the park users .


----------



## Wylian (Aug 2, 2013)

Klurejr said:


> The local trails I ride have a 15mph speed limit, it is actually pretty common in California.
> 
> I have not seen any rangers enforcing it however.


I have, at Skeggs. The rangers sometimes park along downhills that connect to popular single track trail heads. However, it is not common to see.


----------



## Raymo853 (Jan 13, 2004)

Cuyuna said:


> Or....as eBikes get better, lighter, less expensive, and hard to differentiate from pedal only bikes, and fail to demonstrate trail damage, land mangers will shrug and allow class 1 e-bikes on all of their natural surface trails.


First, how will 2,000 Watt eBikes not cause trail damage? I know torque is not the only source of trail damage, but it still a source.

Second, it will not be just trail damage as a problem, but the speeds. Having 1,000 Watt eBikes going by hikers at 40 mph will make it necessary to ban eBikes.

I don't want to go on with more reasons I see, but I strongly suspect the growth of eBikes will end up getting all bikes banned from 30% of the trails now open to them.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Raymo853 said:


> My prediction: as eBikes get better, lighter, less expensive, and hard to differentiate from pedal only bikes, land mangers will have no choice but to consider banning all bikes to keep eBikes off trails and MUT.





Cuyuna said:


> Or....as eBikes get better, lighter, less expensive, and hard to differentiate from pedal only bikes, and fail to demonstrate trail damage, land mangers will shrug and allow class 1 e-bikes on all of their natural surface trails.


These 2 quotes basically sum up the fears of some and the desires of others.

What no one on this board can tell for certain is which outcome will be the result.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

Raymo853 said:


> First, how will 2,000 Watt eBikes not cause trail damage? I know torque is not the only source of trail damage, but it still a source.
> 
> Second, it will not be just trail damage as a problem, but the speeds. Having 1,000 Watt eBikes going by hikers at 40 mph will make it necessary to ban eBikes.
> 
> I don't want to go on with more reasons I see, but I strongly suspect the growth of eBikes will end up getting all bikes banned from 30% of the trails now open to them.


Class 1 e-bikes. I don't want electric motorcycles or other such throttled vehicles on on natural surface trails either.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> These 2 quotes basically sum up the fears of some and the desires of others.
> 
> What no one on this board can tell for certain is which outcome will be the result.


If "land managers" shrug and allow class 1 e-MTBs on their natural surface trails then access for conventional MTBs is no longer in jeopardy. So...what's the problem?


----------



## Raymo853 (Jan 13, 2004)

Cuyuna said:


> Class 1 e-bikes. I don't want electric motorcycles or other such throttled vehicles on on natural surface trails either.


Class 1, Class 2 , Class B4x/J may be great in the industry regulations but will not be understandable nor enforceable.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Raymo853 said:


> My prediction: as eBikes get better, lighter, less expensive, and hard to differentiate from pedal only bikes, land mangers will have no choice but to consider banning all bikes to keep eBikes off trails and MUT.
> 
> I assume one of the other replies said something similar, but no way did I read any but the first few replies.


I pretty much echoed the same sentiment in an earlier post somewhere.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Cuyuna said:


> Or....as eBikes get better, lighter, less expensive, and hard to differentiate from pedal only bikes, and fail to demonstrate trail damage, land mangers will shrug and allow class 1 e-bikes on all of their natural surface trails.





Cuyuna said:


> If "land managers" shrug and allow class 1 e-MTBs on their natural surface trails then access for conventional MTBs is no longer in jeopardy. So...what's the problem?


This question assumes the only opposition to to ebikes comes from mountain bikers. The "problem" is other users aside from bikers. Ask an average jogger, hiker, equestrian what they think. Ebikes on trails isn't about just getting access to mountain bike trails, it's about getting access to =>***SHARED***<= trails. And many of those trails already have restrictions that ban motorized vehicles. What will end up happening if mountain bikes and ebikes get grouped into one big category of users is the other interests will have good cause to ban all bikes, not just ebikes.

And repeating what someone else said earlier. Some wilderness areas ban motorized vehicles to keep the areas and natural and reduce the effects of technology on the landscape. Mountain bikes were reluctantly allowed in those areas because they required HUMAN power to operate even though they are mechanical in nature. You take the HUMAN power out of the equation you just have another vehicle.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

Lemonaid said:


> This question assumes the only opposition to to ebikes comes from mountain bikers. The "problem" is other users aside from bikers. Ask an average jogger, hiker, equestrian what they think. Ebikes on trails isn't about just getting access to mountain bike trails, it's about getting access to =>***SHARED***<= trails. And many of those trails already have restrictions that ban motorized vehicles. What will end up happening if mountain bikes and ebikes get grouped into one big category of users is the other interests will have good cause to ban all bikes, not just ebikes.
> 
> And repeating what someone else said earlier. *Some wilderness areas ban motorized vehicles to keep the areas and natural and reduce the effects of technology on the landscape*. Mountain bikes were reluctantly allowed in those areas because they required HUMAN power to operate even though they are mechanical in nature. You take the HUMAN power out of the equation you just have another vehicle.


As we've seen in an increasing number of places, it's a matter of re-defining "motor vehicle", thus eliminating that disqualification.

As the e-bike concept evolves, attitudes will evolve also. They already are in many places, positive or negative. Time will tell. Early in the game yet.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Cuyuna said:


> Class 1 e-bikes. I don't want electric motorcycles or other such throttled vehicles on on natural surface trails either.


 On paper, there are classes. Once that door is open, anything goes. How to tell by looking at them? You can't. Sure, some will just buy and ride. Controller over rides and mods are already out there. Fake stickers, an extra battery in the backpack etc.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yeah, if you think this is a rough crowd, try the silver-hair squad at a city council meeting. Mountain bikes *without* motors are just barely tolerated in lots of places. Add a motor (and those grannies will google up some marketing videos of dudes in fullfaces shredding on Kenovos to show at the meeting) and it's game over instantly. 

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Walt said:


> Yeah, if you think this is a rough crowd, try the silver-hair squad at a city council meeting. Mountain bikes *without* motors are just barely tolerated in lots of places. Add a motor (and those grannies will google up some marketing videos of dudes in fullfaces shredding on Kenovos to show at the meeting) and it's game over instantly.
> 
> -Walt


Yup.

If e-bikes were being pushed a number of years ago the way they are now back when we were trying to get MTB trails approved locally, we would've been forced to answer how we would keep them off the trails and lacking a good answer, there's no way we would've gotten some of the permissions we have now.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Cuyuna said:


> If "land managers" shrug and allow class 1 e-MTBs on their natural surface trails then access for conventional MTBs is no longer in jeopardy. So...what's the problem?


I never said that would be a problem. I am not sure why you think I had a problem with that statement.

What I said is you and the others who assume land managers *WILL* shrug and let them be, cannot actually say for a certainty that *IS* what will happen.

The same goes for those who assume land managers *WILL NOT* let them be and *RATHER WILL* ban them and all bikes. That also cannot be said with certainty to happen.

As I have said many times on this board, the future is uncertain. Those who want eBike Access on their local trails need to get out there, join or form an eBike advocacy group and get to advocating.

Just hoping that land managers will accept them because you personally think they are no different from a pedal only driven bike is not going to be the answer for every riding area. Just thinking land managers will accept them because a bunch of people buy them and start riding them also it not a plan to action. If that was the case MTB's would be allowed everywhere hikers and Horseback riders are allowed.... and that most certainly is not the case.

I personally have no problem with eBikes, I have ridden them and seen them on my local trails. But I am one person, and my one opinion means very little if it is drowned out by the HOH members who tend to be the most vocal and active people to show up at City Council meetings and other places where government decisions are made.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Yup, and mine was clearly general and not pointed at any one, whereas you apparently got butt hurt about a post you thought was pointed at you.

You're a moderator, you are expected to do better, not bait, not troll, and not respond personally.



fos'l said:


> Hope this helps. Mt Poster's comment was offered next after my post. As I stated, if it pertains to me, the poster needs to read what I've written previously, namely that I don't support riding where it's prohibited. I don't think it takes a genius to figure that out Mr Poster. If you weren't referring to me, I wasn't referring to you. Only you know for sure, but I have my suspicions. Maybe Mr Poster should have identified what his comment was in reference to, or if it was a random thought that he regurgitated.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

fos'l said:


> IMO, there is a difference where I reside, Orange County, CA. .....e-MTB's are prohibited in state and county parks (AFAIK, physically challenged riders are permitted)...


You sure about that?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Nurse Ben said:


> Yup, and mine was clearly general and not pointed at any one, whereas you apparently got butt hurt about a post you thought was pointed at you.
> 
> You're a moderator, you are expected to do better, not bait, not troll, and not respond personally.


I stand by my comments. Complain to the upper echelon if you're unhappy.


----------



## Guest (Nov 21, 2017)

fos'l said:


> I stand by my comments. Complain to the upper echelon if you're unhappy.


it figures, do and say as you please with lack of responsibility or ownership...lame.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

AGarcia said:


> You sure about that?


About which comment? I've asked Rangers at both County and State Parks who have stated that e-MTB's are prohibited. I've asked at two parks about physically challenged riders and they were allowed at that time (about six months ago). Sad thing is that Pt Magu and the Santa Monica mountain areas have changed their stance on e-MTB's and, apparently, allow them in the "inner" park roads now, but not on the trails.There may be some legal mumbo jumbo that I'm not aware of, and don't plan to pursue. Little bit moot right now anyway since the three parks closest to my residence have been closed by the recent fires.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

fos'l said:


> There may be some legal mumbo jumbo that I'm not aware of...


 

You mentioned OC, so I presumed we were talking about County and State Parks in the OC area, like Santiago Oaks, Aliso & Wood Canyon, Chino Hills... places like that.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

nvphatty said:


> it figures, do and say as you please with lack of responsibility or ownership...lame.


Dude, give negative rep again, idc, but I gotta say you are the ultimate troll in this forum.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Walt said:


> Yeah, if you think this is a rough crowd, try the silver-hair squad at a city council meeting. Mountain bikes *without* motors are just barely tolerated in lots of places. Add a motor (and those grannies will google up some marketing videos of dudes in fullfaces shredding on Kenovos to show at the meeting) and it's game over instantly.
> 
> -Walt


 Or you could go over to the retirement community with a couple of 250w trikes and cruisers and let them ride them around for an afternoon. Everyone who has ever ridden an ebike has said they were addictive and puts huge smiles on first time riders. Of course, you may have to start sharing the trails with silver-haired ebikers if that happened......


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

nvphatty said:


> it figures, do and say as you please with lack of responsibility or ownership...lame.


Cry about it.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> Or you could go over to the retirement community with a couple of 250w trikes and cruisers and let them ride them around for an afternoon. Everyone who has ever ridden an ebike has said they were addictive and puts huge smiles on first time riders. Of course, you may have to start sharing the trails with silver-haired ebikers if that happened......


Are you talking about having elderly people try out eBikes for riding on the street and paved bike paths, or having them try out full suspension eMTB's designed for riding on Dirt trails?

The 2 things are not equal at all.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I'm not gonna complain about you, you make your own bed.

But if you want positive interactions with the other members AND you are a moderator, you might want to choose your battles and pick your words more carefully.

Not caring only works when it's not about interacting with others.



fos'l said:


> I stand by my comments. Complain to the upper echelon if you're unhappy.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

WoodlandHills said:


> Or you could go over to the retirement community with a couple of 250w trikes and cruisers and let them ride them around for an afternoon. Everyone who has ever ridden an ebike has said they were addictive and puts huge smiles on first time riders. Of course, you may have to start sharing the trails with silver-haired ebikers if that happened......


Um, the people at these meetings complaining about "those extreme mountain bikers" are not *ever* going to be convinced that e-bikes belong on trails. Trust me. Remember, please, that they would strongly prefer *no bikes on trails at all*. Sometimes they get their way.

You certainly could try to get them interested in riding around town (the standard behavior is to drive a large SUV, then complain that a new trail will have terrible effects on nature/wildlife), but that would have zero effect on their stance on wheels on dirt trails.

I have spent the better part of 2 decades working on this sort of stuff, and I assure you that you will face much more hostility to e-mtb IRL than you do here.

-Walt


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Klurejr said:


> Are you talking about having elderly people try out eBikes for riding on the street and paved bike paths, or having them try out full suspension eMTB's designed for riding on Dirt trails?
> 
> The 2 things are not equal at all.


+1 seems to be a lot of confusion on what whole "ebikes on trials" issue is about. Ebikes on pavement is virtually a non issue except when speed is involved and zero issue regarding access rights.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

nvphatty said:


> deleting posts of members simply because you didn't care for them ?? is this really what MTBR has become??


If you really must know, I deleted most of your posts in this thread. You constantly walk the line of what is and what is not acceptable on this forum, not just in this post, but all over the forum. I regularly get complaints about your posts. If you really have a problem with how you perceive you are being treated, please reach out to one of us or to fc himself. Making claims like this in public and totally derailing a thread is the wrong way to do it. Posting three times in a row is Obnoxious, just multi-quote into one post please.

Any further discussions about moderating need to be moved to the site feedback forum or put into a PM to a Super-Mod or an Admin.


----------



## Guest (Nov 21, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> Any further discussions about moderating need to be moved to the site feedback forum or put into a PM to a Super-Mod or an Admin.


you have mail


----------



## DL723 (Sep 25, 2017)

Lemonaid said:


> +1 seems to be a lot of confusion on what whole "ebikes on trials" issue is about. Ebikes on pavement is virtually a non issue except when speed is involved and zero issue regarding access rights.


Surprisingly, Ebikes on pavement isn't as cut and dry as it seems. NPS bans them from bike paths for the same reason as why they're banned on trails. They consider them motorized vehicles..which means nogo on bike paths.

That being said, I did just get an email back from them on that subject saying they're gathering more info on ebikes as they grow in use and development. So it may be revisited in the future.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

They are legal on bike paths in SC.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Gutch said:


> They are legal on bike paths in SC.


?

South Carolina
Southern California
Santa Cruz
Santa Clara


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Sorry, South Carolina. Well I should say in Greenville.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Klurejr said:


> Are you talking about having elderly people try out eBikes for riding on the street and paved bike paths, or having them try out full suspension eMTB's designed for riding on Dirt trails?
> 
> The 2 things are not equal at all.


Do you even bother to read the posts that you respond to? I clearly stated the words "250w trikes and cruisers", one would think that a "super moderator" would at least pretend they had shown enough respect to actually take time to both read and comprehend a post before replying. Sad.......


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Gutch said:


> They are legal on bike paths in SC.


Just to add to your statement, AFAIK, Class 1 & 2 are permitted on bike paths in CA, UT, NC, SC, and TN unless specifically excluded. There may be other states with different regulations allowing them.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

fos'l said:


> Just to add to your statement, AFAIK, Class 1 & 2 are permitted on bike paths in CA, UT, NC, SC, and TN unless specifically excluded. There may be other states with different regulations allowing them.


Legal by state legislation on all state trails, paved or natural surface, in Minnesota. Since 2012. Pedal-only, but up to 1000 watts.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Gutch said:


> Sorry, South Carolina. Well I should say in Greenville.


Yeah on the West Coast SC usually means Southern California. Like USC---go Trojans!


----------



## Guest (Nov 22, 2017)

fos'l said:


> Just to add to your statement, AFAIK, Class 1 & 2 are permitted on bike paths in CA, UT, NC, SC, and TN unless specifically excluded. There may be other states with different regulations allowing them.


hopefully motorized transport will be banned from such venues that will lessen mishaps due to speed/pace diff of walkers, joggers, a bicyclists.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

nvphatty said:


> hopefully motorized transport will be banned from such venues that will lessen mishaps due to speed/pace diff of walkers, joggers, a bicyclists.


E-bikes are only a problem on level ground and going up hills; on a downgrade regular bikes are every bit as problematic as are e-bikes in regards to traffic conflicts.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

People For Bikes is the primary ebike advocacy organization at this point. They created and promote their "model" ebike legislation that has been passed by several states, and they track legality of ebikes here:

Electric Bicycles • PeopleForBikes


----------



## DL723 (Sep 25, 2017)

fos'l said:


> Just to add to your statement, AFAIK, Class 1 & 2 are permitted on bike paths in CA, UT, NC, SC, and TN unless specifically excluded. There may be other states with different regulations allowing them.


The "specifically excluded" part is what bugs me. It basically means you still have to check every place you go to confirm. I've mentioned this before...Orange county is probably one of the most ebike heavy areas in the country. But if you ask the county park system, they will actually say ebikes are not allowed on their paved bike paths, since they are motorized vehicles. That ordnance will most likely change over the next few years. But it illustrates having that caveat of local exceptions basically makes the state law kind of useless. Not to mention all national parks in california, and there are quite a few, prohibit them from paved paths.

I guess one could just not ask and fall back on the state law. Pretty sure they won't ticket and just give some sort of warning. But I think it would be just cleaner if class 1 + 2 are blanket ok'd for paved paths and be done with it.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

honkinunit said:


> People For Bikes is the primary ebike advocacy organization at this point. They created and promote their "model" ebike legislation that has been passed by several states, and they track legality of ebikes here:
> 
> Electric Bicycles • PeopleForBikes


It should be noted that P4B totally boned the legislation in California; the bill they were sponsoring was not the bill that was passed. They were supporting e-bike access only for bike lanes and bike paths; not for trails.

For a year or so P4B was claiming AB-1096 did not apply to trails. WRONG! They finally have the correct interpretation posted and are now claiming it was "their" model.

P4B is not to be trusted. Do your own research.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

nvphatty said:


> hopefully motorized transport will be banned from such venues that will lessen mishaps due to speed/pace diff of walkers, joggers, a bicyclists.


The bike path that I ride occasionally is insanely fast. We've got mini peletons everywhere.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Yeah, I don’t think the Ebikes are going away anytime soon. All these manufacturers would not have invested in R&D and tooling if they thought it wasn’t going to be a major market change.

Specialized
Pivot
Commencal
Scott
Trek
Giant
Rocky Mountain
Lapierre
Cannondale
Felt
Kona
Orbea
Diamondback
Cube
Focus
Raleigh
Nicolai
Bianchi
Fuji
Mondraker
BMC
Haibike
Surface 604
Bulls
Norco
Moustache
Haro
Merida
Devinnci
Motobecane
Orange
Pinarello


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Hell even the TDF Froomigator winners bike brand Pinarello has just announced a carbon road ebike.


----------



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

I'm opposed to electric bikes on bike and pedestrian paths for the same reason I'm opposed to them off road, which is allowing motors in places previously designated for non-motorized traffic. I realize in many peoples view here that makes me anti-ebike and a *ater but actually I'm just pro-pedestrian, I've really nothing against ebikes at all.



Moe Ped said:


> E-bikes are only a problem on level ground and going up hills; on a downgrade regular bikes are every bit as problematic as are e-bikes in regards to traffic conflicts.


I don't buy that, admittedly I haven't ridden any modern versions but I have a friend who is a very fast rider in most anyones book and he absolutely loves e-bikes because he says he can double his mileage and feels like Chris Froome while doing it. Some sort of Specialized electric road rig. I can't imagine anyone going from a bicycle to an e-bike not upping their average speed by a fairly significant margin.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

Gutch said:


> Yeah, I don't think the Ebikes are going away anytime soon. All these manufacturers would not have invested in R&D and tooling if they thought it wasn't going to be a major market change.
> 
> Specialized
> Pivot
> ...


Yamaha. Shimano.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

^i have the same road ebike. I turn it off on the bike path. Are you ok with it now?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Cuyuna said:


> Yamaha. Shimano.


Well yeah, but Yamaha is obviously a motorcycle company and I don't believe Shimano makes a frame or brands a bike?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> I don't buy that, admittedly I haven't ridden any modern versions but I have a friend who is a very fast rider in most anyones book and he absolutely loves e-bikes because he says he can double his mileage and feels like Chris Froome while doing it. Some sort of Specialized electric road rig. I can't imagine anyone going from a bicycle to an e-bike not upping their average speed by a fairly significant margin.


What is the big deal if someone goes from 12MPH to 19 MPH?

BTW, my Haibike and I think all Bosch drive ebikes with a "20 MPH" limit actually cut at around 19 MPH.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

Gutch said:


> Yeah, I don't think the Ebikes are going away anytime soon. All these manufacturers would not have invested in R&D and tooling if they thought it wasn't going to be a major market change.





Gutch said:


> Well yeah, but Yamaha is obviously a motorcycle company and I don't believe Shimano makes a frame or brands a bike?


Those two manufacturers, Yamaha and Shimano, would not have invested in R&D and tooling if they thought it wasn't going to be a major market change.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> ^i have the same road ebike. I turn it off on the bike path. Are you ok with it now?


Like I said, totally fine with it. Just not fine with defining them as being not motorized and therefore legal on bike paths and motor-free trails.

No matter though, just my dumb opinion which won't change anything. Electric bikes are destined to become mainstream and allowed anywhere that bikes can go.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Well yeah, but Yamaha is obviously a motorcycle company and I don't believe Shimano makes a frame or brands a bike?


Yamaha is about to introduce their own line of eBikes.

KTM already has a line of eBikes.

The Bultaco brand of motorcycles has been resurrected selling - wait for it - ebikes.

What you are going to see is bicycle brands and motorcycle brands both solving the ebike equation in slightly different ways.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Gutch said:


> Well yeah, but Yamaha is obviously a motorcycle company and I don't believe Shimano makes a frame or brands a bike?


Not to argue, but Yamaha, in addition to producing e-bike motors, exhibited their new line of e-bikes, both road and MTB, at Interbike, due to be released in the spring.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Hell even the TDF Froomigator winners bike brand Pinarello has just announced a carbon road ebike.


Cannondale, Trek, Giant, and Specialized are huge suppliers to pro road cycling and they already have eBikes. Pinarello is just catching up.


----------



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

honkinunit said:


> What is the big deal if someone goes from 12MPH to 19 MPH?


Because 12mph seems like a relatively leisurely pace compared to 19mph, 19mph is about the speed where you start getting called an @sshole by people on busy bike paths. E-bikes will allow everyone to be Chris Froome. And they will get faster.

Once again, nothing against electric bikes, I only have a problem with opening a legal door for motors.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> I'm opposed to electric bikes on bike and pedestrian paths for the same reason I'm opposed to them off road, which is allowing motors in places previously designated for non-motorized traffic. I realize in many peoples view here that makes me anti-ebike and a *ater but actually I'm just pro-pedestrian, I've really nothing against ebikes at all.
> 
> I don't buy that, admittedly I haven't ridden any modern versions but I have a friend who is a very fast rider in most anyones book and he absolutely loves e-bikes because he says he can double his mileage and feels like Chris Froome while doing it. Some sort of Specialized electric road rig. I can't imagine anyone going from a bicycle to an e-bike not upping their average speed by a fairly significant margin.


Good thing for us in CA is it's a state law. Also, the 20 mph limit, which is difficult to exceed on e-bikes since you're on your own when the motor shuts off, is a lot slower than many. I've been "motoring" along about 20 mph and been dropped like a rock by a road rider.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Good thing for us in CA is it's a state law.


My buddy has done all of his riding on one in California, I guarantee it well exceeded 20mph.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Cuyuna said:


> Those two manufacturers, Yamaha and Shimano, would not have invested in R&D and tooling if they thought it wasn't going to be a major market change.


Absolutely correct. They are HUGE players.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

DL723 said:


> The "specifically excluded" part is what bugs me. It basically means you still have to check every place you go to confirm. I've mentioned this before...Orange county is probably one of the most ebike heavy areas in the country. But if you ask the county park system, they will actually say ebikes are not allowed on their paved bike paths, since they are motorized vehicles. That ordnance will most likely change over the next few years. But it illustrates having that caveat of local exceptions basically makes the state law kind of useless. Not to mention all national parks in california, and there are quite a few, prohibit them from paved paths.
> 
> I guess one could just not ask and fall back on the state law. Pretty sure they won't ticket and just give some sort of warning. But I think it would be just cleaner if class 1 + 2 are blanket ok'd for paved paths and be done with it.


Since it's a state law, it would seem like an area would need to post that e-bikes are prohibited. There are at least three paths in Orange County where I've encountered this. Curiously, while two say "no electric bicycles", one states "no motorized vehicles" which, by law, means e-bikes are permitted, but I won't be the test case.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

fos'l said:


> Not to argue, but Yamaha, in addition to producing e-bike motors, exhibited their new line of e-bikes, both road and MTB, at Interbike, due to be released in the spring.


Yes, i understand Yamaha. I'll add them along with Bultaco and soon to be Husqvarna. I just didn't want to hear "ha ha damn motorcycle companies blah blah blah!"


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> Cannondale, Trek, Giant, and Specialized are huge suppliers to pro road cycling and they already have eBikes. Pinarello is just catching up.


Yes, but they don't produce a drop bar road ebike. I know giant and orbea do.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

RickBullottaPA said:


> You assume that "eBikers" and "mountain bikers" are mutually exclusive groups. That is a fallacious assumption. Some days I want to hammer hard on my Santa Cruz, and some days I want to do "enduro days" and session downhill segments, and my KTM eBike allows me to do that and get in 2X as many descents. And still get a good workout. Wrangling a 50 lb bike around is sort of a flashback to early DH bikes. And I rarely ever use the highest power output (like, almost never). Just enough to keep the ascents aerobic. And yes, I do participate in access, trail work, youth racing, and other advocacy and pro-MTB activities.
> 
> Sadly too many people have tried to make this an "OR" discussion rather than an "AND" discussion. With some simple and common sense policies, a certain class of eBikes (and e-Bikers) can easily co-exist without any threat to access.


I completely agree. 👍


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

RickBullottaPA said:


> You assume that "eBikers" and "mountain bikers" are mutually exclusive groups. That is a fallacious assumption.


The fear is that when you lump ebikers in with mountain bikers that a-holes will begin sneaking in overpowered ebikes that ruin everything.

There are several parks near me in which moto bikes and mountain bikes are allowed on the same trails. The moto bikes tear those trails up to the point where they are nearly unrideable. Right now, I can go to the trails where those things aren't allowed and everything is awesome.

Sure, you can tell me class 1 bikes don't have the power to do that to normal trails. I will reply that it will be impossible for land managers to tell when a bike is class 1 versus class-OMFG-MONSTER. E-monsters will then run unchecked through the trails we know and love.

And then everything will no longer be awesome.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Klurejr said:


> Are you talking about having elderly people try out eBikes for riding on the street and paved bike paths, or having them try out full suspension eMTB's designed for riding on Dirt trails?
> 
> The 2 things are not equal at all.





WoodlandHills said:


> Do you even bother to read the posts that you respond to? I clearly stated the words "250w trikes and cruisers", one would think that a "super moderator" would at least pretend they had shown enough respect to actually take time to both read and comprehend a post before replying. Sad.......


One would also think you could comprehend the final, most important sentence in the post you're referring to.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> The fear is that when you lump ebikers in with mountain bikers that a-holes will begin sneaking in overpowered ebikes that ruin everything.
> 
> There are several parks near me in which moto bikes and mountain bikes are allowed on the same trails. The moto bikes tear those trails up to the point where they are nearly unrideable. Right now, I can go to the trails where those things aren't allowed and everything is awesome.
> 
> ...


Understood, but don't you think they would just ban Ebikes?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Asshole-ed-ness is a function of personality, not what you ride or drive.


True but machines can enhance asshole-ed-ness. That is why governments regulate stuff (cars, guns, explosives, etc).

YOU might be responsible. However, regulations banning ebikes protect us against all the irresponsible a-holes who would smear their asshole-ed-ness all over the forest like **** on a bagel.

Another issue is the concept that ebikes would allow more people to put more miles on the trails. Is that really desirable? Lets say people can double their mileage on an ebike. Do we really want to subject trails to that level of use? Perhaps the practical limitations of non-motorized travel is a GOOD thing in that regard.



Gutch said:


> Understood, but don't you think they would just ban Ebikes?


Sure. But the fear is the "they" won't discriminate between MTBs and Ebikes when they drop the banhammer. Keep in mind there is a segment of users who would absolutely love to have an excuse to ban MTBs right now.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Yeah, I don't think the Ebikes are going away anytime soon. All these manufacturers would not have invested in R&D and tooling if they thought it wasn't going to be a major market change.
> 
> Specialized
> Pivot
> ...


That's a lot of players in an unproven market and what very well may prove to be a niche market. A decent ebike will be expensive and Chinese company ebikes will take the lower end of the market. A limited number of serious cyclist will be interested in ebikes (I'm sure some here won't agree), maybe some moto types will jump in if it means they can ride non-motorized trails. I still think the biggest part of the market will be for commuters and running around town, not eMTBs.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Moe Ped said:


> E-bikes are only a problem on level ground and going up hills; on a downgrade regular bikes are every bit as problematic as are e-bikes in regards to traffic conflicts.


Depends on the e-bike. Poachers gonna poach. My old commute included about 10 miles of nice, relatively flat, bike path. Pretty wide with good sight lines. I'd usually do 18-20mph on the flats on that stretch and there was a guy on a converted fat bike. Our commutes overlapped occasionally. Riding completely upright he would pass me like I was standing still. I would assume he was on a class 3, which would not have been legal in CO on that path. I'd guess he only pedaled to make it look semi-legit.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> True but machines can enhance asshole-ed-ness. That is why governments regulate stuff (cars, guns, explosives, etc).
> 
> YOU might be responsible. However, regulations banning ebikes protect us against all the irresponsible a-holes who would smear their asshole-ed-ness all over the forest like **** on a bagel.
> 
> ...


I understand the "fear" but a reasonable LM would just put up a no ebike sign. That's all we will see in the future. If you have a vast trail system more mileage is awesome. I don't mind climbing but when your traveling at 3-5mph for a few hours of your ride it gets boring.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

RickBullottaPA said:


> You assume that "eBikers" and "mountain bikers" are mutually exclusive groups. That is a fallacious assumption. Some days I want to hammer hard on my Santa Cruz, and some days I want to do "enduro days" and session downhill segments, and my KTM eBike allows me to do that and get in 2X as many descents. And still get a good workout. Wrangling a 50 lb bike around is sort of a flashback to early DH bikes. And I rarely ever use the highest power output (like, almost never). Just enough to keep the ascents aerobic. And yes, I do participate in access, trail work, youth racing, and other advocacy and pro-MTB activities.
> 
> Sadly too many people have tried to make this an "OR" discussion rather than an "AND" discussion. With some simple and common sense policies, a certain class of eBikes (and e-Bikers) can easily co-exist without any threat to access.


To a large degree, they are mutually exclusive groups. I also trail run, often on the very same trails that I mountain bike on. But most mountain bikers don't trail run and most trail runners don't mountain bike.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> That's a lot of players in an unproven market and what very well may prove to be a niche market. A decent ebike will be expensive and Chinese company ebikes will take the lower end of the market. A limited number of serious cyclist will be interested in ebikes (I'm sure some here won't agree), maybe some moto types will jump in if it means they can ride non-motorized trails. I still think the biggest part of the market will be for commuters and running around town, not eMTBs.


I agree commuter Ebikes will be the lions share.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> I understand the "fear" but a reasonable LM would just put up a no ebike sign.


Sure, and a reasonable user would be considerate enough not to bring a motorized bicycle onto a non-motorized trail, but **** happens.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Moe Ped said:


> It should be noted that P4B totally boned the legislation in California; the bill they were sponsoring was not the bill that was passed. They were supporting e-bike access only for bike lanes and bike paths; not for trails.
> 
> For a year or so P4B was claiming AB-1096 did not apply to trails. WRONG! They finally have the correct interpretation posted and are now claiming it was "their" model.
> 
> P4B is not to be trusted. Do your own research.


They are trying to walk back and clarify their position on emtbs fwiw. Still don't trust them....



> NOTE FOR ELECTRIC MOUNTAIN BIKE RIDERS: This map represents how e-bikes are interpreted in each state's vehicle code, and where e-bikes are allowed to go on the road, bike lanes, bike paths, or other paved or hard-surface bicycle infrastructure. The vehicle code does not apply to electric mountain bike access on motorized and non-motorized trails typically used for hiking, biking, and other singletrack or doubletrack trail experiences. eMTB access on singletrack is different than access to paved and soft surface bike lanes and bike paths; eMTBs are not allowed everywhere traditional mountain bikes are; and on federal, state, county and local trails, eMTB access varies significantly. Always consult with your local land manager for access questions.


Electric Bicycles â€¢ PeopleForBikes


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Gutch said:


> Well yeah, but Yamaha is obviously a motorcycle company and I don't believe Shimano makes a frame or brands a bike?


 I thought Shimano made a torque sensing motor? BIkes Direct uses it on their eMTB, Shimano Steps IIRC?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

DL723 said:


> The "specifically excluded" part is what bugs me. It basically means you still have to check every place you go to confirm. I've mentioned this before...Orange county is probably one of the most ebike heavy areas in the country. But if you ask the county park system, they will actually say ebikes are not allowed on their paved bike paths, since they are motorized vehicles. That ordnance will most likely change over the next few years. But it illustrates having that caveat of local exceptions basically makes the state law kind of useless. Not to mention all national parks in california, and there are quite a few, prohibit them from paved paths.
> 
> I guess one could just not ask and fall back on the state law. Pretty sure they won't ticket and just give some sort of warning. But I think it would be just cleaner if class 1 + 2 are blanket ok'd for paved paths and be done with it.


Colorado adopted the Class 1-3 regs this summer for bike paths, there is no uniformity throughout the state. Some places allow class 1/2, some class 1 only, some, no ebikes at all. We're a home rule state, I don't see that lack of uniformity changing anytime soon, especially when cheap faster bikes become easy to find.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

ryguy79 said:


> One would also think you could comprehend the final, most important sentence in the post you're referring to.


 Of course they are two different things: that is why I specifically cited trikes and cruisers and did not just say ebikes. So even slow people could know that I was not talking about eMTBs.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

kpdemello said:


> The fear is that when you lump ebikers in with mountain bikers that a-holes will begin sneaking in overpowered ebikes that ruin everything.
> 
> There are several parks near me in which moto bikes and mountain bikes are allowed on the same trails. The moto bikes tear those trails up to the point where they are nearly unrideable. Right now, I can go to the trails where those things aren't allowed and everything is awesome.
> 
> ...


You "class-OMFG-MONSTER" is going to be obvious the moment they kick up roost.

I really don't get the fear issue around ebikes. Just like today, people either follow the rules or they don't. If they don't, then they need to be confronted and cited/punished.

If you are seriously concerned, just advocate for Class 1 only. Then, if you see someone going uphill or on the flats without pedaling, they are out of compliance. No pedalec of any power is going to wreck a trail any faster than an enduro/DH rider in training. What do you do about them?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Correct, they make a motor and are a drivetrain producer, but don’t produce a “Shimano “ bicycle.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> I really don't get the fear issue around ebikes.


It stems from the hell MTBers had to go through to get access in the first place, the fact that anti-MTB advocates are still around and looking for an excuse to ban MTBs from everywhere, and the fear that MTBers will have to fight the access battle all over again thanks to these ebikes that, philosophically, most MTBers don't even like.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> Do you even bother to read the posts that you respond to? I clearly stated the words "250w trikes and cruisers", one would think that a "super moderator" would at least pretend they had shown enough respect to actually take time to both read and comprehend a post before replying. Sad.......


I read it, and this discussion is why eBikes are a touchy subject specifically for Dirt Multi-use Trails, eBikes are not a touchy subject for paved street use, so discussing older people learning how to use street only eBikes has no place in this discussion. Hence I was clarifying to make sure that is exactly what the OP meant.


----------



## Rivet (Sep 3, 2004)

fos'l said:


> Good thing for us in CA is it's a state law. Also, the 20 mph limit, which is difficult to exceed on e-bikes since you're on your own when the motor shuts off, is a lot slower than many. I've been "motoring" along about 20 mph and been dropped like a rock by a road rider.


I was climbing a 1% grade full gas doing intervals on my road bike in Orange County Ca and had a guy on what I think was a Specialized eBike MTB (big fat tires) he cruised next to me for 20 seconds or so going 28-30mph. Maybe a modified bike but I'm betting that will be the norm.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

chazpat said:


> That's a lot of players in an unproven market and what very well may prove to be a niche market. A decent ebike will be expensive and Chinese company ebikes will take the lower end of the market. A limited number of serious cyclist will be interested in ebikes (I'm sure some here won't agree), maybe some moto types will jump in if it means they can ride non-motorized trails. I still think the biggest part of the market will be for commuters and running around town, not eMTBs.


It would be interesting to see actual sales metrics that showed what percentage of eBike sales are for Beach Cruiser eBikes, Road Bike/Townie Bike style eBikes and full suspension MTB eBikes.

From what I see in San Diego, seems like Beach Cruiser and Road Bike/Townie Bike make up the vast majority of any eBikes I see, they are all over the place.

eMTB's, not as much.

Yamaha and the others jumping in the game might see the MTB portion of sales as a niche and the road going styles as the main sellers.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> It stems from the hell MTBers had to go through to get access in the first place, the fact that anti-MTB advocates are still around and looking for an excuse to ban MTBs from everywhere, and the fear that MTBers will have to fight the access battle all over again thanks to these ebikes that, philosophically, most MTBers don't even like.


Idk, every cyclist I know has zero issues with Ebikes. So, from "my" perspective I can say that "most" don't give a ****.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Idk, every cyclist I know has zero issues with Ebikes. So, from "my" perspective I can say that "most" don't give a ****.


It is the Hikers and Equestrian groups you need to be worried about.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Idk, every cyclist I know has zero issues with Ebikes. So, from "my" perspective I can say that "most" don't give a ****.


Seriously? Have you read the thread? Every MTBer I know thinks ebikes are the devil.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Gutch said:


> Correct, they make a motor and are a drivetrain producer, but don't produce a "Shimano " bicycle.


 So that means they are NOT "players" in the ebike market? That's like saying they aren't players in the bicycle market since they don't sell a Shimano bicycle......


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Yeah seriously! I live in a mtb destination area and everyone that I’ve ridden with or know personally has zero issues with them. Real life riders. All your going to get on the Net is opposition. Do you not see them moving in? If you’re that pure and against them, I’d suggest boycotting the bike manufacturers above! Maybe SRAM and Shimano also. Almost impossible to avoid.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

WoodlandHills said:


> So that means they are NOT "players" in the ebike market? That's like saying they aren't players in the bicycle market since they don't sell a Shimano bicycle......


Of course not. I didn't list all the companies that support Ebikes. Just posted people that make a friggin frame. Cool?


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

kpdemello said:


> Seriously? Have you read the thread? Every MTBer I know thinks ebikes are the devil.


 Next time anyone says that ebikes are not being demonized, can I quote you? Cause I think that being "devilized" is a step above being "demonized" So how can one have a discourse with people who think the other side is the literal epitome of evil? Why would anyone bother.......


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

gutch said:


> of course not. I didn't list all the companies that support ebikes. Just posted people that make a friggin frame. Cool?


ok.....


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Yeah seriously! I live in a mtb destination area and everyone that I've ridden with or know personally has zero issues with them. Real life riders. All your going to get on the Net is opposition.


I mean we are obviously from different parts of the country, but around where I live (New England) every MTBer that I have talked to looks at ebikes the way that I have posted earlier in this thread. I also got numerous people on this board giving me rep message thingies about my posts in this thread essentially saying "yeah i agree" or "well said"

I think it's weird if you don't see that there is a sizeable group of MTBers who really don't care much for ebikes. Maybe not most, I didn't take a poll, but certainly you have to agree that there's a huge number of MTBers that just don't care for these machines.



WoodlandHills said:


> Next time anyone says that ebikes are not being demonized, can I quote you?


Sure. I'm happy to demonize the damned things any time you want.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> I mean we are obviously from different parts of the country, but around where I live (New England) every MTBer that I have talked to looks at ebikes the way that I have posted earlier in this thread. I also got numerous people on this board giving me rep message thingies about my posts in this thread essentially saying "yeah i agree" or "well said"
> 
> I think it's weird if you don't see that there is a sizeable group of MTBers who really don't care much for ebikes. Maybe not most, I didn't take a poll, but certainly you have to agree that there's a huge number of MTBers that just don't care for these machines.
> 
> Sure. I'm happy to demonize the damned things any time you want.


I certainly see a large group of bikers and surely hikers and equestrian groups that are definitely opposed to them. They are new, things will change. I'm originally from New England area. I understand it's a different scene. Where are you? VT, NY, NH, PA, MA?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Angry Masshole here. We do hate change, especially the weather, which is why we are always angry as the weather here is unpredictable.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Yes it is. I’ve lived in Vermont and Upstate NY. Constant survival mode. Now I can ride year around, pay way less taxes and enjoy WAY more laid back people. Pretty country everywhere.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> It is the Hikers and Equestrian groups you need to be worried about.


It must vary from place to place. Around here, hikers on biking trails are barely tolerated and equestians can just stay home. They aren't allowed to be part of the decision-making process. Both groups are mostly viewed as poachers.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> My buddy has done all of his riding on one in California, I guarantee it well exceeded 20mph.


Is he riding a Class 1 or 2 bike? For information, I'd like to know how fast a "normal-type" rider could ride a 50 pound e-bike after the 20 mph limiter is shut off.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Rivet said:


> I was climbing a 1% grade full gas doing intervals on my road bike in Orange County Ca and had a guy on what I think was a Specialized eBike MTB (big fat tires) he cruised next to me for 20 seconds or so going 28-30mph. Maybe a modified bike but I'm betting that will be the norm.


IF (and I a$$ume since you were on a road bike) you were on the road or a bike lane contiguous with a road, Class 3 (28 mph) is the prevailing max assist.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

On flat level ground I can barely pedal to 32 after mine shuts down at 28mph. 50# Specialized Turbo.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Is he riding a Class 1 or 2 bike?


I'm don't know, he just said it was an off the shelf specialized road bike. Could have been modded. It sounded like him and his friends there went on rides regularly with them so I don't think they were anything unusual.

I don't know about the second question either, a lot faster than they could without it though.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

FWIW the (almost) universal e-bike speed hack costs almost nothing and is super easy.

A magnet is put on a crank arm and the wheel speed sensor pickup is relocated to where it can "see" the magnet. Now the controller thinks your pedaling cadence is your wheel RPM.

Works on almost any speed-limited e-bike.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> You "class-OMFG-MONSTER" is going to be obvious the moment they kick up roost.
> 
> I really don't get the fear issue around ebikes. Just like today, people either follow the rules or they don't. If they don't, then they need to be confronted and cited/punished.
> 
> If you are seriously concerned, just advocate for Class 1 only. Then, if you see someone going uphill or on the flats without pedaling, they are out of compliance. No pedalec of any power is going to wreck a trail any faster than an enduro/DH rider in training. What do you do about them?


Or if you are seriously concerned just advocate against all bikes with motors. Like I do.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> I'm don't know, he just said it was an off the shelf specialized road bike. Could have been modded. It sounded like him and his friends there went on rides regularly with them so I don't think they were anything unusual.
> 
> I don't know about the second question either, a lot faster than they could without it though.


Not to argue, but I (remember, I'm old) had a hard time pushing a Haibike 50+ pound hard tail past about 24 mph when the motor shut off at an indicated 19 mph.I'm pretty sure I could have gone faster on a light road bike. Guess we need somebody to do testing. If Walt is "listening" it would be interesting to see how fast his rig goes on a flat area. The Turbo is a 28 mph bike, so he could have been going somewhat faster than that.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Rivet said:


> I was climbing a 1% grade full gas doing intervals on my road bike in Orange County Ca and had a guy on what I think was a Specialized eBike MTB (big fat tires) he cruised next to me for 20 seconds or so going 28-30mph. Maybe a modified bike but I'm betting that will be the norm.


 Since max speed for Class 3 is 28mph, yes, that is the new normal.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

fos'l said:


> Not to argue, but I (remember, I'm old) had a hard time pushing a Haibike 50+ pound hard tail past about 24 mph when the motor shut off at an indicated 19 mph.I'm pretty sure I could have gone faster on a light road bike. Guess we need somebody to do testing. If Walt is "listening" it would be interesting to see how fast his rig goes on a flat area. The Turbo is a 28 mph bike, so he could have been going somewhat faster than that.


Read my post above. I own 4 Turbo's. I'm very familiar with them.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Woodland, I thought we were buds since I gave you permission to quote me. How you gonna neg rep me now?

Dont worry tho, the 5 people who gave me positive rep based on my posts in this thread offset your obviously mistaken click. So you can still quote me on the demon ebike thing.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Not to argue, but I (remember, I'm old) had a hard time pushing a Haibike 50+ pound hard tail past about 24 mph when the motor shut off at an indicated 19 mph.I'm pretty sure I could have gone faster on a light road bike. Guess we need somebody to do testing. If Walt is "listening" it would be interesting to see how fast his rig goes on a flat area. The Turbo is a 28 mph bike, so he could have been going somewhat faster than that.


I misunderstood, I thought you meant how fast could a rider go past 20 mph with the limiter disabled. No average rider is going to be pushing any 50# bike past 20mph for very long without power assist.

My point was that it made a very fast rider much faster, and that it would have an even greater effect (percentage wise) for an average rider.


----------



## Skooks (Dec 24, 2008)

One more great reason to keep buying Knolly bikes!


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Cuyuna said:


> It must vary from place to place. Around here, hikers on biking trails are barely tolerated and equestians can just stay home. They aren't allowed to be part of the decision-making process. Both groups are mostly viewed as poachers.


Wow, I've gotta visit Minnesota!


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Or if you are seriously concerned just advocate against all bikes with motors. Like I do.


Paranoid is a crappy way to live.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

fos'l said:


> Not to argue, but I (remember, I'm old) had a hard time pushing a Haibike 50+ pound hard tail past about 24 mph when the motor shut off at an indicated 19 mph.I'm pretty sure I could have gone faster on a light road bike. Guess we need somebody to do testing. If Walt is "listening" it would be interesting to see how fast his rig goes on a flat area. The Turbo is a 28 mph bike, so he could have been going somewhat faster than that.


My cargo rig cuts the assist at 20. And it's very hard to go much faster than that since it weighs 75 pounds and has the aero profile (and tires) of a narcoleptic elephant.

So basically, I have no idea. With the bike set to give max assist, getting to 20 is pretty easy even on moderate uphills. I would imagine the same power on a skinny tire road bike would let you go pretty damn fast if you wanted to (and the bike didn't have an assist cutoff).

-Walt


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Gutch said:


> Read my post above. I own 4 Turbo's. I'm very familiar with them.


I read yours, but the difference is Walt has a 20 mph cut-off AFAIK and is a professional rider; not to denigrate your data, but I was interested in his perspective too.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> I misunderstood, I thought you meant how fast could a rider go past 20 mph with the limiter disabled. No average rider is going to be pushing any 50# bike past 20mph for very long without power assist.
> 
> My point was that it made a very fast rider much faster, and that it would have an even greater effect (percentage wise) for an average rider.


Thanks for clarifying; anything reasonable is possible with "modding", but I haven't done that and don't plan to.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

fos'l said:


> I read yours, but the difference is Walt has a 20 mph cut-off AFAIK and is a professional rider; not to denigrate your data, but I was interested in his perspective too.


No worries, I thought you were looking for how fast past 28 on the Specialized. I know when my Levo tops out it's very hard to go faster.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Like I said, totally fine with it. Just not fine with defining them as being not motorized and therefore legal on bike paths and motor-free trails.


I made the same mistake several months ago. That is, assuming that things are the same in different geographical locations.

Take the "Strand" bike path on the LA coast that goes from Redondo Beach past Santa Monica. Some sections are filled with pedestrians. Others are empty and you'll see 25mph bike pacelines.


----------



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

J.B. Weld said:


> Like I said, totally fine with it. Just not fine with defining them as being not motorized and therefore legal on bike paths and motor-free trails.





EricTheDood said:


> I made the same mistake several months ago. That is, assuming that things are the same in different geographical locations.
> 
> Take the "Strand" bike path on the LA coast that goes from Redondo Beach past Santa Monica. Some sections are filled with pedestrians. Others are empty and you'll see 25mph bike pacelines.


I don't know what those 2 posts have to do with each other, I think you misunderstand me.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> I don't know what those 2 posts have to do with each other, I think you misunderstand me.


Sorry, I quoted the wrong post.

Meant to quote this one:



J.B. Weld said:


> I'm opposed to electric bikes on bike and pedestrian paths for the same reason I'm opposed to them off road, which is allowing motors in places previously designated for non-motorized traffic.


Point being, what works in one area might not make sense in another area.


----------



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

EricTheDood said:


> ..............Point being, what works in one area might not make sense in another area.


That's what I've been saying all along, which is why I think it's wrong to define electric bikes as being non-motorized.


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> That's what I've been saying all along, which is why I think it's wrong to define electric bikes as being non-motorized.


Around here, pedal-assist e-bikes less than 1000 watts are defined as motorized, but that doesn't mean anything. They are not classified as motor vehicles, therefore allowed on all state trails.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Some of the e- positions iterated above are mickey mouse in nature compared to the local socal MTB forum where eMTB riders seem to be somewhere in a category between drug dealers and child predators. These guys pat themselves on the back for excoriating e+ individuals or terrorizing e-MTB riders.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

People fear they will go faster and faster I think and this one claims 46 mph top speed high powered sports revolution sport. That sacres me while be kids are riding the trails. Though you guys maybe responsible it only takes a few that aren't. And at 46 miles an hour someone could be badly hurt if not killed.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

STAGER1 said:


> People fear they will go faster and faster I think and this one claims 46 mph top speed high powered sports revolution sport. That sacres me while be kids are riding the trails. Though you guys maybe responsible it only takes a few that aren't. And at 46 miles an hour someone could be badly hurt if not killed.


I have never been on a MUT where I can ride 46mph!! The trail will always dictate the speed.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

Maybe not 46 in some tight trails but I can tell you when I ride if I was on a small dirt bike like a 125cc which is not as nible as a bike I'd scare the **** out of people mtb coming out of the turns up straight away hills etc.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I have never been on a MUT where I can ride 46mph!! The trail will always dictate the speed.


But they do exist. There are a number of them in San Diego that have long wide straights where speeds over 40 "could" be achieved.

Just because you(speaking in general to everyone on this board) have never seen something where you ride, does not mean it is not happening or possible elsewhere.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

RickBullottaPA said:


> FYI, a 125 2 Stroke makes about 10,000-12,000 watts of power. A long, long way from the 250 watts of a Class 1 eBike or even the 750 watts of the more powerful ones.


Closer to 20k watts.

BRAAAPPPP!!!!


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

It might be noted that the 46 mph bike referenced (there's one produced by M1Sporttechnik, a company that has yet to make much presence in the US) is legal on neither bike paths nor trails in (at least) CA, NC, SC, UT & TN). Additionally, in CA it must be licensed and insured.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Things are getting “way” blown out of proportion! 46mph ebike, fine. It’s like seeing Sasquatch. Does it exist? Maybe, how many sitings? 46 mph on any bike is road only. MUT’s is bullshit. Period.. Now, I’m sure there is some fools on here that drink 5 hr. Energy every 2 hrs, but c’mon let’s be realistic.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Klurejr said:


> But they do exist. There are a number of them in San Diego that have long wide straights where speeds over 40 "could" be achieved.
> 
> Just because you(speaking in general to everyone on this board) have never seen something where you ride, does not mean it is not happening or possible elsewhere.


Listen, I don't doubt it, all I'm saying is that is not an example of Ebikes in general. There's always going to be that a** clown. He will get pressured off the trails. We've all self policed at one time or another. ? Thankfully I haven't seen clowns like that, although we've all seen the Strava junkies on regular bicycles blowing over strollers so they can win a free beer at the bar! Wait, that could have been me! JK! Hope every brother on here had a great thanksgiving.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

RickBullottaPA said:


> What he said!
> 
> Let's deal with the situation at hand, not outlier hypotheticals. Far more likely someone will take an electric dirt bike on the trails than a 46MPH eBike.
> 
> Multi-use trail usage should be restricted to Class 1 eBikes. Problem solved. Next topic please.


Please, tell me how you solved the problem?

How are you ensuring that class 1 ebikes are the only ebikes riding the trails?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Deleted


----------



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

RickBullottaPA said:


> How do you ensure that motorcycles don't ride the trails? That homicidal circus clowns don't walk the trails? That water bottles don't contain expired milk?


If they start making motorcycles and homicidal circus clowns that look 100% identical to class 1 electric bikes then that might become a problem. You're on your own with the curdled milk, water only for me.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> Please, tell me how you solved the problem?
> 
> How are you ensuring that class 1 ebikes are the only ebikes riding the trails?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


 The same way we currently ensure that MTBs do not ride on hiking only trails and other places where all bikes are banned. 99.99% of MTBers are law abiding citizens who don't poach, and violators are shunned just like illegal trail builders are.

What's wrong with applying the system that is already sucessful and in effect now? The MTB community rigorously self-polices today to the point that there is apparently very little tension between the courteous and respectful mountain bikers and other trail users, at least that what I read here. So why not just stick with what is working and accept Class 1's on the same basis?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Mountain bikers are actually pretty notorious for NOT self policing. 

Even on this forum alone, their are many anecdotes of ebikers poaching trails and not being told to leave.

As long as a 3000 watt ebike looks like a class 1 ebike and no one can tell the difference, they will all be banned.

As long as ebikers continue to think they are part of the mountain bike demographic and expect us to do the heavy lifting, we will fight them.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

RickBullottaPA said:


> And while you have me fired up, one more thing. What the f*ck do you mean by "part of the mountain bike demographic"? What an a*hole thing to even say. The very core of the MTB tribe and community is one of inclusion, non-conformity, and generally whatever-the-f*ck-ed-ness. That elitist hipster/roadie mindset has no place in MTBing, but sadly it has infected the culture. Now what you wear, what you ride, what you drink, and how you ride matters more than the ride itself. That's horrible. The douche factor has been steadily rising. I'll welcome those e-Bikers if they are good people and gladly kick the arrogant elitist a-holes out of the tribe to make room for 'em.


Oddly, I've found MTB riders to be just as judgemental as road riders, if not more.

Example: I wear Lycra most of the time. I'm a (shitty) pro XC racer and it's what I'm comfortable wearing. I'll regularly catch up to people at the top, give them a good gap, and catch them going down, on my 120/100mm bike. I've had many interactions along the lines of, "Whoa, didn't expect to see you again" or "I'm surprised you can ride these trails". Based entirely upon my apparel or bike.

There's quite a bit of tribalism in MTB. Many "trail" riders who claim they don't ride "XC", except all they ride is really XC. They just do it with 140mm bikes, knee pads, and 20lbs of crap on their backs.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



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

RickBullottaPA said:


> And while you have me fired up, one more thing. What the f*ck do you mean by "part of the mountain bike demographic"? What an a*hole thing to even say. The very core of the MTB tribe and community is one of inclusion, non-conformity, and generally whatever-the-f*ck-ed-ness. That elitist hipster/roadie mindset has no place in MTBing, but sadly it has infected the culture. Now what you wear, what you ride, what you drink, and how you ride matters more than the ride itself. That's horrible. The douche factor has been steadily rising. I'll welcome those e-Bikers if they are good people and gladly kick the arrogant elitist a-holes out of the tribe to make room for 'em.


Why so angry? I can understand Silentfoe's point of view and I agree with much of it, I happen to disagree with you but that in itself doesn't make you an arrogant "whatever-the-f*ck-ed-ness" a-hole.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Sad. Very sad. We should be on the same side.


I tend to agree, but let's be honest - what do e-bike riders bring to the table? What risks do they bring? It's not necessarily "hating" to think that the potential costs outweigh the (probably limited) benefits for mountain bikers.

I mean, if e-bikes are widely popular on mountain bike trails in 20 years, how is that a good thing for me? My trails are often crowded as it is, so I have zero interest in attracting more riders or "growing the sport". I don't want more powerful or faster vehicles on the trails (I like to hike with my kids, too) or trails closed to bikes because e-bikes are indistinguishable from normal ones.

It is possible that someday I won't be physically able to ride without an assist, but I'm guessing that at that point I won't be mountain biking at all anymore just due to general frailty. I've been getting slower for the last decade or more and I still have a load of fun, so I don't see the appeal of "feeling like a kid again" if there's even the slightest potential for losing trail access.

The bottom line for me, and for many mountain bikers, is that *the trails are more important than the bikes*. I'd give up most modern bike tech (suspension, fancy brakes, tubeless tires, etc etc) in a hot second to keep access to the trails I love. More speed and more technology is neat, but it's not worth losing what really matters.

This is why I don't want mountain bikes and e-bikes conflated with each other. They need to stay separate things, gain (or lose) access separately, and both groups need to recognize that the trails are what matter the most. All else is secondary.

-Walt


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> Mountain bikers are actually pretty notorious for NOT self policing.
> 
> Even on this forum alone, their are many anecdotes of ebikers poaching trails and not being told to leave.
> 
> ...


 Since most eMTBers seem to be either women or older men, perhaps they will be more responsible and will make things better and not worse. From what you suggest, " the MTB community" seem to live in a big glass house, and yet they seem to delight in throwing rocks at others........

Why would one expect new eMTB riders to be as irresponsible as you say the current MTB riders are? They appear to be a completely different demographic.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Walt said:


> I tend to agree, but let's be honest - what do e-bike riders bring to the table? What risks do they bring? It's not necessarily "hating" to think that the potential costs outweigh the (probably limited) benefits for mountain bikers.
> 
> I mean, if e-bikes are widely popular on mountain bike trails in 20 years, how is that a good thing for me? My trails are often crowded as it is, so I have zero interest in attracting more riders or "growing the sport". I don't want more powerful or faster vehicles on the trails (I like to hike with my kids, too) or trails closed to bikes because e-bikes are indistinguishable from normal ones.
> 
> ...


bingo!


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Walt said:


> I tend to agree, but let's be honest - what do e-bike riders bring to the table? What risks do they bring? It's not necessarily "hating" to think that the potential costs outweigh the (probably limited) benefits for mountain bikers.
> 
> I mean, if e-bikes are widely popular on mountain bike trails in 20 years, how is that a good thing for me? My trails are often crowded as it is, so I have zero interest in attracting more riders or "growing the sport". I don't want more powerful or faster vehicles on the trails (I like to hike with my kids, too) or trails closed to bikes because e-bikes are indistinguishable from normal ones.
> 
> ...


I am with you on this one Brother


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> Since most eMTBers seem to be either women or older men, perhaps they will be more responsible and will make things better and not worse.


Source? In my personal experience the 3 eBiker's I have seen in my local riding area were all men under the age of 55.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Therein lies the problem. It isn't "us" and "them". We're the same people. I do trail work, I ride a "regular" mountain bike (a couple of them actually), I fight for trail access, I support youth mountain biking, I also happen to own and ride an e-Bike.
> 
> Oddly enough, your position sounds EXACTLY like the position of the equestrians and hikers that we seem to battle every day.
> 
> ...


 Disagree, there is motorized and non motorized. Not we. Clear line in the sand, so to speak.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> Disagree, there is motorized and non motorized. Not we. Clear line in the sand, so to speak.


I agree.
Even though I mainly mountain bike, I also do lots of other things that aren't mountain biking.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Le Duke said:


> Oddly, I've found MTB riders to be just as judgemental as road riders, if not more.
> 
> Example: I wear Lycra most of the time. I'm a (shitty) pro XC racer and it's what I'm comfortable wearing. I'll regularly catch up to people at the top, give them a good gap, and catch them going down, on my 120/100mm bike. I've had many interactions along the lines of, "Whoa, didn't expect to see you again" or "I'm surprised you can ride these trails". Based entirely upon my apparel or bike.
> 
> ...


? so true..


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Remember, it’s not the few posters on this ebike sub forum that started this movement. It’s these guys. Scream at them and tell them to separate and also hold them accountable. I enjoy both sports regardless. 

Specialized
Pivot
Commencal
Scott
Trek
Giant
Rocky Mountain
Lapierre
Cannondale
Felt
Kona
Orbea
Diamondback
Cube
Focus
Raleigh
Nicolai
Bianchi
Fuji
Mondraker
BMC
Haibike
Surface 604
Bulls
Norco
Moustache
Haro
Merida
Devinnci
Motobecane
Orange
Pinarello


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Remember, it's not the few posters on this ebike sub forum that started this movement. It's these guys. Scream at them and tell them to separate and also hold them accountable.


People give 'The Industry' way too much cred IMHO.
Nobody I've ever met in the MTB access/trailbuilding game gives a goddamn what they think. Pretty much nobody that rides does either. Make a bike, if it's good maybe I'll buy it, back it up when it breaks, otherwise who cares what they want, or think? Nobody makes access decisions based on what 'The Industry' wishes to sell.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> People give 'The Industry' way too much cred IMHO.
> Nobody I've ever met in the MTB access/trailbuilding game gives a goddamn what they think. Pretty much nobody that rides does either. Make a bike, if it's good maybe I'll buy it, back it up when it breaks, otherwise who cares what they want, or think? Nobody makes access decisions based on what 'The Industry' wishes to sell.


Although this is true, without these manufacturers there wouldn't be emtbs. They should all donate and build ebike parks or designated ebike trails.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Although this is true, without these manufacturers there wouldn't be emtbs. They should all donate and build ebike parks or designated ebike trails.


Good luck with that!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Although this is true, without these manufacturers there wouldn't be emtbs. They should all donate and build ebike parks or designated ebike trails.


They should have done that 5 years ago, really. Or else held off on selling the e-mtbs until they had laid some form of access groundwork.

As SHMF says, the bike industry overall is really not very influential (nor do they spend any significant money) on access/trailbuilding. Locals, local clubs, and local mountain bikers who work in land management agencies are by far the biggest determiners of what gets built and who gets to use it. Hell, local shops and businesses have a much bigger influence than any of the manufacturers.

Part of that is probably just that the US is a big place, and bike companies run on razor thin margins and (in general, though there are a couple of exceptions) are barely profitable. Add to that the fact that 90% of the bike market is road bikes and commuters, and it's hard to make the case that it makes business sense to spend a lot of money on trailbuilding.

-Walt


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Yes, in a perfect world I know.. My buddy owns a Specialized shop and he claims road bike sales are way down. People getting hit everywhere. You’re correct though, the infrastructure should have been laid out. My biggest fear is poaching, there will be more emtbs sold and there’s gonna be poaching. I personally do not poach because I respect land owners and rules.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Walt said:


> Part of that is probably just that the US is a big place, and bike companies run on razor thin margins and (in general, though there are a couple of exceptions) are barely profitable. Add to that the fact that 90% of the bike market is road bikes and commuters, and it's hard to make the case that it makes business sense to spend a lot of money on trailbuilding.


Margins are there, they're just split up among many companies. Can't expect Specialized, for instance, to carry the weight while Brose and SRAM sit back and happily sell drive systems and components at normal margins.

If the manufacturers were to team up and assemble a set number of e-MTBs using surplus/scratch-'n-dent frames and components from "last year", and donate these bikes to land managers for trailbuilding and ranger use, I think it would go a long way in spreading awareness to the right people on what exactly Class 1 e-MTB is about.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Klurejr said:


> Source? In my personal experience the 3 eBiker's I have seen in my local riding area were all men under the age of 55.


Same as you, my personal experience on bike paths and trails as well as what people report here. I have never seen an eMTb ridden by anyone in their 20's or 30's, so far. I have seen ebikes on the street ridden by people under 55, but still that was less than 25% IMHO. I know I have never seen an ebike, of any kind, ridden by a child or a teen. I am sure that location has a lot to do with it though: we have an RV and I've seen lots of ebikes ridden by my peers (I am 64) in RV parks and nearby bike paths when we travel. I also lived until very recently just outside of the Santa Monica Mtns and rode the trails there all the time, now I live on the Central Coast and ride the beaches and trails here, so I've seen a few ebikes.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

The reality is that horses, and mtbs aren’t allowed everywhere and so will emtbs. But I’d bet my bottom dollar there will be access to class 1 emtbs on “some” MUT trails in the future. To think otherwise is foolish, and if there is major conflict they will ban them.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> I tend to agree, but let's be honest - what do e-bike riders bring to the table? What risks do they bring? It's not necessarily "hating" to think that the potential costs outweigh the (probably limited) benefits for mountain bikers.
> 
> I mean, if e-bikes are widely popular on mountain bike trails in 20 years, how is that a good thing for me? My trails are often crowded as it is, so I have zero interest in attracting more riders or "growing the sport". I don't want more powerful or faster vehicles on the trails (I like to hike with my kids, too) or trails closed to bikes because e-bikes are indistinguishable from normal ones.
> 
> ...


I tend to agree, but let's be honest - what do MTB riders bring to the table? What risks do they bring? It's not necessarily "hating" to think that the potential costs outweigh the (probably limited) benefits for hikers.

I mean, if MTBs are widely popular on hiking trails in 20 years, how is that a good thing for me? My trails are often crowded as it is, so I have zero interest in attracting MTBs. I don't want MTBs on the trails (I like to hike with my kids, too) or trails closed to hikers because MTBs take over.

It is possible that someday I won't be physically able to hike without an assist, but I'm guessing that at that point I won't be hiking at all anymore just due to general frailty. I've been getting slower for the last decade or more and I still have a load of fun, so I don't see the appeal of "feeling like a kid again".

The bottom line for me, and for many hikers, is that *the trails are more important than the bikes*. More speed and more technology is neat, but it's not worth losing what really matters.

This is why I don't want hikers and MTBs on trails with each other. They need to stay separate things, gain (or lose) access separately, and both groups need to recognize that the trails are what matter the most. All else is secondary.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Walt said:


> They should have done that 5 years ago, really. Or else held off on selling the e-mtbs until they had laid some form of access groundwork.
> 
> As SHMF says, the bike industry overall is really not very influential (nor do they spend any significant money) on access/trailbuilding. Locals, local clubs, and local mountain bikers who work in land management agencies are by far the biggest determiners of what gets built and who gets to use it. Hell, local shops and businesses have a much bigger influence than any of the manufacturers.
> 
> ...


IME, at least here, where we actually have a semi substantial local bike industry (SRAM/Rockshox, Rotor, Borealis, SRM) the "industry" has zero impact on what gets built, where, and who gets to use it. It's all local groups and locals, and then the land managers who make the final decisions. Local shops effectively do nothing. Here, I know they can be a driving force elsewhere.

Most of the industry money gets spent on politics or maybe specific grants. A Bell built grant for example. Peopleforbikes spent $4 million last year of industry money and most people have never heard of them.

http://2016.peopleforbikes.org/2016-pfb-financials.pdf

I agree that they put the cart before the horse in trying to sell ebikes before there was any consensus and uniformity on access. It's just greed, the US companies were trying to catch the EU market, where they were the latecomers and they started selling them here too.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> I tend to agree, but let's be honest - what do MTB riders bring to the table? What risks do they bring? It's not necessarily "hating" to think that the potential costs outweigh the (probably limited) benefits for hikers.
> 
> I mean, if MTBs are widely popular on hiking trails in 20 years, how is that a good thing for me? My trails are often crowded as it is, so I have zero interest in attracting MTBs. I don't want MTBs on the trails (I like to hike with my kids, too) or trails closed to hikers because MTBs take over.
> 
> ...


What's your point?

That is how hikers and equestrians have always felt. That is why real mtbers have been fighting for access for decades. That is why we don't want motorized bikes that look just like real mountain bikes on all of the MUT's.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Um, what? If your point is that plenty of hikers really dislike bikes (and would be apoplectic about e-bikes) on trails, that's certainly true. 

MTB riders (like me) already brought widespread access to the table - by working their butts off in many different areas. E-bike riders could do the same, but they're not going to get much help from mountain bikers (witness the hostility here) especially if they insist on insulting the very folks they probably need to at least stay neutral. 

Go start attending city council meetings and talking to land managers if you want to start riding your e-bike legally on more trails. It might work, it might not. Around here the precedent has pretty much been set and they're widely banned already, but with enough effort that *might* be reversible. 

Making mountain bikers angry (on the internet or otherwise) might be fun, but it's counterproductive. E bikes have a ton of enemies already. 

-Walt


----------



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

honkinunit said:


> This is why I don't want hikers and MTBs on trails with each other.


I see you slipped in a misquote, the above statement was never said and is an important difference.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> IME, at least here, where we actually have a semi substantial local bike industry (SRAM/Rockshox, Rotor, Borealis, SRM) the "industry" has zero impact on what gets built, where, and who gets to use it. It's all local groups and locals, and then the land managers who make the final decisions. Local shops effectively do nothing. Here, I know they can be a driving force elsewhere.
> 
> Most of the industry money gets spent on politics or maybe specific grants. A Bell built grant for example. Peopleforbikes spent $4 million last year of industry money and most people have never heard of them.
> 
> ...


Agree, we also have some industry but they do help with Trail maintenance and sponsoring events etc. REI is greatly appreciated here.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

honkinunit said:


> This is why I don't want hikers and MTBs on trails with each other. They need to stay separate things, gain (or lose) access separately, and both groups need to recognize that the trails are what matter the most. All else is secondary.


I think you should edit your post, this isn't at all what I said. I said "This is why I don't want mountain bikes and e-bikes conflated with each other." not "This is why I don't want e-bikes and MTBs on trails together".

Seriously, misquoting me is lame.

-W


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

sfgiantsfan said:


> What's your point?
> 
> That is how hikers and equestrians have always felt. That is why real mtbers have been fighting for access for decades. That is why we don't want motorized bikes that look just like real mountain bikes on all of the MUT's.


Exactly. 
Mountain bikers never made any demands on hikers to pretend the activities were exactly the same thing, and never went into anything expecting hikers take responsibility for us. We banded together and earned our keep and the respect of many (if not most) land managers. Even many hikers are now big fans because of the incredible amount of trail work we do (at least in my region); I get thanked all the time.

If an e-bike group got together to build and maintain a bunch of sweet-ass trails around here, I'm sure they'd gain fans. If e-bikers just try to muscle in based on perceived entitlement, they'll most likely end up shunned.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

slapheadmofo said:


> Exactly.
> Mountain bikers never made any demands on hikers to pretend the activities were exactly the same thing, and never went into anything expecting hikers take responsibility for us. We banded together and earned our keep and the respect of many (if not most) land managers. Even many hikers are now big fans because of the incredible amount of trail work we do (at least in my region); I get thanked all the time.
> 
> If an e-bike group got together to build and maintain a bunch of sweet-ass trails around here, I'm sure they'd gain fans. If e-bikers just try to muscle in based on perceived entitlement, they'll most likely end up shunned.


Yep, several of the trail systems around me were built by mountain bikers and the hikers realize that they are guests, mountain bikes even have the right of way. My Sorba group organizes and perfoms trail maintenance with NPS volunteers and we all get thanked by passing bikers, hikers and trail runners. My chapter also is building new trails in city parks.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Walt said:


> I tend to agree, but let's be honest - what do e-bike riders bring to the table? What risks do they bring? It's not necessarily "hating" to think that the potential costs outweigh the (probably limited) benefits for mountain bikers.


100% agree.



honkinunit said:


> I tend to agree, but let's be honest - what do MTB riders bring to the table? What risks do they bring? It's not necessarily "hating" to think that the potential costs outweigh the (probably limited) benefits for hikers.


That's exactly what other trail users (hikers, equestrians, etc) say about mountain bikers.

My point? Mountain bikers and e-bikers are separate groups. You want to ride your e-bike where I ride my mountain bike? Okay, go get permission from the land managers. Don't try to pretend to belong to a user group that you are not.

Also, as a mountain biker, I am free and not at all a hypocrite to advocate for access for my group and to be skeptical of yours. That's because we're separate user groups with separate issues, attributes, and impacts.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

This is like wac a mole or a merry-go-round after addressing the same subject for the umpteenth time. Most of the e+ & e- (maybe e-neutrals too) have agreed that e-MTB and MTB are separate. It's obvious the MTB group doesn't want to enter e-MTB waters and I don't blame them. The e+ group needs to create access by whatever means seem viable. SHM & KJ can't we make this a stipulation and move on?


----------



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

fos'l said:


> This is like wac a mole or a merry-go-round after addressing the same subject for the umpteenth time. Most of the e+ & e- (maybe e-neutrals too) have agreed that e-MTB and MTB are separate. It's obvious the MTB group doesn't want to enter e-MTB waters and I don't blame them. The e+ group needs to create access by whatever means seem viable. SHM & KJ can't we make this a stipulation and move on?


Seems like at least half of the pro e-bike crowd here believes that electric bikes are equal to bicycles in every way and deserve the same access as them. To me that seems to be the general plan, and the most viable way for them to gain universal access.

It is similar to wac-a-mole though, none of the bickering here will change the legalities of anything.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

JB, you're probably correct so I guess the game/ride will go on.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

J.B. Weld said:


> Seems like at least half of the pro e-bike crowd here believes that electric bikes are equal to bicycles in every way and deserve the same access as them. To me that seems to be the general plan, and the most viable way for them to gain universal access.
> 
> It is similar to wac-a-mole though, none of the bickering here will change the legalities of anything.


Yep.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> It is similar to wac-a-mole though, none of the bickering here will change the legalities of anything.


I disagree. Where else is the "industry" getting the accurate perception that there is an anti-ebike sentiment in the US? I guarantee the manufacturers and distributors are well aware of the ebike "dialogue" that goes on both here and Pinkbike, and all the other mtb websites. The comment section on Pinkbike is, as funny as it sounds, a powerful thing that advertisers do pay attention to.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

I need something in life to ***** about.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

fos'l said:


> This is like wac a mole or a merry-go-round after addressing the same subject for the umpteenth time. Most of the e+ & e- (maybe e-neutrals too) have agreed that e-MTB and MTB are separate. It's obvious the MTB group doesn't want to enter e-MTB waters and I don't blame them. The e+ group needs to create access by whatever means seem viable. SHM & KJ can't we make this a stipulation and move on?


While I agree with you, the fundemental divide is "it's a bicycle/it's not a bicycle", which while there are legal positions for both, at least on a discussion forum, that doesn't really matter when it's people arguing over their point of view. If the mods or FC chooses one side as the MTBR stated position, and eliminates any further discussion, then the forum becomes only a place to post information, ebike reviews, and notifications as to where you can legally ride. Which would reduce it's value IMO, I've seen people here change or at least moderate their positions, in both directions once they consider what others have to say. Not many, but a few.... lol

While it's very true that the bickering here has little effect directly on actual accesss, it can in the end. These forums are seen by way more than just the usual posters, and I see talking points that originate here, or seem to anyway, reappearing elsewhere on the internet and then into face to face discussions in the real world.


----------



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

watermonkey said:


> I disagree. Where else is the "industry" getting the accurate perception that there is an anti-ebike sentiment in the US? I guarantee the manufacturers and distributors are well aware of the ebike "dialogue" that goes on both here and Pinkbike, and all the other mtb websites. The comment section on Pinkbike is, as funny as it sounds, a powerful thing that advertisers do pay attention to.


I'd like to believe that and if I'm honest part of me would like to think that my puny opinion might make a difference. In reality though I don't think the industry gives a crap about anti-ebike sentiment as long as it doesn't affect their bottom line. I think manufactures are banking on access by means of legally defining class 1 electric bikes as non-motorized vehicles the same as bicycles, and most likely it's already a foregone conclusion.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

fos'l said:


> This is like wac a mole or a merry-go-round after addressing the same subject for the umpteenth time. Most of the e+ & e- (maybe e-neutrals too) have agreed that e-MTB and MTB are separate. It's obvious the MTB group doesn't want to enter e-MTB waters and I don't blame them. The e+ group needs to create access by whatever means seem viable. SHM & KJ can't we make this a stipulation and move on?


Unless fc wants to come in and make a ruling, I think this thread is actually the perfect place to keep this debate corralled.



Harryman said:


> If the mods or FC chooses one side as the MTBR stated position, and eliminates any further discussion, then the forum becomes only a place to post information, ebike reviews, and notifications as to where you can legally ride. Which would reduce it's value IMO, I've seen people here change or at least moderate their positions, in both directions once they consider what others have to say. Not many, but a few.... lol
> 
> While it's very true that the bickering here has little effect directly on actual accesss, it can in the end. These forums are seen by way more than just the usual posters, and I see talking points that originate here, or seem to anyway, reappearing elsewhere on the internet and then into face to face discussions in the real world.


I for one have changed my mind over the years being part of this sub-forum. I think it is healthy for there to be discussion here. As long as new users do not come in and create new threads that state "eBikes = pedalbikes" and all the debate stays here it is a good thing.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Klurejr said:


> Unless fc wants to come in and make a ruling, I think this thread is actually the perfect place to keep this debate corralled.
> 
> I for one have changed my mind over the years being part of this sub-forum. I think it is healthy for there to be discussion here. As long as new users do not come in and create new threads that state "eBikes = pedalbikes" and all the debate stays here it is a good thing.


Have you turned to the dark side?!!!


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Have you turned to the dark side?!!!


Huh? What side of the debate do you think I stand on?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I’m guessing you’re pro ebike. Maybe you didn’t start that way, but being around a few with friends / other riders, may have swayed you into realizing they’re not that bad? Idk, just guessing 🤔


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> As long as a 3000 watt ebike looks like a class 1 ebike and no one can tell the difference, they will all be banned.


Thing is, it's very easy to tell a 3000 watt e-bike from a Class 1. The dead giveaway is the massive battery.

A 3000 watt e-bike with a small battery has too short of a range to appeal to those who would buy a 3000 watt e-bike in the first place.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

What does the industry have to do with anything here? Companies will make what people will buy. They don't care if some people hate their product so long as there are others who buy it.

The boycott thing is lame, too. When has a boycott ever accomplished anything? Beyond the practical aspect, I don't think it's the role of business to decide what products are good or bad or where and when they should be used.

I hate the ebike concept personally but like I said earlier, if you're not hurting anybody but yourself, have at it. My only concern is the impact that your ebike might have on me and my trails. If all you do is ride your ebike on fire roads, motorized vehicle trails, and/or pavement, you don't affect my trails at all so have a blast. If you're talking about getting ebikes onto tight, twisty, sensitive single track, then we have beef.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

EricTheDood said:


> Thing is, it's very easy to tell a 3000 watt e-bike from a Class 1. The dead giveaway is the massive battery.
> 
> A 3000 watt e-bike with a small battery has too short of a range to appeal to those who would buy a 3000 watt e-bike in the first place.


Seriously? Nope.

Maybe in general they are bigger but there are some huge ass batteries out there.

If they ever make class 1 ebikes legal on trails are they going to standardize battery sizes so we can easily tell at a glance? Nope.

Are they going to come out with a size list so we can compare against It? Nope

Are batteries and their technology one of the things manufacturers are keen to significantly improve, to include making much smaller? Yep.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> Seriously? Nope.
> 
> Maybe in general they are bigger but there are some huge ass batteries out there.
> 
> ...


Class 1s with huge batteries are few and far between.

You can certainly limit battery sizes on trails, using risk of fire as a reason. That doesn't mean it's enforceable, but it'll put manufacturers on notice. Use TSA's battery limit policy as legal precedent.

As for batteries "significantly improving", with regards to weight and bulk, good luck on that. What manufacturers are "keen" on doing is often a far cry from reality, which is that lithium battery technology has plateaued. Hence the gigafactories. You don't spend billions on a factory to mass produce a product in its infancy.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> What does the industry have to do with anything here? Companies will make what people will buy. They don't care if some people hate their product so long as there are others who buy it.
> 
> The boycott thing is lame, too. When has a boycott ever accomplished anything? Beyond the practical aspect, I don't think it's the role of business to decide what products are good or bad or where and when they should be used.
> 
> I hate the ebike concept personally but like I said earlier, if you're not hurting anybody but yourself, have at it. My only concern is the impact that your ebike might have on me and my trails. If all you do is ride your ebike on fire roads, motorized vehicle trails, and/or pavement, you don't affect my trails at all so have a blast. If you're talking about getting ebikes onto tight, twisty, sensitive single track, then we have beef.


We're cool, I don't ride with you or on your trails. Have a good day.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> I need something in life to ***** about.


Why?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

kpdemello said:


> If you're talking about getting ebikes onto tight, twisty, sensitive single track, then we have beef.


How I feel about 29ers...


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> How I feel about 29ers...


 Works for those of us with sasquatch like arm and legs


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> Class 1s with huge batteries are few and far between.
> 
> You can certainly limit battery sizes on trails, using risk of fire as a reason. That doesn't mean it's enforceable, but it'll put manufacturers on notice. Use TSA's battery limit policy as legal precedent.
> 
> As for batteries "significantly improving", with regards to weight and bulk, good luck on that. What manufacturers are "keen" on doing is often a far cry from reality, which is that lithium battery technology has plateaued. Hence the gigafactories. You don't spend billions on a factory to mass produce a product in its infancy.


 Plateau? Tell that to Tesla. Man was not meant to fly. The model T is the pinnacle of evolution. Self driving cars? Never. Man will never go to the moon. Etc. Tubeless tires are a fad. Battery size? In the top tube, made up of the down tube, looking like water bottles or in the backpack? Like those?


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Plateau? Tell that to Tesla. Man was not meant to fly. The model T is the pinnacle of evolution. Self driving cars? Never. Man will never go to the moon. Etc. Tubeless tires are a fad. Battery size? In the top tube, made up of the down tube, looking like water bottles or in the backpack? Like those?


Funny you mention Tesla, because I was specifically referring to them and their original gigafactory.

https://www.greentechmedia.com/arti...n-progress-and-musk-may-add-4-more#gs.I910AFk

Don't get me wrong, lithium WILL be replaced. Eventually.

But I trust that for someone like Elon Musk to go "all-in" on Li-ion, the next breakthrough technology is, at a minimum, 10-20 years away from commercialization.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

I give it 5 years on the discovery level.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

leeboh said:


> I give it 5 years on the discovery level.


Based on... hopes and dreams?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> Funny you mention Tesla, because I was specifically referring to them and their original gigafactory.
> 
> https://www.greentechmedia.com/arti...n-progress-and-musk-may-add-4-more#gs.I910AFk
> 
> ...


Considering how much money is to be made in the battery industry, I'd suspect many companies are throwing serious money at coming up with the next battery tech.

Groundbreaking Fast-Charging Battery Technology by Toshiba Triples E-Bike Range 

As of now you can have a 3+kw bike with a backpack battery that would pass as either a class 1 or plain old mtb for most people.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Regardless of your feelings about Elon Musk, does anyone really believe that batteries (for bikes or anything else) won't continue to improve over decade+ timescales?

Because if your argument is "3kW e-bikes are impossible because batteries", then you're staking a pretty bold claim that we'll see no progress whatsoever on that front for a long time. 

I have a vested interest (3 and 5 year old ones) in making sure the trails I love are still open to bikes in 20, 30, 40 years. 

-Walt


----------



## stevenfallover (Jun 5, 2004)

I like that...."my trails".



kpdemello said:


> What does the industry have to do with anything here? Companies will make what people will buy. They don't care if some people hate their product so long as there are others who buy it.
> 
> The boycott thing is lame, too. When has a boycott ever accomplished anything? Beyond the practical aspect, I don't think it's the role of business to decide what products are good or bad or where and when they should be used.
> 
> I hate the ebike concept personally but like I said earlier, if you're not hurting anybody but yourself, have at it. My only concern is the impact that your ebike might have on me and my trails. If all you do is ride your ebike on fire roads, motorized vehicle trails, and/or pavement, you don't affect my trails at all so have a blast. If you're talking about getting ebikes onto tight, twisty, sensitive single track, then we have beef.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Mine.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I'm guessing you're pro ebike. Maybe you didn't start that way, but being around a few with friends / other riders, may have swayed you into realizing they're not that bad? Idk, just guessing ?


More neutral really.

I have ridden a kit bike eBike with a throttle, I do not know the wattage, but it was very fun and odd at the same time.
I have ridden with guys on Pedelecs, again I did not know the wattage.
I have been passed while climbing by a guy on a pedelec, again I did not know the wattage, but it was probably a Turbo Levo.

As long as the eBikes I see and interact with are 250w Class 1, I really see no problem with them in the area's I ride.

I will never buy one, because I ride for the fun AND the exercise, and I would be cheating myself. I get just a few hours a week to ride, and I do those rides with friends. Getting a eBike would mean less exercise for me in those few hours(unless they all bought eBikes and we put in double the miles in the same amount of time, but I do not see that happening).

I am not going to go on a crusade to block eBikers, but I certainly am not going to include them in a trail access discussion as being the same as a pedal only bike. The feelings that are evoked by many when they hear the word "motor" or "motorized" can be very negative, and I would not want anyone with the power to block access to trails to ever lump pedal bikes with eBikes.

The entire nature of adding a motor to a bike is why this topic is so sensitive in the US. Motors have been vilified over the years, and become off-limits to many areas.

There is no easy answer today/right now. We all will have to collectively wait and see what happens, and those who are Pro-eBike need to form or join groups and start advocating if they want to avoid blanket bans.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Harryman said:


> Considering how much money is to be made in the battery industry, I'd suspect many companies are throwing serious money at coming up with the next battery tech.
> 
> Groundbreaking Fast-Charging Battery Technology by Toshiba Triples E-Bike RangeÂ*


SCiB has been around for over 10 years now and has yet to realize commercialization.



Harryman said:


> As of now you can have a 3+kw bike with a backpack battery that would pass as either a class 1 or plain old mtb for most people.


LOL, because that's not conspicuous. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Walt said:


> Because if your argument is "3kW e-bikes are impossible because batteries", then you're staking a pretty bold claim that we'll see no progress whatsoever on that front for a long time.
> 
> I have a vested interest (3 and 5 year old ones) in making sure the trails I love are still open to bikes in 20, 30, 40 years.
> 
> -Walt


Not bold, just realistic.

There are plenty of valid reasons to oppose e-MTBs on your local trails.

The idea that 3KW stealth e-bikes will be a reality in 20+ years, however, is not one of them, not because it can't/won't happen, but because the entire technological landscape will be very different by then. Quadcopters will be transporting hikers straight to the top of the mountains.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech...ying-car-backed-googles-co-founder/100848734/


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

EricTheDood said:


> Not bold, just realistic.
> 
> There are plenty of valid reasons to oppose e-MTBs on your local trails.
> 
> ...


So you consider getting quad coptered up to the top of a mountain hiking, no wonder you think riding a motor bike up a hill is mountain biking.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

sfgiantsfan said:


> So you consider getting quad coptered up to the top of a mountain hiking, no wonder you think riding a motor bike up a hill is mountain biking.


Do you consider lift-served trails to be "mountain bike" trails or ?????

If someone rides a cart while golfing are they really golfing?


----------



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

honkinunit said:


> Do you consider lift-served trails to be "mountain bike" trails or ?????
> 
> If someone rides a cart while golfing are they really golfing?


I don't think anyone cares if electric bikes are ridden in lift served mtb parks or golf courses.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> Based on... hopes and dreams?


In the Boston area? We call it MIT. Stanford on the west coast.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

honkinunit said:


> Do you consider lift-served trails to be "mountain bike" trails or ?????


You don't even need to go that far.

If you have to drive to a local trailhead with your bike on a rack, you're not MTBing. You're driving.


----------



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

EricTheDood said:


> If you have to drive to a local trailhead with your bike on a rack, you're not MTBing. You're driving.


Excellent observation, driving is different than riding.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

honkinunit said:


> Do you consider lift-served trails to be "mountain bike" trails or ?????
> 
> If someone rides a cart while golfing are they really golfing?


Nobody here cares if you ride an e-bike at a lift-served bike park. They are closed to hikers and DH only. You could ride a motorcycle (or hell, an ATV) on most of them. As long as the resort/trail center is making money, there is zero chance of mountain bikes losing access.

We're concerned about MUTs, where it's a different story entirely.

-Walt


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

honkinunit said:


> If someone rides a cart while golfing are they really golfing?


Good point; in pro golfing you can't use a cart unless you're physically disabled.

See where this is going...?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Klurejr said:


> More neutral really.
> 
> I have ridden a kit bike eBike with a throttle, I do not know the wattage, but it was very fun and odd at the same time.
> I have ridden with guys on Pedelecs, again I did not know the wattage.
> ...


Good point and politically correct answer in a very touchy sub forum! Your right, everything is speculation, now. I'm guessing some of these manufacturers have a crystal ball or have some very good contacts. I just have friends in low places..?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> Do you consider lift-served trails to be "mountain bike" trails or ?????


Yes. But they have dedicated trails and parks for it. I'm certainly fine if ebikers want to create their own private dedicated ebike parks.



honkinunit said:


> If someone rides a cart while golfing are they really golfing?


That's a pretty strained analogy. Riding an ebike is more like having a machine swing the club for you in golf.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

kpdemello said:


> That's a pretty strained analogy. Riding an ebike is more like having a machine swing the club for you in golf.


You clearly never rode a Pedelec style e-Bike. Your analogy is actually the flawed one.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Note to everyone: the golf analogy makes no sense. 

-Walt


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

RickBullottaPA said:


> You clearly never rode a Pedelec style e-Bike. Your analogy is actually the flawed one.


Never have and don't care to try one. Nor do I feel the need to try one to validate my opinion on ebikes. There are legitimate reasons behind my views that have nothing to do with how well or not well the thing pedals, or how much fun it is to ride. I'm sure it's a blast and everything but so is riding an ATV, and I don't think those should be allowed everywhere either.



Walt said:


> Note to everyone: the golf analogy makes no sense.


True. Analogies rarely do.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Walt said:


> Note to everyone: the golf analogy makes no sense to me.
> 
> -Walt


FIFY.

Actually it's a great analogy.

Back in the dim times folks that liked hitting around little round balls out in the countryside decided that if they wanted decent areas to play their game they would need to get organized and obtain land for just their sport. At some point a whole set of rules was formulated. Like real men (and women) didn't use golf carts to make their game easier. Powered golf carts were OK for the flabby public, it was recognized that their participation would help fund the elite (and those that would self-caddie).

So one of the ways this relates to MTB'ing is bike MFG's know that pushing e-bikes on the "flabby public" is an easy way to get the multitudes into a sport where "par" is now determined by Strava. Until bikers start paying "greens fees" the only form financial clout we have is what we purchase; electrified or not.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Moe Ped said:


> Until bikers start paying "greens fees" the only form financial clout we have is what we purchase; electrified or not.


Not true at all. We use dollar numbers all of the time when presenting to cities and land managers as incentive to allow more mountain bikers.

Our local BLM also has a trail fund that is flush with money due solely to mountain bike events held on BLM land.

Not a single penny of that is from ebikes.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> Note to everyone: the golf analogy makes no sense.
> 
> -Walt


It makes perfect sense. People rag on eBikes because they disrupt the "purity" of the holy sport of mountain biking. People rag on carts for the exact same reason. You are not a *real* golfer if you ride in a cart, because the sport was meant to be a physical challenge that is "lost" if you ride a cart. Golf is too "easy" for people who ride in carts, and carts bring too many people onto the course and mess up the conditions. People who would otherwise not be on the golf course are in the way of the people who "deserve" to be there.

Exactly. The. Same.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Silentfoe said:


> Not true at all. We use dollar numbers all of the time when presenting to cities and land managers as incentive to allow more mountain bikers.
> 
> Our local BLM also has a trail fund that is flush with money due solely to mountain bike events held on BLM land.
> 
> ...


Where is this land of milk and honey of which you speak?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Walt said:


> Note to everyone: the golf analogy makes no sense.





honkinunit said:


> It makes perfect sense. People rag on eBikes because they disrupt the "purity" of the holy sport of mountain biking. People rag on carts for the exact same reason. You are not a *real* golfer if you ride in a cart, because the sport was meant to be a physical challenge that is "lost" if you ride a cart. Golf is too "easy" for people who ride in carts, and carts bring too many people onto the course and mess up the conditions. People who would otherwise not be on the golf course are in the way of the people who "deserve" to be there.
> 
> Exactly. The. Same.


I'll play devil's advocate for you. Is walking from hole to hole really essential to the game of golf? Isn't golf really just about hitting a ball off a tee and trying to get it into the hole? Using motorized transport really doesn't disrupt or take away from anything that makes a good golfer a good golfer. It just makes it easier to get from tee off to tee off.

On the other hand, pedaling the bike is essential to the sport of mountain biking. It's what makes it what it is. When you make that easier by adding a motor, you are diluting the essence of the sport. It's like golfing with a bionic arm or a mechanized driver.

In the end you can go round and round with these analogies and not get anywhere. Analogies prove nothing, demonstrate nothing, and offer nothing. They are just clever tools that at best merely communicate a sentiment or a feeling.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

kpdemello said:


> I'll play devil's advocate for you. Is walking from hole to hole really essential to the game of golf? Isn't golf really just about hitting a ball off a tee and trying to get it into the hole? Using motorized transport really doesn't disrupt or take away from anything that makes a good golfer a good golfer. It just makes it easier to get from tee off to tee off.
> 
> On the other hand, pedaling the bike is essential to the sport of mountain biking. It's what makes it what it is. When you make that easier by adding a motor, you are diluting the essence of the sport. It's like golfing with a bionic arm or a mechanized driver.
> 
> In the end you can go round and round with these analogies and not get anywhere. Analogies prove nothing, demonstrate nothing, and offer nothing. They are just clever tools that at best merely communicate a sentiment or a feeling.


Go talk to the people who didn't even want Casey Martin to be able to use a cart when he is officially disabled by a serious disease. Golf purists believe walking is integral to golf.

Pedaling *is* essential to mountain biking. You have to pedal an Class 1 eBike.

You're welcome.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

kpdemello said:


> I'll play devil's advocate for you. Is walking from hole to hole really essential to the game of golf? Isn't golf really just about hitting a ball off a tee and trying to get it into the hole? Using motorized transport really doesn't disrupt or take away from anything that makes a good golfer a good golfer. It just makes it easier to get from tee off to tee off.


Golf is a very nuanced game, riding in a cart vs. walking the course does make a huge difference imho. I believe the average 18 hole lap is about 5 miles so there is some physical exertion involved in walking a round or two or three.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Moe Ped said:


> FIFY.
> 
> Actually it's a great analogy.
> 
> Back in the dim times folks that liked hitting around little round balls out in the countryside decided that if they wanted decent areas to play their game they would need to get organized and obtain land for just their sport. At some point a whole set of rules was formulated. Like real men (and women) didn't use golf carts to make their game easier. Powered golf carts were OK for the flabby public, it was recognized that their participation would help fund the elite (and those that would self-caddie).


Ummm....actually, the analogy had nothing at all to do with golf carts. 
He brought up a 'machine that swings the club for you'.

Walt, as usual, is dead on.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

slapheadmofo said:


> Ummm....actually, the analogy had nothing at all to do with golf carts.
> He brought up a 'machine that swings the club for you'.
> 
> Walt, as usual, is dead on.


Ummm OK but was Walt referring to #469 or #477? Or to both??? The discussion started with carts and went to swinging machines.

The bigger picture is how golfers pay for access to their sport.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> Go talk to the people who didn't even want Casey Martin to be able to use a cart when he is officially disabled by a serious disease. Golf purists believe walking is integral to golf.


And most golfers would probably say that golfing is still golf even if you use a cart. Like I said, you can go round and round with an analogy and get absolutely no where.



honkinunit said:


> Pedaling *is* essential to mountain biking.


If you accept this premise, then logically it follows that any help offered by a motor that allows you to pedal faster/harder changes the nature of the activity from "mountain biking" to something else.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> Not true at all. We use dollar numbers all of the time when presenting to cities and land managers as incentive to allow more mountain bikers.
> 
> Our local BLM also has a trail fund that is flush with money due solely to mountain bike events held on BLM land.
> 
> ...


 Could that have anything to do with the fact ebikes are not permitted to participate?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Who gives a flying rats a**. If you wanna own an ebike, buy one. If not, don’t. Just don’t judge either way. There is no sense trying to convert anyone. I’ll continue to do whatever puts a smile on my face, hell it may be jumping golf carts! That always works.😳


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> SCiB has been around for over 10 years now and has yet to realize commercialization.
> 
> LOL, because that's not conspicuous. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
> 
> View attachment 1169821


True, backpack batteries stand out like a sore thumb, it's so easy to tell these three apart


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

I think most of us are kinda set in our opinions here. Which doesn't surprise me. Let's revisit in, oh, 3-5 years. 

In the meantime, I'll ride my "normal" bike, my e-Bike, my fatbike, and my dirtbike, whenever and wherever I'm allowed, and smile the whole time.

For now, I have to shut down the computer, fire up the e-Bike, and go take some KOMs from Stravassholes. ;-)


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Ok, how about this. Is someone who plays miniature golf participating in the same sport as someone who plays tradition golf? They have a whole lot in common but most people would agree that miniature golf is easier (no long drives) and thus, missing some of the key difficulties of traditional golf, it is not the same as actual golf but rather its own sport.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

chazpat said:


> and thus, missing some of the key difficulties of traditional golf, it is not the same as actual golf but rather its own sport.


Neither is a sport. They are _games_.



Gutch said:


> Who gives a flying rats a**. If you wanna own an ebike, buy one. If not, don't. Just don't judge either way.


I reserve the right to judge the **** out of anyone, anywhere, at any time.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

chazpat said:


> Ok, how about this. Is someone who plays miniature golf participating in the same sport as someone who plays tradition golf? They have a whole lot in common but most people would agree that miniature golf is easier (no long drives) and thus, missing some of the key difficulties of traditional golf, it is not the same as actual golf but rather its own sport.


Do you have derailleurs on your mountain bike? Suspension? Disk brakes?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> Neither is a sport. They are _games_.
> 
> I reserve the right to judge the **** out of anyone, anywhere, at any time.


Of course you do. Don't let that crap weather upset you!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

My point was that golf carts vs. walking vs. mechanical drivers vs. shooting the ball from a howitzer is irrelevant because *golfers don't have any problem losing access to the places they play golf*.

-Walt


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> Do you have derailleurs on your mountain bike? Suspension? Disk brakes?


not on my single speed
not on my CX that I sometimes ride on single track
not on my single speed nor on my CX

why do you ask?

btw, they also don't have motors, because then they would be ebikes instead of bicycles and I would be ebiking instead of mountain biking.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> Do you have derailleurs on your mountain bike? Suspension? Disk brakes?


I have gears, suspension, disk brakes and motors on a bunch of my machines. 
Guess which of the above makes them "not a mountain bike".


----------



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

The golf analogy is completely off target. First off, comparing golf to mountain biking is just wrong in several ways. Golf is also a lot different than skiing but they are similar in that they both are enterprises devoted solely to satisfying their clientele and maximizing profits. Bike parks would be the same deal, multi-use trails in national parks and forests wouldn't.

Any hikers on golf courses? Equestrians? Protected wildlife habitat? People trying to temporarily escape civilization?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Of course you do. Don't let that crap weather upset you!


Are you judging me?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

chazpat said:


> not on my single speed
> not on my CX that I sometimes ride on single track
> not on my single speed nor on my CX
> 
> ...


Ok, how about this. Is someone who rides a bike with a derailleur participating in the same sport as someone who rides a traditional single speed, the only type of bike that existed for the first 50 years of cycling? They have a whole lot in common but most people would agree that riding with gears is easier and thus, missing some of the key difficulties of traditional cycling, it is not the same as actual cycling but rather its own sport.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

honkinunit said:


> Ok, how about this. Is someone who rides a bike with a derailleur participating in the same sport as someone who rides a traditional single speed, the only type of bike that existed for the first 50 years of cycling? They have a whole lot in common but most people would agree that riding with gears is easier and thus, missing some of the key difficulties of traditional cycling, it is not the same as actual cycling but rather its own sport.


Different shades of the same color, SS is like doing a round of golf using only one club. Adding a motor to a bike is a different color with a whole new range of shades to admire (or hate).

As this thread reveals; mixing these two colors yields results not pleasing to many.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> Ok, how about this. Is someone who rides a bike with a derailleur participating in the same sport as someone who rides a traditional single speed, the only type of bike that existed for the first 50 years of cycling? They have a whole lot in common but most people would agree that riding with gears is easier and thus, missing some of the key difficulties of traditional cycling, it is not the same as actual cycling but rather its own sport.


I don't ride my geared bike and claim I am single speeding.
I don't ride my full/hardtail suspension bike and claim I am riding rigid.
I wouldn't ride a bike propelled by a motor and claim I was mountain biking.

Bicycles are not defined by how many gears they have, if they do or do not have suspension, what type of brakes they have, if both wheels are the same size or not, if they are driven by the front or rear wheel, what the frame is made of; etc.
They are defined by how the are propelled; 100% human. Wheels have to be in-line and driven by pedaling, that's about it.

Why are you so afraid to say you are riding an ebike and thus you are ebiking rather than mountain biking? Hey, call it off-road ebiking if you like. It seems you just can't admit that.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

I can understand people with injuries or coming back from injuries using them, but why regular healthy people. Maybe if you one of you guys explain why you choose one I would understand more.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> Are you judging me?


Not now, I've already cast judgement on you when you called me a lazy bastard! Unlike you, I'm a very positive person and don't really need something in my life to ***** about.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

STAGER1 said:


> I can understand people with injuries or coming back from injuries using them, but why regular healthy people. Maybe if you one of you guys explain why you choose one I would understand more.


Something different. I don't get paid to ride a bicycle and I doubt 99% of posters here don't either. So 99% of us ride for fun and exercise, exactly what I get from my mtb, emtb, or road bikes. Have you rode one?


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

No I haven't. I'm sure it's fun. I'm not trying to offend anyone but the part I enjoy the most about biking is pushing myself to the limit so it's just hard for me and probably others to understand. Does it make you faster jump high things like that which I guess would make riding exciting.


----------



## Flamingtaco (Mar 12, 2012)

Moe Ped said:


> Different shades of the same color, SS is like doing a round of golf using only one club. Adding a motor to a bike is a different color with a whole new range of shades to admire (or hate).
> 
> As this thread reveals; mixing these two colors yields results not pleasing to many.


A different color? I don't think that differentiates things enough. Bikes already come in boatloads of colors.

More like adding a rocket motor to a golf club. But not really, because we are not trying to moderate a sport. Maybe it's more like replacing the golf cart with a Jeep.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

That's because you are using a frame of reference for ebikes as a bicycle and thus a bicycling experience which they provide some of but not all of. Some people only climb so that they can go down so having a motor assist with the aspects that they do not like is appealing. You are like me, the climbing is as much of the experience as descending. It is a different thing. And if anyone asks, I consider downhill to be different as well. I kind of chuckle at the guys pushing their bikes up a hill, but hey, if that's what they want to do, fine. But I don't consider it to be the same thing as what I do.

And I think that is why ebikes are such a touchy subject in the US (well, that and the fear that they will cause trail access issues). When the industry tries to promote them as bicycles, cyclist frame them as bicycles for reference and then yes, they are cheating, they have a motor to assist in propelling them. If you think about motorcycles, you probably have no problem with them as you are referencing them as something different, motorcycles (as long as they ride legally). So think of ebikes as… ebikes. They are somewhat similar to bicycles but they aren't bicycles so don't use a bicycle as a frame of reference.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

STAGER1 said:


> No I haven't. I'm sure it's fun. I'm not trying to offend anyone but the part I enjoy the most about biking is pushing myself to the limit so it's just hard for me and probably others to understand. Does it make you faster jump high things like that which I guess would make riding exciting.


As indicated above, because it's fun. Plus it's a hoot being a "normal" MTB rider when on a SS or geared MTB and a "cheater" on an e-MTB? BTW, with one exception, every e-MTB rider that I know (probably 10 - 20) rides MTB too. The exception is recovering from foot surgery.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

Gutch said:


> On flat level ground I can barely pedal to 32 after mine shuts down at 28mph. 50# Specialized Turbo.


28 MPH? on flat level ground? That's pretty fast. I hit that on steep downhill sections on paved roads. Shows how out of touch with cycling eBikes are. And 20 MPH is pretty fast on most trails. It's fast for a paved road on a road bike.

When you start talking about hitting 32 MPH and maintaining speed in the mid-twenties under electric power with some perfunctory pedaling you are well out of the realm of cycling and into the land of "why even bother calling it cycling?"


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Not now, I've already cast judgement on you when you called me a lazy bastard! Unlike you, I'm a very positive person and don't really need something in my life to ***** about.


Ah I see... too lazy to judge more than once


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Ailuropoda said:


> 28 MPH? on flat level ground? That's pretty fast. I hit that on steep downhill sections on paved roads. Shows how out of touch with cycling eBikes are. And 20 MPH is pretty fast on most trails. It's fast for a paved road on a road bike.
> 
> When you start talking about hitting 32 MPH and maintaining speed in the mid-twenties under electric power with some perfunctory pedaling you are well out of the realm of cycling and into the land of "why even bother calling it cycling?"


Do you road ride in mtns? That's what I'm talking about. Hell on downhills on normal road bike you can get into the 40's.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

STAGER1 said:


> No I haven't. I'm sure it's fun. I'm not trying to offend anyone but the part I enjoy the most about biking is pushing myself to the limit so it's just hard for me and probably others to understand. Does it make you faster jump high things like that which I guess would make riding exciting.


Maybe Ebikes aren't for you. No biggie. Most guys on here should be in the "endurance and training " forum. Then they can exploit their knowledge and testosterone to the fullest and push your keyboard to the max, unassisted of course! Hahaha


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

chazpat said:


> That's because you are using a frame of reference for ebikes as a bicycle and thus a bicycling experience which they provide some of but not all of. Some people only climb so that they can go down so having a motor assist with the aspects that they do not like is appealing. You are like me, the climbing is as much of the experience as descending. It is a different thing. And if anyone asks, I consider downhill to be different as well. I kind of chuckle at the guys pushing their bikes up a hill, but hey, if that's what they want to do, fine. But I don't consider it to be the same thing as what I do.
> 
> And I think that is why ebikes are such a touchy subject in the US (well, that and the fear that they will cause trail access issues). When the industry tries to promote them as bicycles, cyclist frame them as bicycles for reference and then yes, they are cheating, they have a motor to assist in propelling them. If you think about motorcycles, you probably have no problem with them as you are referencing them as something different, motorcycles (as long as they ride legally). So think of ebikes as&#8230; ebikes. They are somewhat similar to bicycles but they aren't bicycles so don't use a bicycle as a frame of reference.


Another person who has never actually ridden a pedal-assist ebike weighing in with their false impressions and chest thumping.

I'll say it again. And again. And again. If you have never actually ridden an eMTB on a real trail for a real amount of time, you have no clue.

I can ride as hard as I want on my eMTB. If I want, I can get a *better* workout on my eMTB than my enduro bike, because the eMTB is heavier and doesn't have rear suspension. The ride can be kind of easy, or brutally difficult.

I know that you are all knowing and don't "need" to ride one to know exactly what the eMTB experience is like. That is f'ing amazing.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

STAGER1 said:


> No I haven't. I'm sure it's fun. I'm not trying to offend anyone but the part I enjoy the most about biking is pushing myself to the limit so it's just hard for me and probably others to understand. Does it make you faster jump high things like that which I guess would make riding exciting.


I assure you, you can find your limits on an e-Bike as well. It's "different". You can choose to leverage the boost to go farther, to choose routes with previously unmanageable climbs (to reward yourself with more descending), to maintain flow on trails, and to improve your bike handling (downhill runs with a 52 lb beast are flashback to the first generation DH bikes). But since they are pedal assist, you can get your heart rate pumping as much as you want, just like you can with a regular bike. I hit the same general HR ranges on my eBike as I do on my Santa Cruz. I get a bit more of an upper body workout on my eBike. Somewhat between my Santa Cruz and my dirt bike.

Of course, an eBike can also be used to just back off the effort and ride at a lower effort as well. The nature of a Pedelec (pedal assist) gives you that choice.

I, for one, have no interest in a throttle on an eBike. Nor do I need more than the 250W of power my class 1 eBike adds. When I want those things, I hop on my KTM 300 and ride on trails appropriate for that type of vehicle.

Having been MTBing for a long time, all over the country, on all kinds of trails and bikes, I can unequivocally say that class 1 eBikes should be permitted on MTB trails. About the only exception to me would be long "epics" where an expired battery could lead to a less than desirable situation, but I prefer to let individuals be accountable for using good judgement.

As has been discussed before, being a trail asshole has little to do with what you ride - we've all encountered douchehats on singlespeeds, DH bikes, cross bikes, whatever...


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Ailuropoda said:


> 28 MPH? on flat level ground? That's pretty fast. I hit that on steep downhill sections on paved roads. Shows how out of touch with cycling eBikes are. And 20 MPH is pretty fast on most trails. It's fast for a paved road on a road bike.
> 
> When you start talking about hitting 32 MPH and maintaining speed in the mid-twenties under electric power with some perfunctory pedaling you are well out of the realm of cycling and into the land of "why even bother calling it cycling?"


Huh. I've hit 50 on my Santa Cruz on descents. Scared the piss out of me, but it had nothing to do with a motor.

The limiter on MTB trails around us is rarely power/speed - it's handling. If my bike would let me go 25 MPH, I'd rarely be able to use it. Typically half that. To draw an analogy, your car will probably go 110 MPH - but on a twisty local road you'd be in the trees or the lake long before you hit those speeds.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

honkinunit said:


> Another person who has never actually ridden a pedal-assist ebike weighing in with their false impressions and chest thumping.
> 
> I'll say it again. And again. And again. If you have never actually ridden an eMTB on a real trail for a real amount of time, you have no clue.
> 
> ...


Truth.


----------



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

honkinunit said:


> Another person who has never actually ridden a pedal-assist ebike weighing in with their false impressions and chest thumping.
> 
> I'll say it again. And again. And again. If you have never actually ridden an eMTB on a real trail for a real amount of time, you have no clue.





RickBullottaPA said:


> Truth.


Understand that for many people having experience riding an electric bike has nothing whatsoever to do with their opinion that they shouldn't be permitted in areas designated as being non-motorized areas. If exceptions are made then this sign should be removed at the trailhead-









I'll say it again, having experience riding an electric bike is completely irrelevant in formulating that opinion.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Moe Ped said:


> Different shades of the same color, SS is like doing a round of golf using only one club. Adding a motor to a bike is a different color with a whole new range of shades to admire (or hate).
> 
> As this thread reveals; mixing these two colors yields results not pleasing to many.


 Wouldn't that be friedclamshitgreen?


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

So if a trail doesn't have this sign posted then e bikes are ok!!! If I ride a trail and ther is no posted sign but I find one at the end of the trail do I have to go back and unride it?


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Understand that for many people having experience riding an electric bike has nothing whatsoever to do with their opinion that they shouldn't be permitted in areas designated as being non-motorized areas. If exceptions are made then this sign should be removed at the trailhead-
> 
> View attachment 1170004
> 
> ...


...and clinging to those opinions without deferring to facts, experience, or reality is the very definition of ignorance. Sadly, this behavior applies to so very much more than eBikes. It's just a pattern that repeats over and over in a society where too many don't bother to gather data, let it slosh around for a while, then form their own POVs. It's far easier to read someone else's and just attach to it. Ugh.


----------



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

RickBullottaPA said:


> ...and clinging to those opinions without deferring to facts, experience, or reality is the very definition of ignorance. Sadly, this behavior applies to so very much more than eBikes. It's just a pattern that repeats over and over in a society where too many don't bother to gather data, let it slosh around for a while, then form their own POVs. It's far easier to read someone else's and just attach to it. Ugh.


Uh huh, cause that's what I'm doing, reading someone else's opinion and clinging to it. Clinging to the idea that motor-free areas are important to me and thousands of others. How obtuse of me, apologies all around.

btw I have ridden electric bicycles, not that it matters.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

One Trail that I sometimes ride has a sign that clearly states no ATVs or off road vehicles isn't a MT bike a off road vehicle??


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

RickBullottaPA said:


> ...and clinging to those opinions without deferring to facts, experience, or reality is the very definition of ignorance. Sadly, this behavior applies to so very much more than eBikes. It's just a pattern that repeats over and over in a society where too many don't bother to gather data, let it slosh around for a while, then form their own POVs. It's far easier to read someone else's and just attach to it. Ugh.


It's almost like some people in this thread think of ebikes like the civil rights movement. Dude, it's a bike with a motor. Riding one is not going to suddenly open my eyes to the mysteries locked within the ebike world. I don't need to ride an ebike to know that I don't like the idea of wild places being invaded by motors, even fancy electronic ones that mask their presence by allowing the rider to pretend to do some of the work.



rider95 said:


> One Trail that I sometimes ride has a sign that clearly states no ATVs or off road vehicles isn't a MT bike a off road vehicle??


And now you're being purposefully obtuse.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

STAGER1 said:


> I can understand people with injuries or coming back from injuries using them, but why regular healthy people. Maybe if you one of you guys explain why you choose one I would understand more.


 The one injury you never heal or recover from: age. I will be 65 in May and I am pretty sure no matter what I do I'll never be 64 again.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Ailuropoda said:


> 28 MPH? on flat level ground? That's pretty fast. I hit that on steep downhill sections on paved roads. Shows how out of touch with cycling eBikes are. And 20 MPH is pretty fast on most trails. It's fast for a paved road on a road bike.
> 
> When you start talking about hitting 32 MPH and maintaining speed in the mid-twenties under electric power with some perfunctory pedaling you are well out of the realm of cycling and into the land of "why even bother calling it cycling?"


 And that's why a legal Class 1 or 2 shuts off the power at 20mph, not 28mph. Any ebike that can hit 28mph is illegal anywhere but a paved bike path or bike lane on the street.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rider95 said:


> One Trail that I sometimes ride has a sign that clearly states no ATVs or off road vehicles isn't a MT bike a off road vehicle??


 Vehicles usually refer to ones with a motor.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

RickBullottaPA said:


> I assure you, you can find your limits on an e-Bike as well. It's "different". You can choose to leverage the boost to go farther, to choose routes with previously unmanageable climbs (to reward yourself with more descending), to maintain flow on trails, and to improve your bike handling (downhill runs with a 52 lb beast are flashback to the first generation DH bikes). But since they are pedal assist, you can get your heart rate pumping as much as you want, just like you can with a regular bike. I hit the same general HR ranges on my eBike as I do on my Santa Cruz. I get a bit more of an upper body workout on my eBike. Somewhat between my Santa Cruz and my dirt bike.
> 
> Of course, an eBike can also be used to just back off the effort and ride at a lower effort as well. The nature of a Pedelec (pedal assist) gives you that choice.
> 
> ...


 I guess PA is different from MA where I ride. Not so much in the way of mt bike trails here. Multi use paths on state forest trails. Hikers, dogs, etc. Motorized vehicles not allowed. Also not allowed on the town conservation areas I pedal as well. E bikes, they can stay where all those other motorized vehicles go.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

I have been riding my e bike all over the Midwest and the south for over 5 yrs most other trail users including other reg mt bikers don't see a big deal with e bikes , and have no problem with them a lot of them don't even know there is any anti e bike feelings . Its a great time to be a e biker lots of new cool e bike stuff new places to ride new friends to be made like the guy last week who turned out to be a police commesner from Chigo thought my e bike was cool ..


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

WoodlandHills said:


> And that's why a legal Class 1 or 2 shuts off the power at 20mph, not 28mph. Any ebike that can hit 28mph is illegal anywhere but a paved bike path or bike lane on the street.


Actually, I believe the People For Bikes "Model Legislation" restricts Class 3 from bike paths as well unless they are specifically permitted. At least that is what was implemented in Colorado, and I think they took the "model" lock, stock and battery.

As implemented in Colorado, the "model" legislation is flawed in this way: it states that a Class 1 or Class 2 electrically assisted bicycle "ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches a speed of twenty miles per hour." Who the hell writes this stuff? A lawyer will tell you that a legal reading of that means that a bike that cuts out at 19 MPH is not a Class 1. WTF? I'm not even a lawyer and I can tell that is going to cause problems down the line.

BTW, I guess the mods are going to go apeshit here. An ebike is officially designated as a "bicycle" in Colorado statute.

(14)
(a)
(I) a person may ride a class 1 or class 2 electrical assisted bicycle on a
bike or pedestrian path where bicycles are authorized to travel.
(II) A local authority may prohibit the operation of a class 1 or class 2
electrical assisted bicycle on a bike or pedestrian path under its
jurisdiction.

(b) A person shall not ride a class 3 electrical assisted bicycle on a bike or
pedestrian path unless:
(I) The path is within a street or highway; or
(II) The local authority permits the operation of a class 3 electrical
assisted bicycle on a path under its jurisdiction.

(15)
(a) A person under sixteen years of age shall not ride a class 3 electrical assisted
bicycle upon any street, highway, or bike or pedestrian path; except that a
person under sixteen years of age may ride as a passenger on a class 3
electrical assisted bicycle that is designed to accommodate passengers.
(b) A person shall not operate or ride as a passenger on a class 3 electrical
assisted bicycle unless:
(I) Each person under eighteen years of age is wearing a protective
helmet of a type and design manufactured for use by operators of
bicycles;
(II) The protective helmet conforms to the design and specifications set
forth by the United States consumer product safety commission or
the American Society for Testing and Materials; and
(III) The protective helmet is secured properly on the person's head with
a chin strap while the class 3 electrical assisted bicycle is in motion.

(c) A violation of subsection (15)(b) of this section does not constitute negligence
or negligence per se in the context of any civil personal injury claim or lawsuit
seeking damages.

Cite as C.R.S. § 42-4- 1412

(28.5) "Electrical assisted bicycle" means a vehicle having two or three wheels,
fully operable pedals, and an electric motor not exceeding seven hundred
fifty watts of power. Electrical assisted bicycles are further required to
conform to one of three classes as follows:
(a) "Class 1 electrical assisted bicycle" means an electrical assisted bicycle
equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is
pedaling and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches a
speed of twenty miles per hour.
(b) "Class 2 electrical assisted bicycle" means an electrical assisted bicycle
equipped with a motor that provides assistance regardless of whether the
rider is pedaling but ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches
a speed of twenty miles per hour.
(c) "Class 3 electrical assisted bicycle" means an electrical assisted bicycle
equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is
pedaling and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches a
speed of twenty-eight miles per hour.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> BTW, I guess the mods are going to go apeshit here. An ebike is officially designated as a "bicycle" in Colorado statute.


For about the millionth time, legal definitions are just ways to define how something will be governed; they don't magically change things into being something they're not. They don't want to have to rewrite everything with the same wording but changing "bicycle" to "ebike". There is an ebiker who has posted on this forum who is legally blind yet he rides his ebike on trails. I was told I qualify as legally deaf but I don't have a hearing aid nor do I have many issues with understanding people. If the government declared old men (I changed this from what I was originally going to say) are legally women, would you be checking your pants expecting to find a change?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> Another person who has never actually ridden a pedal-assist ebike weighing in with their false impressions and chest thumping.
> 
> I'll say it again. And again. And again. If you have never actually ridden an eMTB on a real trail for a real amount of time, you have no clue.
> 
> ...


I guess you missed this post so I'll paste it here for you:

Bicycles are not defined by how many gears they have, if they do or do not have suspension, what type of brakes they have, if both wheels are the same size or not, if they are driven by the front or rear wheel, what the frame is made of; etc.
They are defined by how the are propelled; 100% human. Wheels have to be in-line and driven by pedaling, that's about it.

Why are you so afraid to say you are riding an ebike and thus you are ebiking rather than mountain biking? Hey, call it off-road ebiking if you like. It seems you just can't admit that.

For being such an ebike fan, you sure don't seem to like ebikes.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Honkinunit, a bike path is not the same as an off road trail.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

We have the people for bikes statutes here in UT as well. Local land managers and (of course) the Feds retain the ability to do whatever they want with e-bikes - which means that 90% of the riding in UT (including basically all the good stuff, ie PC, Moab, St. George) is off limits, and will probably remain that way forever. 

Shoulda done the EU class 1 standard, shoulda laid the access groundwork 5 years ago, etc etc. It's a shame, but greed ruined it. 

-Walt


----------



## davesupra (Sep 2, 2013)

If you really think about it, it's not the motor that makes an e-bike and e-bike. It's the battery. Take off the battery and your e-bike is now a... heavy bicycle. 

That said I haven't ridden and e-bike, but I think that a pedal assist bike would be fun to try.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

chazpat said:


> For about the millionth time, legal definitions are just ways to define how something will be governed; they don't magically change things into being something they're not. They don't want to have to rewrite everything with the same wording but changing "bicycle" to "ebike". There is an ebiker who has posted on this forum who is legally blind yet he rides his ebike on trails. I was told I qualify as legally deaf but I don't have a hearing aid nor do I have many issues with understanding people. If the government declared old men (I changed this from what I was originally going to say) are legally women, would you be checking your pants expecting to find a change?


 I thought the whole discussion on this forum was about how ebikes were going to be legally governed as far as access to state trails and other lands. If that is true, then the legal definition of bicycle is going to be sort of relevant, dontcha think? In California, where I live it has had quite an impact in some locales.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

chazpat said:


> I guess you missed this post so I'll paste it here for you:
> 
> Bicycles are not defined by how many gears they have, if they do or do not have suspension, what type of brakes they have, if both wheels are the same size or not, if they are driven by the front or rear wheel, what the frame is made of; etc.
> They are defined by how the are propelled; 100% human. Wheels have to be in-line and driven by pedaling, that's about it.
> ...


 I ride a class 1 eMTB that the state of California considers to be a bicycle as defined by state law. One can discuss all day long whether that changes the meaning of the word "bicycle" colloquially, but it cannot be denied that it changes the meaning legally. And since access to state lands will ultimately be decided in court, I submit that the legal definition is what matters.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

WoodlandHills said:


> I ride a class 1 eMTB that the state of California considers to be a bicycle as defined by state law. One can discuss all day long whether that changes the meaning of the word "bicycle" colloquially, but it cannot be denied that it changes the meaning legally. And since access to state lands will ultimately be decided in court, I submit that the legal definition is what matters.


Sure, but all these statutes allow local authorities/LMs to further restrict if they see fit. The "legally a bicycle" thing is to allow them on bike paths and prevent us from having to get insurance/registration.

If Jane the forest manager decides she doesn't want e-bikes on a trail, she can still do that. Local control is a good thing.

-Walt


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

davesupra said:


> If you really think about it, it's not the motor that makes an e-bike and e-bike. It's the battery. Take off the battery and your e-bike is now a... heavy bicycle.
> 
> That said I haven't ridden and e-bike, but I think that a pedal assist bike would be fun to try.


The new integrated battery/motor system called the Fazua Evation (used on the Pinarello road bike) allows you to remove the motor and battery in five seconds.

The Pinarello Nytro can be ridden as a 29lb eBike or the Fazua system can be removed to make it 19lb.

Coming soon to an MTB near you.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> I thought the whole discussion on this forum was about how ebikes were going to be legally governed as far as access to state trails and other lands. If that is true, then the legal definition of bicycle is going to be sort of relevant, dontcha think? In California, where I live it has had quite an impact in some locales.


this thread is:

*Why Are E-Bikes Such a Touchy Subject in the U.S.?
*
Access is a different thread.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

leeboh said:


> Honkinunit, a bike path is not the same as an off road trail.


(I) a person may ride a class 1 or class 2 electrical assisted bicycle on a
bike or pedestrian path where bicycles are authorized to travel.
(II) A local authority may prohibit the operation of a class 1 or class 2
electrical assisted bicycle on a bike or pedestrian path under its
jurisdiction.

This means just what it says. In Colorado, if a bicycle is allowed somewhere, by default, an electrically assisted bicycle is allowed unless the local authority has banned them.

A hiking trail is a "pedestrian path". If bicycles are allowed, eBikes are allowed, unless a specific prohibition is in place.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> A hiking trail is a "pedestrian path


Can you provide a link to the states legal definition of 'pedestrian path' where it specifies natural surface hiking trails in areas that aren't governed by the state's motor vehicle codes are legally considered 'pedestrian paths'?

Or are you just using that term colloquially rather than in a legal sense?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> We have the people for bikes statutes here in UT as well. Local land managers and (of course) the Feds retain the ability to do whatever they want with e-bikes - which means that 90% of the riding in UT (including basically all the good stuff, ie PC, Moab, St. George) is off limits, and will probably remain that way forever.
> 
> Shoulda done the EU class 1 standard, shoulda laid the access groundwork 5 years ago, etc etc. It's a shame, but greed ruined it.
> 
> -Walt


Moab is an awesome place for eMTBs.

- Slickrock
- Amasa Back
- Sovereign
- Klondike Bluffs
- First 3/4 of Porcupine Rim
- Flat Pass
- Monitor and Merrimack
- Gemini Bridges
- Little Canyon Rim
- Bull Run/Golden Spike/Gold Bar
- Poison Spider
- 95% of Kokopelli
- Onion Creek/Rose Garden/Top of the World
- Dolores Triangle
- La Sal Pass
- Trans La Sal
- Hey Joe Canyon
- 10 Mile
- Hurrah Pass/Chicken Corners/Lockhart Basin
- Kane Creek
- Pritchett Canyon/Prostitute Butte/24 Hours of Moab

In addition, an eMTB would make Fins and Things, Hell's Revenge, and a bunch of other traditionally Jeep trails very, very fun, and the Jeeps don't have an asshole attitude toward ebikes, unlike the douchebags on mountain bikes I ran into on Slickrock, who tried to tell me my eBike was not allowed. They didn't even know it was originally, and still is, a motorcycle trail.

The Abajos have an entire additional network of trails open to eBikes.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

honkinunit said:


> (I) a person may ride a class 1 or class 2 electrical assisted bicycle on a
> bike or pedestrian path where bicycles are authorized to travel.
> (II) A local authority may prohibit the operation of a class 1 or class 2
> electrical assisted bicycle on a bike or pedestrian path under its
> ...


 Dude, just no. Really, no. Bike path or ped path = mup. Not a multi use hiking trail in the woods, not even close. Please check your facts. Uggg.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

leeboh said:


> Dude, just no. Really, no. Bike path or ped path = mup. Not a multi use hiking trail in the woods, not even close. Please check your facts. Uggg.


Talk to my lawyer: https://www.bikelaw.com/2017/08/colorado-electric-bicycle-laws/

"In Colorado, Category I and II can be ridden on a bike, pedestrian or multi-use paths."


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

rider95 said:


> So if a trail doesn't have this sign posted then e bikes are ok!!! If I ride a trail and ther is no posted sign but I find one at the end of the trail do I have to go back and unride it?


This is the attitude we are worried about.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

honkinunit said:


> (I) a person may ride a class 1 or class 2 electrical assisted bicycle on a
> bike or pedestrian path where bicycles are authorized to travel.
> (II) A local authority may prohibit the operation of a class 1 or class 2
> electrical assisted bicycle on a bike or pedestrian path under its
> ...


It's a CDOT regulation, it has no bearing on natural surface trails. Bicycle Colorado, which sponsored the legislation, and P4B, could find no uniform trail classification system in Colorado, like tier 1, teir 2 etc, so they thought that would suffice. I, and a couple of other people tried to get them to define it more clearly, but they just wanted to get it done. Feel free to interpret it as you'd like, but it only applies to bike paths, not singletrack.



> NOTE FOR ELECTRIC MOUNTAIN BIKE RIDERS: This map represents how e-bikes are interpreted in each state's vehicle code, and where e-bikes are allowed to go on the road, bike lanes, bike paths, or other paved or hard-surface bicycle infrastructure. The vehicle code does not apply to electric mountain bike access on motorized and non-motorized trails typically used for hiking, biking, and other singletrack or doubletrack trail experiences.


Electric Bicycles â€¢ PeopleForBikes

AFAIK, the only place to ride ebikes legally on non motorized singletrack in Colorado is within state parks, and at Purgatory.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

chazpat said:


> this thread is:
> 
> *Why Are E-Bikes Such a Touchy Subject in the U.S.?
> *
> Access is a different thread.


 So you don't think this thread has drifted off topic? Why not respond to my point anyway, if you can.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

slapheadmofo said:


> Can you provide a link to the states legal definition of 'pedestrian path' where it specifies natural surface hiking trails in areas that aren't governed by the state's motor vehicle codes are legally considered 'pedestrian paths'?
> 
> Or are you just using that term colloquially rather than in a legal sense?


Like you'ed know what to do with a legal definition


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Flamingtaco said:


> More like adding a rocket motor to a golf club.


Nah, more like adding an electric motor to a golf club. 250w max and only works while you manually swing. If the club head moves at more than 20mph the motor cuts out.

The problem is these pesky renegade golfers who delimit their clubs and slap on 3000 watt motors, and wear battery backpacks.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

honkinunit said:


> Moab is an awesome place for eMTBs.
> 
> List of Jeep roads/moto trails.


Indeed, you can ride on all the moto trails (jeep roads, basically) like Koko and Amasa and such. You can also ride on jeep roads and moto trails... anywhere.

But it is true that Moab has lots of them if you want to get out there on an e-bike. I don't know that most of that stuff would be considered fun by present day mountain bikers (I haven't ridden any of that list in many years, and I'm in Moab all the time), but opinions vary.

I think Rabbit Valley (a bit to the east) is better than most of that (jeep road and wide open slickrock) stuff - it's actually singletrack, and totally e-bike legal.

-Walt


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

WoodlandHills said:


> I ride a class 1 eMTB that the state of California considers to be a bicycle as defined by state law. One can discuss all day long whether that changes the meaning of the word "bicycle" colloquially, but it cannot be denied that it changes the meaning legally. And since access to state lands will ultimately be decided in court, I submit that the legal definition is what matters.


Actually the e-bike reg's brought about by AB-1096 does not consider e-bike Classes 1, 2 and 3 to be "bicycles" but defines them as "electric bicycles" with a special set of regulations applying to them. *E-bikes are not bicycles in California. They are electric bicycles.*


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

So basically after researching the motor is mainly used just to help climb hills. Is the ride down as fun with the added weight of the motor. What do they weigh roughly? After researching I would think people's issue wouldn't be the speed but... If people were able to climb the incline of trails 4 times instead of twice the trails would be more busy. So maybe people that ride crowded areas would have issues with that. I personal don't deal with that but maybe that would effect some


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> And that's why a legal Class 1 or 2 shuts off the power at 20mph, not 28mph. Any ebike that can hit 28mph is illegal anywhere but a paved bike path or bike lane on the street.





WoodlandHills said:


> So you don't think this thread has drifted off topic? Why not respond to my point anyway, if you can.


So it's ok for you to go a bit off topic to respond to a post but it's not ok for me to do so? And then you want me to respond to your off topic post? Well, ok.



WoodlandHills said:


> If that is true, then the legal definition of bicycle is going to be sort of relevant, dontcha think? In California, where I live it has had quite an impact in some locales.


There is another ebiker who has posted that he is legally blind. Does he need to be forced to wear dark sunglasses and carry a white cane, after all, the legal definition says he is blind so he must be blind right? And see Moe Ped's post #556 above, also in response to you.

Why do you so desperately want an ebike to be a bicycle? It seems like you are not comfortable with it just being an ebike.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> Indeed, you can ride on all the moto trails (jeep roads, basically) like Koko and Amasa and such. You can also ride on jeep roads and moto trails... anywhere.
> 
> But it is true that Moab has lots of them if you want to get out there on an e-bike. I don't know that most of that stuff would be considered fun by present day mountain bikers (I haven't ridden any of that list in many years, and I'm in Moab all the time), but opinions vary.
> 
> ...


Most of those trails end up riding like singletrack, because there is only one good line. I rode Poison Spider on my eMTB a few weeks ago and it was completely awesome. I haven't ridden that for years on my MTB because the sand really sucks, but even with 2.35 tires the eBike allowed me to clean most of the sand pits, even ones so deep the bike would stay upright when you got off of it.

I don't hear many people complaining about the Jeep road sections of Porcupine just because it isn't "singletrack". Most of the singletrack in Moab that is more than a year or two old is blown out and multi-threaded anyway.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Why do you so desperately want an ebike to be a bicycle? It seems like you are not comfortable with it just being an ebike.


I'm fine with the latter.

But many folks, including several posting in this thread, "desperately want" e-bikes to be grouped with motorcycles.

Can't have it both ways. It's either its own group or it isn't. It might be easy to win a short term internet argument by calling them motorcycles or mopeds, but it forces the other side to group them with bicycles.


----------



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

EricTheDood said:


> But many folks, including several posting in this thread, "desperately want" e-bikes to be grouped with motorcycles.


Maybe one or 2 posters here feel that way but I think the majority would like to see them them grouped separately from both bicycles and motorcycles. Mopeds did it in the 70's, why can't you have it both ways?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Yep, I'm fine with that as well. I hereby declare ebikes to be ebikes.

That was my point a while back in the thread, ebikes are a touchy subject in the US when people try to think about them solely in terms of them being a bicycle. When they are recognized to be something different, cyclist are more comfortable with them. I'm not sure why Europe didn't have this issue, maybe because mopeds and scooters and all sorts of two wheeled contraptions are more common there?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> I'm fine with the latter.
> 
> But many folks, including several posting in this thread, "desperately want" e-bikes to be grouped with motorcycles.
> 
> Can't have it both ways. It's either its own group or it isn't. It might be easy to win a short term internet argument by calling them motorcycles or mopeds, but it forces the other side to group them with bicycles.


 Motorized vehicle= e bike. And bikes don't have motors, start there. What other side? Hikers? Part of the issues is that so many different agencies define them differently. They need to treated and defined differently than bikes. Lots to sort out. Will be a touchy subject for quite sometime.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I thought we acknowledged Ebikes as Ebikes last year?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

AGarcia said:


> Like you'ed know what to do with a legal definition


You really don't understand that motor vehicle codes have limits to where they apply?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I thought we acknowledged Ebikes as Ebikes last year?


Most of us did.

Some people just can't seem to get it though.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Gutch said:


> I thought we acknowledged Ebikes as Ebikes last year?


Most of us have; others keep referring to them as bicycles.

Folks age, they tend to forget things. Kinda like when my late mother (had Alzheimer's) would ask every 5 minutes what day it was.

You just have to politely answer and move on. No point in arguing or complaining.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Moe Ped said:


> Most of us have; others keep referring to them as bicycles.


Or mopeds or motor vehicles.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

chazpat said:


> So it's ok for you to go a bit off topic to respond to a post but it's not ok for me to do so? And then you want me to respond to your off topic post? Well, ok.
> 
> There is another ebiker who has posted that he is legally blind. Does he need to be forced to wear dark sunglasses and carry a white cane, after all, the legal definition says he is blind so he must be blind right? And see Moe Ped's post #556 above, also in response to you.
> 
> Why do you so desperately want an ebike to be a bicycle? It seems like you are not comfortable with it just being an ebike.


 I don't have a problem with it being an electric sort of bicycle as long as you all don't have a problem with it being an electric type of bicycle. As in DH, XC, SS and E (Electric) are all types of bicycles and are all treated the same.

I suspect that this would be totally unacceptable to a sizable part of your ranks though. Judging from some of the statements on the forum on his topic, it sure sounds like there is a fundamental scism within your ranks about this.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

slapheadmofo said:


> Or mopeds or motor vehicles.


Only because some are mopeds or motor(cycles)/(vehicles).


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

WoodlandHills said:


> I don't have a problem with it being an electric sort of bicycle as long as you all don't have a problem with it being an electric type of bicycle. As in DH, XC, SS and E (Electric) are all types of bicycles and are all treated the same.
> 
> I suspect that this would be totally unacceptable to a sizable part of your ranks though. Judging from some of the statements on the forum on his topic, it sure sounds like there is a fundamental scism within your ranks about this.


No, they're not. (California)

There is no provision in CA law to exclude DH, XC or SS selectively from trails.

AB-1096 was built around being able to selectively exclude (or permit as in the case of Class 3) E-bikes from bicycle trails.


----------



## MikeTowpathTraveler (Aug 12, 2015)

Unbelievable. The thread without end soldiers on. What has more "sustain"? This thread or one of Nigel Tufnel's guitars?

Link: 




2016 Haibike Full FatSix....loving every minute of it.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Motorized vehicle= e bike.


That is your interpretation. It's neither right nor wrong because legal definitions are by nature, convoluted and ambiguous.

Some folks don't make the distinction between "motorized vehicles" and "motor vehicles". A motor vehicle, by most definitions, is self-propelled. Class 1 and 3 e-bikes are not self-propelled.

So where does that leave us?

An e-bike is a motorized bicycle, nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Huh. I've hit 50 on my Santa Cruz on descents. Scared the piss out of me, but it had nothing to do with a motor.
> 
> The limiter on MTB trails around us is rarely power/speed - it's handling. If my bike would let me go 25 MPH, I'd rarely be able to use it. Typically half that. To draw an analogy, your car will probably go 110 MPH - but on a twisty local road you'd be in the trees or the lake long before you hit those speeds.


He was talking about doing 32 MPH on level ground. I would never use the word "never" but I have never heard of anybody doing that kind of speed on a bicycle on a level road. I am no speed demon being more of a gravel grinder but my wife rides in a very fast local group and they average 19-21 MPH on their very fast group rides. Those are typical speeds for fit riders pushing themselves.

I have 2.3 inch 29er tires on my "road bike" and on our last 69 mile race I averaged 15 MPH.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Ailuropoda said:


> He was talking about doing 32 MPH on level ground. I would never use the word "never" but I have never heard of anybody doing that kind of speed on a bicycle on a level road. I am no speed demon being more of a gravel grinder but my wife rides in a very fast local group and they average 19-21 MPH on their very fast group rides. Those are typical speeds for fit riders pushing themselves.
> 
> I have 2.3 inch 29er tires on my "road bike" and on our last 69 mile race I averaged 15 MPH.


Are you serious? I've been in the 30s on flat ground sprints on a road bike and I'm not a fast roadie.


----------



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

Ailuropoda said:


> He was talking about doing 32 MPH on level ground.


Bradley Wiggins did almost 34mph for an hour but he has superhuman powers and was riding in near perfect (indoor velodrome) conditions. Bicycle speed depends on a lot of conditions, if you're a strong rider 32mph in a fast group can be done but aside from Wiggins and company nobody is doing that on their own without a big tailwind, downgrade or both.

15mph average for a 69 mile ride on a mtb is very good IME.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

ryguy79 said:


> Are you serious? I've been in the 30s on flat ground sprints on a road bike and I'm not a fast roadie.


Bike Calculator

About 750-800 watts to hit 32mph. Somewhat difficult for smaller people. Not difficult for bigger dudes coming off someone's wheel.


----------



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

EricTheDood said:


> Bike Calculator
> 
> About 750-800 watts to hit 32mph. Somewhat difficult for smaller people. Not difficult for bigger dudes coming off someone's wheel.


That calculator says you'd need 1000 watts to do 32mph on a mtb and ~600 watts for a road bike (175# rider). It depends on so many things, road surface and tires make a huge difference but wind resistance is the biggest factor. Wiggins only (only!) needed ~450 watts to go 34mph but he was on an aerodynamic bike and riding in a very aero position. Half of that race was won in a wind tunnel.

Anyway, a reasonably fit rider can probably produce 600 watts for a few seconds, a very fit one maybe 1000. Mark Cavendish says he sprints at about 1,500 but probably peaks around 2,000.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> That calculator says you'd need 1000 watts to do 32mph on a mtb and ~600 watts for a road bike (175# rider). It depends on so many things, road surface and tires make a huge difference but wind resistance is the biggest factor. Wiggins only (only!) needed ~450 watts to go 34mph but he was on an aerodynamic bike and riding in a very aero position. Half of that race was won in a wind tunnel.
> 
> Anyway, a reasonably fit rider can probably produce 600 watts for a few seconds, a very fit one maybe 1000. Mark Cavendish says he sprints at about 1,500 but probably peaks around 2,000.


If you can put out more than 250W for five minutes or peak over 750W, you should be banned from trails.


----------



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

honkinunit said:


> If you can put out more than 250W for five minutes or peak over 750W, you should be banned from trails.


Well then I guess you better not pedal and add any power to your e-machine, and don't those electric bikes put out at least 250 watts until the battery runs dry?


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

All this talk about wattage gets me excited!

Anyway the "average man" is good for about 75 watts (output not input) mechanical energy for an 8 hour day. So the current mfg consensus that 750 watts is a good place to limit e-bikes is an order of magnitude above what human power really is.

I like e-bikes but even at 250 watts they're not a good mix with other "human powered" activities.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Moe Ped said:


> All this talk about wattage gets me excited!
> 
> Anyway the "average man" is good for about 75 watts (output not input) mechanical energy for an 8 hour day. So the current mfg consensus that 750 watts is a good place to limit e-bikes is an order of magnitude above what human power really is.
> 
> I like e-bikes but even at 250 watts they're not a good mix with other "human powered" activities.


Even amateur riders can put out 250W for hours. A top pro can do 400W+ for an hour.


----------



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

honkinunit said:


> Even amateur riders can put out 250W for hours. A top pro can do 400W+ for an hour.


Yep, serious amateurs who train 3 hours a day and regularly win highly competitive races can. How are your numbers?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> Yep, I'm fine with that as well. I hereby declare ebikes to be ebikes.
> 
> That was my point a while back in the thread, ebikes are a touchy subject in the US when people try to think about them solely in terms of them being a bicycle. When they are recognized to be something different, cyclist are more comfortable with them. I'm not sure why Europe didn't have this issue, maybe because mopeds and scooters and all sorts of two wheeled contraptions are more common there?





J.B. Weld said:


> Bradley Wiggins did almost 34mph for an hour but he has superhuman powers and was riding in near perfect (indoor velodrome) conditions. Bicycle speed depends on a lot of conditions, if you're a strong rider 32mph in a fast group can be done but aside from Wiggins and company nobody is doing that on their own without a big tailwind, downgrade or both.
> 
> 15mph average for a 69 mile ride on a mtb is very good IME.


I agree, that's hauling the mail! For 69 miles. Definitely went deep.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

slapheadmofo said:


> You really don't understand that motor vehicle codes have limits to where they apply?


I understand codes, statutes, legal decisions....


----------



## DirtyHun (Jan 9, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> Understand that for many people having experience riding an electric bike has nothing whatsoever to do with their opinion that they shouldn't be permitted in areas designated as being non-motorized areas. If exceptions are made then this sign should be removed at the trailhead-
> 
> View attachment 1170004
> 
> ...


The sign you posted a pic of hits it dead center. E-bikes are motorized, and should not be sharing trails with human powered (unaugmented) bicycles.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

There’s gonna be a lot of upset mtbrs when 250w Pedelecs hit some MUT’s legally. Deep down we all know it’s inevitable. Maybe not in your neck of the woods but it will happen. When it does are you going to be cool to fellow riders or a d*** head? Emtbs will then have just as much right as anyone to enjoy the trails.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> Even amateur riders can put out 250W for hours. A top pro can do 400W+ for an hour.





J.B. Weld said:


> Yep, serious amateurs who train 3 hours a day and regularly win highly competitive races can. How are your numbers?


He's talking about his numbers on his ebike.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> There's gonna be a lot of upset mtbrs when 250w Pedelecs hit some MUT's legally. Deep down we all know it's inevitable. Maybe not in your neck of the woods but it will happen. When it does are you going to be cool to fellow riders or a d*** head? Emtbs will then have just as much right as anyone to enjoy the trails.


I actually met my first ebiker on my local mountain bike trails this past weekend. He said one of the LBSes loaned it to him. I asked him if he knew if it was legal on these trails or not and he said he had no idea. I wasn't sure either. I emailed the IMBA chapter and they said that they are. These are very heavily traveled trails, directional. We'll have to see what happens when there gets to be a bunch of them; sorry, I still think there will be a lot of issues due to the large number of riders, how twisty and tight the trails are, and the greater differences in speed. MTBs have the right of way over foot traffic as they are built and maintained by mtbers.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> Understand that for many people having experience riding an electric bike has nothing whatsoever to do with their opinion that they shouldn't be permitted in areas designated as being non-motorized areas. If exceptions are made then this sign should be removed at the trailhead-
> 
> View attachment 1170004
> 
> ...


Interesting sign and I encountered a similar one on a bike path in Orange County, CA where, by state law, Class 1 & 2 e-bikes would be allowed. Will be an interesting case if it ever goes to court since, by state law, Class 1 & 2 e-bikes are defined as NOT-motorized vehicles. Other paths have "no Electric Bicycle" signs which are more exclusive. BTW, I'm not planning to be a test case.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Interesting sign and I encountered a similar one on a bike path in Orange County, CA where, by state law, Class 1 & 2 e-bikes would be allowed.


I think that right there is a big reason why electric bikes are a touchy subject in the US, I know it will never sit right with me. Mostly because it's just profit driven legal bs and obviously not reality.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think that right there is a big reason why electric bikes are a touchy subject in the US, I know it will never sit right with me. Mostly because it's just profit driven legal bs and obviously not reality.


Bound to be a touchy subject as long as there are individuals who think that a legal activity is wrong. Truth be told, there are probably those who don't think e-bikes belong anywhere.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> I actually met my first ebiker on my local mountain bike trails this past weekend. He said one of the LBSes loaned it to him. I asked him if he knew if it was legal on these trails or not and he said he had no idea. I wasn't sure either. I emailed the IMBA chapter and they said that they are. These are very heavily traveled trails, directional. We'll have to see what happens when there gets to be a bunch of them; sorry, I still think there will be a lot of issues due to the large number of riders, how twisty and tight the trails are, and the greater differences in speed. MTBs have the right of way over foot traffic as they are built and maintained by mtbers.


Interesting, where are you?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Interesting, where are you?


Atlanta


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Bound to be a touchy subject as long as there are individuals who think that a legal activity is wrong.


^this has nothing to do with my post


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> ^this has nothing to do with my post


You could have fooled me. I stated that it was legal to ride e-bikes on paths in my area, and you said it didn't sit right with you. Seemed to me that you were opposed to a legal activity.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Yep, serious amateurs who train 3 hours a day and regularly win highly competitive races can. How are your numbers?


Amateurs who weigh 190 lbs maybe. A casual rider weighing 150 lbs can hold 200W for 2-3 hours (160-175 bpm intensity) from the fitness they gain from simply commuting 30-45 mins to work casually. A weekend warrior weighing 150 lbs probably would be pushing their heart to race pace levels to hold 175 W.

Perhaps the definition of amateur is the semantics issue here. I consider them to be non-pro competitors, above casuals. Numbers for casual 150 lb rider and weekend warrior come from Strava estimates. Weekend warrior does big relatively intense weekly rides (~45 miles/week done in 1-2 outings, ~150 average bpm), while commuter does many comfortable short rides (~8 miles/trip, ~12 trips/week, 120-140 bpm average).


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

ryguy79 said:


> Are you serious? I've been in the 30s on flat ground sprints on a road bike and I'm not a fast roadie.


You may have short bursts of speed but even the pros can't sustain that pace.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Ailuropoda said:


> You may have short bursts of speed but even the pros can't sustain that pace.


He did say sprints. I bet many of my friends could sprint just as fast if I lent them my bike and got them on a nice open stretch without a headwind, at least for short distances. It would be mind blowing to average that much on a bicycle. Heck, even 19-21 sounds new to me. I could do 18 average on the road, if I tried maybe, but I tend to average 15-16 on road and up to 12 mph off road (on 45 min quickie rides), usually about 8-10 on longer rides, esp if there's some serious climbing involved or if I'm with a group.

Emtb is like a new innovative disruptor, like new wheel sizes were. There's actually real speed and performance, but at what cost? I think people are still stuck on the part asking if they should even exist, while I kind of see it as inevitable. If only the power grid was fueled by renewables, I'd see it as green, as opposed to another luxury item. It's on once that happens though. Who knows, maybe Walmart will start selling cheap ebikes before then...


----------



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

fos'l said:


> You could have fooled me. I stated that it was legal to ride e-bikes on paths in my area, and you said it didn't sit right with you. Seemed to me that you were opposed to a legal activity.


You should read more carefully, I didn't say that I was opposed to you riding them legally, I said it doesn't sit right with me for them to be ridden in designated non-motorized areas. If it's legal to ride them on bike paths I believe the "no motorized vehicles allowed" sign should be removed. See the difference?


----------



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

dv8zen said:


> Amateurs who weigh 190 lbs maybe. A casual rider weighing 150 lbs can hold 200W for 2-3 hours (160-175 bpm intensity) from the fitness they gain from simply commuting 30-45 mins to work casually.


I did say 250 watts which is a fair difference from 200, also a casual rider isn't going to hold 200w for 2-3 hours. Do you have a power meter?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> You should read more carefully, I didn't say that I was opposed to you riding them legally, I said it doesn't sit right with me for them to be ridden in designated non-motorized areas. If it's legal to ride them on bike paths I believe the "no motorized vehicles allowed" sign should be removed. See the difference?


Now I see the difference. You like to argue, I don't. The sign(s), which are about every 200 - 300' on the path, might have been installed to deter ICE "bikes" which I've seen in the area.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> Atlanta


Nice, representing the ATL! Have you rode Clemson?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

We have those signs all over our bike path and there is Ebikes everywhere. Even designated bike shops that rent Ebikes for the trail. People here refer the sign to gas and noise.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Why on earth would anyone be opposed to e bikes on the bike path/bike lane?

I guess there are more people out there on the path with me now, which can be slightly annoying. But I usually still see zero other riders on a jaunt to the store or the library.

We have "no motorized vehicle" signs here on all the bike paths which e-bikes are exempt from, and on all the dirt trails/singletrack, we have "no e-bike" signs as well, which makes it nice and easy to understand. Trails in Moab have the same sort of signage (at least the ones I frequent) that specifically name e-bikes rather than just saying "no motorized". 

-Walt


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Now I see the difference. You like to argue, I don't.


Discuss, I understand your point of view but I disagree with it. Based on your responses it appears that you can't, or won't understand any point of view other than your own or those that you agree with.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Walt said:


> Why on earth would anyone be opposed to e bikes on the bike path/bike lane?
> 
> I guess there are more people out there on the path with me now, which can be slightly annoying. But I usually still see zero other riders on a jaunt to the store or the library.
> 
> ...


Exactly! Simple, right? Everywhere should be "No motorized" = No gas engine. "No Ebikes" = No Ebikes! Simple, cut and dry. Everyone could get behind this, no?


----------



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

Walt said:


> Why on earth would anyone be opposed to e bikes on the bike path/bike lane?


For many of the same reasons I oppose them on trails that prohibit motorized vehicles.

I am pro-pedestrian and place high value on the relatively few motor-free areas there are, soon there will be a lot less of them.
They will raise average speeds on bike/pedestrian paths significantly.
Technology will improve, they will get sleeker and faster.

If they are allowed on bike and pedestrian areas then they should remove the "no motor vehicles beyond this point" signs because it's no longer the case. Dumb that that bothers me I guess, personally I'd prefer honesty over lawyer speak and word shuffling but I doubt that would be such an easy sell.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Gutch said:


> Exactly! Simple, right? Everywhere should be "No motorized" = No gas engine. "No Ebikes" = No Ebikes! Simple, cut and dry. Everyone could get behind this, no?


And yet I still saw an e-bike on this trail system:










Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

^Why is everyone against speed! I love it. Highways went from 55-70, why not bike paths up to 35? Riders that travel in speed often have experience at speed.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Le Duke said:


> And yet I still saw an e-bike on this trail system:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, same as the occasional a**hat that comes up my blind driveway to turn around and clearly "private drive". There's always gonna be someone that's "that guy."


----------



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

Gutch said:


> Exactly! Simple, right? Everywhere should be "No motorized" = No gas engine.


Well I guess this is good to go then









ON YOUR LEFT!


----------



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

Gutch said:


> ^Why is everyone against speed! I love it. Highways went from 55-70, why not bike paths up to 35?


Why not 50? 80? Why limits?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Why not 50? 80? Why limits?


Hell yeah! Now your talking. Pick up the friggin pace.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Well I guess this is good to go then
> 
> View attachment 1170310
> 
> ...


Just make sure it's equipped with a bell!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> For many of the same reasons I oppose them on trails that prohibit motorized vehicles.
> 
> I am pro-pedestrian and place high value on the relatively few motor-free areas there are, soon there will be a lot less of them.


Hmm. Where I live (obviously YMMV) the bike path is 95% bikes commuting (either to head to a trail, or to run errands/go to work). There are some folks who go for a run, and the very occasional dog walker, but it's basically a bike highway. You could have everyone going 30 all the time and it would basically be fine. It's a *bike* path.

If it's a place where families/kids/dogs/crowds go to stroll, I could see e-bikes being a problem but that's not the case *around here*.

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Walt said:


> If it's a place where families/kids/dogs/crowds go to stroll, I could see e-bikes being a problem but that's not the case *around here*.
> 
> -Walt


We've got some that see very light use, but we also have some that regularly see 2-3-4000 mixed users a day (Minuteman Bike Path from Lexington in to Boston is one of the most popular rail-trails in the country). Like everything else with to do with access, local conditions are the driver.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Walt said:


> Hmm. Where I live (obviously YMMV) the bike path is 95% bikes commuting (either to head to a trail, or to run errands/go to work). There are some folks who go for a run, and the very occasional dog walker, but it's basically a bike highway. You could have everyone going 30 all the time and it would basically be fine. It's a *bike* path.
> 
> If it's a place where families/kids/dogs/crowds go to stroll, I could see e-bikes being a problem but that's not the case *around here*.
> 
> -Walt


I purposely don't go too fast because it's a "yoga pants" fashion show..


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> I am pro-pedestrian and place high value on the relatively few motor-free areas there are, soon there will be a lot less of them.
> They will raise average speeds on bike/pedestrian paths significantly.
> Technology will improve, they will get sleeker and faster.


Average speed is meaningless with regards to pedestrians. The only thing that matters to them is passing speed.

There is nothing about a Class 1 e-bike that makes it more dangerous in passing than a regular bike.

In fact, the opposite might be true. An e-bike rider can stop or slow way down for a pedestrian and get back up to speed with less effort than a regular bike rider. Whether they will or not is unknown.

It's ultimately up to the rider, not the machine.


----------



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

Walt said:


> Hmm. Where I live (obviously YMMV) the bike path is 95% bikes commuting (either to head to a trail, or to run errands/go to work). There are some folks who go for a run, and the very occasional dog walker, but it's basically a bike highway. You could have everyone going 30 all the time and it would basically be fine. It's a *bike* path.
> 
> If it's a place where families/kids/dogs/crowds go to stroll, I could see e-bikes being a problem but that's not the case *around here*.
> 
> -Walt


The ones I'm familiar with are probably close to 75% bikes but the majority of those seem to be very casual riders, many families with kids and grandmas just toodling. Also plenty of walkers, joggers and baby strollers.

Also there are lots of paths in and near parks that are clearly low speed zones but do allow bicycles. Just like trail access I guess I'm mostly opposed to them being lumped together as one, to me it would make a lot more sense to add a sign to the "no motorized vehicles" ones that says "except e-bikes" in places where they are permitted.


----------



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

EricTheDood said:


> Average speed is meaningless with regards to pedestrians. The only thing that matters to them is passing speed.
> 
> There is nothing about a Class 1 e-bike that makes it more dangerous in passing than a regular bike.
> 
> ...


Uh huh, cars could do the same thing, in fact they _always_ slow way down when passing me.... cause they're so considerate


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Uh huh, cars could do the same thing, in fact they _always_ slow way down when passing me.... cause they're so considerate


If you want to talk about cars, a pedestrian (who doesn't ride) driving a car is more likely to buzz a cyclist than a e-biker driving a car.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

EricTheDood said:


> Average speed is meaningless with regards to pedestrians. The only thing that matters to them is passing speed.
> 
> There is nothing about a Class 1 e-bike that makes it more dangerous in passing than a regular bike.
> 
> ...


 Ebikes on the street have been known to actually STOP at stop signs which, I believe is a banishment offense for roadies, for this very reason. Hell, I do it all the time: what's a few watts as opposed to courtesy and compliance with traffic laws? A couple of weeks ago there was a whole bunch of riders in their colorful costumes getting ready to pass me on my electric recumbent as we were coming up to a 4-way stop, there were cars approaching, but none actually waiting, so I stopped. Boy, were they annoyed! Swerving and weaving as they all blew the stop sign en masse...... Lots of dirty looks backward as I pulled away too. BTW it looked like most of them were older guys and not athletes out on a training ride.


----------



## hobbit (Apr 23, 2007)

I can honestly say I would give up MTBing if I rode in an area with 25mph speed limits on trails. I only ride directional trails but we can go as fast as we like. I regularly hit 45mph on the downhill section of one circular trail (Llandegla red - hanging on death gripping) on both my regular and emtb.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> Discuss, I understand your point of view but I disagree with it. Based on your responses it appears that you can't, or won't understand any point of view other than your own or those that you agree with.


My simple point was the sign I encountered had no influence on Class 1 & 2 bikes. If you disagree, and don't think state law applies, fine. Now, I know you want to get the last word, so go to it until you can start another argument.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

hobbit said:


> I can honestly say I would give up MTBing if I rode in an area with 25mph speed limits on trails. I only ride directional trails but we can go as fast as we like. I regularly hit 45mph on the downhill section of one circular trail (Llandegla red - hanging on death gripping) on both my regular and emtb.


25mph?

Speed limits around here at 10mph. 5mph passing.

Nobody enforces the former. The latter is common sense.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Sprinter 25 mph
Runner 10 mph
Jogger 7.5 mph
Brisk walker 5 mph
Walker 3 mph

*shrug* Considering all these traffic disputes, I guess this is why modern shared trails as wide as sidewalks. Save the singletrack!

Need to enlist some actual smart people to actually do all the planning, since all these fixes I'm seeing are excessively discriminatory, have negative side effects, and just outright poorly thought out.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Wow, to the guys doing over 40 on their mtb, that’s insane.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Gutch said:


> Wow, to the guys doing over 40 on their mtb, that's insane.


Not mind blowing to see 40 mph down a straight downhill barely any rougher than a road, with a safe spot to decelerate somewhere. xD

I wonder if that girl in that video in that featured article to the right hit 40 mph. Might be a close call.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> Yep, serious amateurs who train 3 hours a day and regularly win highly competitive races can. How are your numbers?


An average Cat 3 could maintain 250W for hours. I was a shitty Cat 3 and once rode a 40Km time time trial in 58 minutes in the late 80's on a non-aero bike. That requires 300W+.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Ailuropoda said:


> You may have short bursts of speed but even the pros can't sustain that pace.


You didn't qualify how long when you said "I would never use the word "never" but I have never heard of anybody doing that kind of speed on a bicycle on a level road. "

Say what you actually mean or don't bother.


----------



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

honkinunit said:


> An average Cat 3 could maintain 250W for hours. I was a shitty Cat 3 and once rode a 40Km time time trial in 58 minutes in the late 80's on a non-aero bike. That requires 300W+.


That seems a little high but even if it were true it still maintains my point, an average cat 3 rider is far from an average joe and probably in the top 10% overall at least.

Tour pros do low 300's for 4 hour rides, the fastest guy I know on strava shows mid to upper 200's (power meter) on 2 hour rides where he's smashing it and taking a 4 or 5 KOM's. You might have done 300 watts on that tt but without power meter data it's just an educated guess.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> That seems a little high but even if it were true it still maintains my point, an average cat 3 rider is far from an average joe and probably in the top 10% overall at least.
> 
> Tour pros do low 300's for 4 hour rides, the fastest guy I know on strava shows mid to upper 200's (power meter) on 2 hour rides where he's smashing it and taking a 4 or 5 KOM's. You might have done 300 watts on that tt but without power meter data it's just an educated guess.


Surprised that tour pros do low 300s. They are going real easy in the peloton. Like 120 bpm easy. Higher than I expected.

Holy crap, looking into this, I found that they average 30 mph in time trials, can put out 1400W in sprints...

More data: https://cyclingtips.com/2017/06/just-how-good-are-male-pro-road-cyclists/
- breakaway riders put out 300W in order to get away from the peloton, while some peloton riders are averaging as little as 140W

More references:
Team Sky reveal Froome's Tour de France data from stage 10 | Cyclingnews.com
Pro Power Analysis | VeloNews.com

Didn't expect the 30mph average part... I'm humbled. Oh ya, what was the argument again? That e-bikes are so fast and powerful that they cannot be compared to normal bikes?


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Jens Voigt's win data:

Power Analysis: Jens Voigt's winning power file, Stage 4 of the USA Pro Challenge | VeloNews.com


----------



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

dv8zen said:


> Surprised that tour pros do low 300s. They are going real easy in the peloton. Like 120 bpm easy.


lol, super easy! An average cat 3 could easily hang with them. Casual.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Guys, they're not putting out 300w sitting in the group. You or I could indeed hang at cruising speed (though we probably couldn't take a pull). When there was an acceleration, though, we'd get dropped instantly. 

Regardless, 250w of extra power can indeed make a motivated rider pro-speed. 750w (the actual Class 1 limit here in the US) can make them roughly double the power/weight ratio of a pro. More power makes you faster. 

On a directional bike-specific trail even a 750w bike probably doesn't matter, though you'll do more laps and maybe annoy people passing them on the climbs constantly. 

On a crowded MUT with kids and dogs or a 2-way trail with poor sight lines it might as well be a moto if you're going to actually use that power. Totally situation dependent.

As I've said before, the EU class 1 (250w/25kph assist limit) makes a lot of sense. It doesn't let anyone go any faster than a determined pro, probably not a problem or access threat on most popular mountain bike trails. 

-Walt


----------



## LetsBeHonest (Nov 28, 2017)

IMBA's New E-MTB position statement
Here's the rest of the e-MTB story pertaining to just one source of political influence on IMBA. Most mountain bikers will be surprised to learn that People for Bikes and the Bicycle Product Suppliers Association have been actively lobbying state legislatures to enact their model e-bike legislation. See https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/static.peopleforbikes.org/docs/Model eBike Legislation.pdf to read it. 
For the bigger picture, start with Electric Bicycles â€¢ PeopleForBikes and then click down to access much more information on e-bikes, including e-MTBs. For example, check out the "playbook to advocate for better trail access" designed for advocates wishing to gain better e-MTB access to trails at http://b.3cdn.net/bikes/0a8683b43fba1f4d2a_4zm6bg5j2.pdf 
Surely you knew about all this already because of the new Executive Director's pledge to be more open and transparent?


----------



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

Walt said:


> Guys, they're not putting out 300w sitting in the group. You or I could indeed hang at cruising speed (though we probably couldn't take a pull). When there was an acceleration, though, we'd get dropped instantly.


That seems kind of like saying my Civic could hang with formula 1 cars as long as they keep it under 80mph 

It might not be so hard to ride in a pro group when they're lollygagging but when the hammer is dropped we would be too, or at least I would. Pro riders who can produce double the watts of most mortals get dropped form the peloton.

....... and now back to our regularly scheduled argument


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

I'm sure this is due to the great energy savings of drafting, as Walt said "though we probably couldn't take a pull". My understanding is that a rider only requires about 2/3s of the energy of a rider not drafting. Lose the draft or have the leader step up the pace and we're off the back with not enough wattage.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

All the top dudes have the seat post motors anyway!!


----------



## IPunchCholla (Dec 8, 2013)

LetsBeHonest said:


> IMBA's New E-MTB position statement
> Here's the rest of the e-MTB story pertaining to just one source of political influence on IMBA. Most mountain bikers will be surprised to learn that People for Bikes and the Bicycle Product Suppliers Association have been actively lobbying state legislatures to enact their model e-bike legislation. See https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/static.peopleforbikes.org/docs/Model eBike Legislation.pdf to read it.
> For the bigger picture, start with Electric Bicycles â€¢ PeopleForBikes and then click down to access much more information on e-bikes, including e-MTBs. For example, check out the "playbook to advocate for better trail access" designed for advocates wishing to gain better e-MTB access to trails at http://b.3cdn.net/bikes/0a8683b43fba1f4d2a_4zm6bg5j2.pdf
> Surely you knew about all this already because of the new Executive Director's pledge to be more open and transparent?


There only thing that bugs me after a quick scan is the stupid clean air claim. Around here, coal got burned to make the electricity stored in the battery. Using more energy means more pollution. And this is really true regardless of the source it came from because it means more solar panels or more windmills or something else that took energy/pollution to build. I would much rather have it come from those sources as they are cleaner for the air, but there is always pollution somewhere in the line and more energy used is more pollution.

Anyway, what's weird is that the trails I ride are motorized access. They were largely built by and for mountain bikers, though. So while they are multi-use (hiker, horse, biker, Moto), the biggest user group is mountain bikes. I see a group of Moto riders maybe every 7 or 8 rides. Ebikes are legal on these trails. But I've never seen one (and I check everyone's bike out). Maybe because we're a poor state. But the bikes tend to be pretty high end. So I'm thinking it might just be that people who would do the ebike thing just get a motor bike since it's legal.

This sets up the idea that ebikes are just a way to sneak motorcycles onto trails that people really don't want motorcycles on. Motos are legal on these trails, but I'm always kinda pissed when a group has been through, since they tend to kick big rocks right into the middle of the narrow trail bed. Rocks big enough that if you got them at speed you have a good shot at losing your front wheel and crashing. Plus you can really see the wear they put in the trails. Hikers tend to really hate them. Horse riders tend to be super rare.

So, around here, people tend to think of this when people talk about motorized vehicles on trails so they get touchy. I believe much of this perception would have been eliminated if we had just gone with the 250W/25kph standard.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> ....... and now back to our regularly scheduled argument


Doesn't matter what we're arguin', as long as we're arguin'.

:rockon:

:madman:


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

Lol I've never even seen one except the road ebikes that are everywhere in manhattan. My main area has quite a few horses ,few dirt bikes and a handful of dog walkers. Don't mind except for a guy who walks a vicious attack dogs who seems to be to much dog for him to handle. The think lunges at me and my son as we pass. I've several times thought of getting my own dog to teach this animal a lesson but self control gets the better of me. Why people in nice neighborhoods need attack dogs is baffling to me.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

STAGER1, when was the last time you visited Manhattan and witnessed this? I ask since I heard they were banned off the streets there, and stepped up enforcement: https://www.bicycling.com/culture/new-york-city-just-declared-war-on-e-bikes

Did you feel like they were complaint-worthy?

*shrug* They are disruptive for sure, and taking legislative action against them is a serious message. I just don't know the full story to understand why. I can only relate this story to a few Chinese cities' ebike bans, where they were blatantly disregarding the rules of the road and the hidden costs involved (traffic incidents causing delays, healthcare for victims, etc) were serious enough.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

Just saw some on Saturday


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

I had heard the also. But walking to my truck from Union square it was on 5th Ave and between 19th and 18th to Asian delivery drivers.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Well, so far, my initial impression on answering the topic question is:

The US culture subconsciously demands segregation. The people want clear borders to define what belongs to what/who.

Not racial segregation, but simply defining separate groups and where they belong. It seems to create order to be aware of simple separations such as borders of someone else's property in relation to public property. For instance, on roads, traffic is segregated to northbound and southbound, thru traffic and traffic turning left/right, public parking, pedestrian, etc. In another example, people might segregate bikes into smaller groups such as road, offroad/mtb, and hybrid, offroad/mtb to xc, trail, AM, enduro, FR, DH... where's emtb fit in this? It seems people don't want them to be a "child group" of bikes. Since emtbs aren't considered to be the same as bikes on trails, those on mtb don't want the face the consequences of what the emtb riders do with their extra power.

Here is a contrast to this sort of cultural thinking:







Thinking of equivalents to the above video, one solution is wider sustainable trails. Another solution is singletrack that flows 1 direction on odd # calendar days, and the other on even # days, with passing points, not too unlike mountain roads. *shrug* wish I were smart enough to think of solutions that fix the processes, to minimize all these common traffic issues, rather than to encourage people to actually slow down and make eye contact and communicate with other trail users when trying to pass.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yes, directional trails and improved sight lines/speed controls built into the trail design would help a ton. The problem is that the vast majority of the trails in the US are legacy hiking/animal/social trails that weren't even designed for normal bike speeds, let alone bike+motor. 

Redesigning/rebuilding trails takes time and money (lots of both). But it would be a worthwhile goal to improve access for e-bikes and simultaneously improve the user experience for everyone else.

-Walt


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> Average speed is meaningless with regards to pedestrians. The only thing that matters to them is passing speed.
> 
> There is nothing about a Class 1 e-bike that makes it more dangerous in passing than a regular bike.
> 
> ...


 The fact that they go faster is nothing? And so much easier to go faster? My mup going to Boston is full of kids, dogs on leashes, peds, runners and walkers sometimes 2 abreast. Wicked fast e bikes don't belong there. And not allowed. Me? I'm usually going say 10 -12 or so mph.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Look, the "responsible riders won't be jerks" argument is great. But taken to it's logical conclusion, you should be allowed to ride anything anywhere. 

There's a reason we restrict bikes, ebikes, motos, cars, etc from various places, and it's because people can't all be trusted to operate those things responsibly (whether because they have no concern for others, or because they are new to the activity/not very good at operating the vehicle, or both). 

Not every vehicle belongs everywhere. The more power and speed the vehicle is capable of, the more places it'll be banned from. That's how management of everything from highways to singletrack has always worked. 

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

dv8zen said:


> wider sustainable trails.


Widen trails on purpose? Hells no! Most mountain bikers aren't happy at all when narrow trail is blown out even accidentally; to propose going out and destroying singletrack in order to make dirt sidewalks in order to better accommodate e-bikes is an absolute non-starter. Directional singletrack is practically non-existent in this part of the country and also would never fly - there is no agency to put any plan like that into effect, and no one would pay heed if they did.

As it is now, if e-bikers were satisfied riding wide trails (ie-doubletrack and fireroads) almost no one would have an issue with them. But who the hell prefers to ride wide trails? No one I've ever ridden with.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

^I think it’s safe to say there probably will never be Ebikes allowed in MA? I agree, nobody wants dirt sidewalks for mtbing.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Directional trails are great for single-purpose uses but are not as well received for MUT.

My observation is that wider trails with better sight lines is simply a combination for greater bike speeds. Only when in conjunction with speed limiting features (pinch points, rough surfaces, tight switchbacks and etc) are they effective. But the majority of MTB'ers prefer narrower, more "intimate" trails. So do many hikers. Seems like mostly the equestrians that tend to appreciate greater width.

Getting back to the problem with e-bikes is that they roughly double the impact of cycling in areas they're permitted. Speed aside, they allow more people to ride more miles. More people means more jerks, not saying that e-bikers are jerks it's just that some will be per human nature. It's hard enough keeping trails open to bikes in general (where I live in Calif.), every e-biker needs to be a perfect angel for e-bikes not to have negative consequences. Not going to happen.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Really, making trails much tighter and more technical would help more than wider trails. Wider trails just let people ride *faster*. You can have an ultra narrow trail that's totally safe for everyone as long as you make it really tight and twisty such that you just can't go very fast. 

I personally love that kind of trail. You're at your traction/control limits at 10mph and it feels like you're hauling! Descents last forever! You can stop for a hiker or a rider coming the other way with zero issues (closing speed of maybe 12-15mph in the worst case scenario). No need to restrict e-bikes, no need to make the trail one-way, hikers and dogs and kids can enjoy. Win, win, win. 

But mountain bikers don't seem to like that sort thing as much these days, and I doubt you'd have much luck building more of them. Maybe I'm wrong. It seems that the every-corner-must-be-bermed 15-20mph type trails are where the interest is. That's a shame. 

But regardless, if you want e-bikes on a trail, a super tight twisty one (whether it's ultra tech or not) will work better than a fast/wide open one, IMO. 

-Walt


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

Walt said:


> Really, making trails much tighter and more technical would help more than wider trails. Wider trails just let people ride *faster*. You can have an ultra narrow trail that's totally safe for everyone as long as you make it really tight and twisty such that you just can't go very fast.
> 
> I personally love that kind of trail. You're at your traction/control limits at 10mph and it feels like you're hauling! Descents last forever! You can stop for a hiker or a rider coming the other way with zero issues (closing speed of maybe 12-15mph in the worst case scenario). No need to restrict e-bikes, no need to make the trail one-way, hikers and dogs and kids can enjoy. Win, win, win.
> 
> ...


Agreed...::with the current trend of more flow style trails....they don't have those built in speed limiters. If anything the trails are getting unnaturally smoother and faster.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Good points on the trail design. 

How fast are ebikes really on uphills? Some people think they'll be going 20 mph, but what will be the realistic speed on a typical ebike that a big brand is pitching? A Trek Powerfly, Spec Levo, Giant whatever-they-call it? Twice someone's speed if using the highest power assist (at the same intensity level)? What if they back-off and conserve their energy? 10 mph for a 7.5% grade?

Isn't the fact they weigh ~15 lbs more a problem, or does the typically heavier duty parts such as stronger brakes and fatter+grippier tires, offset that? I suppose that in America, that weight difference isn't big compared to a rider's weight difference.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Against changing trails to make them more accessible, but more technical would be great. Also, can't see permitting e-MTB's anywhere that has heavy traffic already, but that's JMO. I ride several trails where I see fewer than one other bike and two hikers on average per 10 - 20 mile ride. Some of those would be OK for e-MTB IMO. One place I've encountered two other riders once in 10 years, none the rest of the time, and an average of 2 - 4 hikers per visit. Don't think e-MTB's would hurt much there either. Maybe some day they'll be permitted, but the local anti-e-bike community probably would be up in arms even though nobody else ever rides there.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Walt said:


> But mountain bikers don't seem to like that sort thing as much these days, and I doubt you'd have much luck building more of them.


Come east young man.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> Come east young man.


I've considered it, but all the places with great riding (ie western MA) have crap schools. Also the skiing is horrible and the winters are grey and awful. I've tried to do it, it ain't gonna happen.

So it's the west for me. On the plus side, the tight/twisty trails are super unpopular here so I have them all to myself.

-Walt


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Tight squirrelly trails are ok, for a while. Then it seems like ya wanna open up a bit. I grew up riding the tight trails. Honestly, about every bike I pass is way overbuilt for the trails, particularly with 29” wheels. I think we will see more 120mm 29 Trail geo being the trend. I used to ride my XC bikes everywhere I do now and didn’t think much about it, but I guess as I get older I don’t mind a few geo changes and stiffer bikes.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Rode a directional MUT Trail today on my Evil. 4 riders in the Parking lot and 3 of them blatantly went the wrong direction. Wtf? Half of people honestly don’t give a s**t anymore!


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Gutch said:


> Rode a directional MUT Trail today on my Evil. 4 riders in the Parking lot and 3 of them blatantly went the wrong direction. Wtf? Half of people honestly don't give a s**t anymore!


Proof that in Georgia 3 out of 4 bikers are jerks. Or illiterate. Maybe both.

Where was Deliverance filmed?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Moe Ped said:


> Proof that in Georgia 3 out of 4 bikers are jerks. Or illiterate. Maybe both.
> 
> Where was Deliverance filmed?


Also in SC! I don't know where deliverance was filmed! You do hear banjo music in the mtns though ?


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Gutch said:


> Also in SC! I don't know where deliverance was filmed! You do hear banjo music in the mtns though ?


I couldn't figure out from the Atlanta/Clemson reference which state was familiar to you.

Deliverance was filmed primarily on the river that separates the two states so we're covered. Fictional river in the book/movie I just learned.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Walt said:


> I've considered it, but all the places with great riding (ie western MA) have crap schools.


Yeah, I'm in north-central MA, about as far north and west as you can go before things start falling off civilization-wise. Good schools, good riding, usually a good amount of snow, but no powder to speak of. Though a couple years ago, the 2nd snowiest city in the US was about 1/2 hour south, and we ended up with well over 120" on the local hill.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> Yeah, I'm in north-central MA, about as far north and west as you can go before things start falling off civilization-wise. Good schools, good riding, usually a good amount of snow, but no powder to speak of. Though a couple years ago, the 2nd snowiest city in the US was about 1/2 hour south, and we ended up with well over 120" on the local hill.


Yeah, I'm a ski town person and always have been/will be. Skiing in the east is just never going to cut it for me, unfortunately. 120 inches? That's about 1/4 of what we had last year... but man oh man is it cheap to live in VT/MA/NH... so tempting.

My wife would lose her mind not seeing the sun all winter, though. She needs bluebird skate ski days at least a couple times a week.

If I could move some east coast trails here to PC I'd do it in a hot second, though.

-Walt


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

One of the few reasons, besides actual soil , that I miss the east coast:

The riding shown on many PinkBike clips would result in injury or broken bikes. The trail is very carefully laid out between rocks and trees, and if you start getting sideways, you're going to eat it hard.









Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Walt said:


> I've considered it, but all the places with great riding (ie western MA) have crap schools. Also the skiing is horrible and the winters are grey and awful. I've tried to do it, it ain't gonna happen.
> 
> So it's the west for me. On the plus side, the tight/twisty trails are super unpopular here so I have them all to myself.
> 
> -Walt


 UT? We do have great skiing out here, just not 300" of powder. VT and NH have the bike/ski thing pretty good.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Don’t move there Walt! You won’t be able to ride your ebike😂 I grew up (allegedly) in VT and used to ski Killington. But agree, not enough sun. Taxes are insane also, although not as bad as NY.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

leeboh said:


> UT? We do have great skiing out here, just not 300" of powder. VT and NH have the bike/ski thing pretty good.


Yes, we live in Park City. UT has it's own set of problems (no good beer!) but it's hard to beat the amount of riding out the door, skiing out the door, and proximity to Moab during mud season. Having a decent airport 25 minutes away is good too.

My wife and I are such incredible nerds that we used 2010 census data to pick a place to live. It was PC or Los Alamos NM (NYT did a neat article where they did something similar you can read here: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/upshot/where-are-the-hardest-places-to-live-in-the-us.html) and we bought houses in both places. PC seems to have won out thus far but they're both great (and Los Alamos is pretty cheap, too).

The problem is that other people have figured out PC is here now, so it's getting crowded and crazy. If it gets too nuts we'll bail to NM but as the kids move into school age it is going to get harder to move so we'll see.

-Walt


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Moe Ped said:


> Proof that in Georgia 3 out of 4 bikers are jerks. Or illiterate. Maybe both.
> 
> Where was Deliverance filmed?


Uh, where did Gutch say he was riding in Georgia? After reading all of the issues with riding in CA, I'm quite happy to ride here.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Moe Ped said:


> I couldn't figure out from the Atlanta/Clemson reference which state was familiar to you.
> 
> Deliverance was filmed primarily on the river that separates the two states so we're covered. Fictional river in the book/movie I just learned.


It's a real river, just a fictional name!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Nice, representing the ATL! Have you rode Clemson?


No, I wish I had more time to get out further but I'm doing well to have a 1/2 day.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> No, I wish I had more time to get out further but I'm doing well to have a 1/2 day.


I haven't rode Isaqueena either. I do the WNC scene and what's real close to me like Paris Mtn, Pleasant Ridge etc. Want to ride FATS. Lots of good riding around Asheville.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

chazpat said:


> Uh, where did Gutch say he was riding in Georgia? After reading all of the issues with riding in CA, I'm quite happy to ride here.


My bad; I thought I was detecting a Georgia accent in his posts.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Shhhh...I’m a damn yankee living in SC.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

dv8zen said:


> Good points on the trail design.
> 
> How fast are ebikes really on uphills? Some people think they'll be going 20 mph, but what will be the realistic speed on a typical ebike that a big brand is pitching? A Trek Powerfly, Spec Levo, Giant whatever-they-call it? Twice someone's speed if using the highest power assist (at the same intensity level)? What if they back-off and conserve their energy? 10 mph for a 7.5% grade?
> 
> Isn't the fact they weigh ~15 lbs more a problem, or does the typically heavier duty parts such as stronger brakes and fatter+grippier tires, offset that? I suppose that in America, that weight difference isn't big compared to a rider's weight difference.


Me pedaling 90%, plus my Haibike with the Bosch Performance CX system and 20 MPH cutoff (actually cuts at just under 19 MPH), a 7.5% smooth grade would be around 15MPH if I was putting full power in, but of course that wouldn't last very long. If I backed off to half of my power input, I suppose 10MPH would be in the ballpark.

My Bosch can't get 190lb me up a 10% grade at over 13 MPH or so, even in Turbo mode with me going 90%. A 15% grade is around 10 MPH as long as I am putting in 90% effort. I rode it on Slickrock in Moab and on the very steepest parts I would have been better off on a non-eBike, mostly because the eBike is not geared as low as my MTB. I saw Levos on Slickrock that were doing about the same. On very steep pitches, my Bosch eBike simply doesn't have enough power to overcome the weight and the high gearing.

Most pedal assist eMTBs do tend to have beefier components than a "trail" bike, about enduro level. The fork might be tuned to be a little stiffer depending on the manufacturer. eMTBs are definitely trending toward long travel full suspension, since the weight penalty to have 150mm travel is pretty small when the bike already weighs 45lb or more.

Now that I have more actual trail time on my eMTB, I predict that lightweight, removable systems like the Fazua that is currently being put on Road bikes, will be the way most eMTBs go. The e-motor systems actually hurt you on downhills and aren't really needed on the flats. They are awesome for helping you conquer those long/steep (but not *too* steep) climbs. If you were doing a local easy trail or there are not a lot of climbs, remove the motor/battery unit in 10 seconds and have a bike that is 10lb lighter. When you want some uphill assistance, pop in the motor/battery and enjoy.

I have a 500w battery and it is overkill. The longest ride I have done on the Haibike was four hours and the battery had just dropped from two to one bar when I finished, but I wasn't trying to conserve at all. A motor/battery that gave half the assistance at half the weight while still providing a super low gear would be better for me personally than the ~18lb the Bosch system adds. The steeper the climb, the more the weight matters. Not dissing Bosch at all, it just is not the ultimate solution for eMTB at this time.

For commuting, the Bosch system is great and I think a bigger battery/motor is the way to go. I have commuted on mine a few times and having motor assist up a long hill into a dark, freezing 20 MPH headwind after a long day at work is pretty awesome. It is definitely going to get me commuting more often. My commute is 10 miles each way and has about 600 feet of climbing. Not a huge amount, but with the headwinds on the Front Range the ride home is a real drag in Winter.

BTW, if anyone has a Bosch powered MTB and has not upgraded the firmware to allow "eMTB" mode, just do it. It improves the way the bike rides on trails immensely. You do lose one commuting mode though, since "Sport" mode goes from being a linear assist level to being a mode where the motor controller tries to optimize short bursts. It also really helps with the issue of getting started on a steep climb since it will give assist as soon as the crank turns rather than the previous 1/4-1/2 revolution lag.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> An e bike with the cheater motor in the downtube? Seen some of the vids from the tour de farce with the bike on the side after a crash, with the wheel spinning crazy fast? Wait, what?


Lance did not use a motor at any time in the TDF. Not sure where you got that idea.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

ALimon said:


> Lance did not use a motor at any time in the TDF. Not sure where you got that idea.


Lance aside, why aren't you questioning how a bike on its side can make the rear wheel spin, with a cheater motor somewhere in the front triangle? If the motor is driving the crank, the cranks need to spin to drive the chain, which then drives the wheel. If the wheel is merely spinning without cranks turning, bike on its side, the motor would have to be turning the wheel directly at its axle, independent of the drivetrain. Not sure if leeboh is joking or just didn't really think things through...


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Le Duke said:


> One of the few reasons, besides actual soil , that I miss the east coast:
> 
> The riding shown on many PinkBike clips would result in injury or broken bikes. The trail is very carefully laid out between rocks and trees, and if you start getting sideways, you're going to eat it hard.


We've got chunky monkey riding like that here, it's just at higher altitude, you need to hit me up.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Harryman said:


> We've got chunky monkey riding like that here, it's just at higher altitude, you need to hit me up.


Ah, but is there dark, rich soil in between the rocks?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Le Duke said:


> Ah, but is there dark, rich soil in between the rocks?
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


You have a 'between the rocks'? 

jk - trails look sweet. Tons and tons of that type of stuff here.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Lance did not use a motor at any time in the TDF. Not sure where you got that idea.


 And didn't dope either? Hmmmm.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

dv8zen said:


> Lance aside, why aren't you questioning how a bike on its side can make the rear wheel spin, with a cheater motor somewhere in the front triangle? If the motor is driving the crank, the cranks need to spin to drive the chain, which then drives the wheel. If the wheel is merely spinning without cranks turning, bike on its side, the motor would have to be turning the wheel directly at its axle, independent of the drivetrain. Not sure if leeboh is joking or just didn't really think things through...


 Just ask mr google. Check out some tour de farce footage. Motors in the down tube is a thing. Really. Some cross race woman got caught and banned for using one.


----------



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

leeboh said:


> Just ask mr google. Check out some tour de farce footage. Motors in the down tube is a thing. Really. Some cross race woman got caught and banned for using one.


Got a link? Stealth bb motors for road bikes are a thing but they are very easy to screen for and you can see them doing that before and after races. I'm sure they've been used successfully but not in big races like the tdf, doping is a different deal.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Hincapie, vandeveld live here and rumor lance moving here. I also doubt TDF motors. I’ve watched it every year for at least 20 years.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Le Duke said:


> Ah, but is there dark, rich soil in between the rocks?
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


On north facing, it's not the NE, but you'd swear you're in Oregon, nice and loamy


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Harryman said:


> On north facing, it's not the NE, but you'd swear you're in Oregon, nice and loamy


Tell me your secrets!

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> Tell me your secrets!
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


Here is a Colorado secret: Golden Gate State Park has trails that steep and rocky, and Class 1 ebikes are legal there.

Snowshoe Hare and Raccoon on the north and west side for example.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

honkinunit said:


> Here is a Colorado secret: Golden Gate State Park has trails that steep and rocky, and Class 1 ebikes are legal there.
> 
> Snowshoe Hare and Raccoon on the north and west side for example.


I'm not particularly concerned about steep, I just want to see/feel something that, even if briefly, resembles the Blue Ridge between Harrisonburg, VA and Pisgah, NC. And that means dark, rich soil.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> I'm not particularly concerned about steep, I just want to see/feel something that, even if briefly, resembles the Blue Ridge between Harrisonburg, VA and Pisgah, NC. And that means dark, rich soil.


As mentioned, some north facing trails in the ROCKY Mountains will get some loamy stuff on north facing slopes, but we are mostly sand and clay.

Are you making coffee out of it or ???? Mountain grown is the richest kind, after all, according to Mrs. Olsen.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Le Duke said:


> I'm not particularly concerned about steep, I just want to see/feel something that, even if briefly, resembles the Blue Ridge between Harrisonburg, VA and Pisgah, NC. And that means dark, rich soil.


Well, that's awfully specific, but we do have loam and decent soil between @ 8-11k ft up on the Peak. Lots of rocks and good riding too. There are sections I've never cleaned in 25 years of trying.

https://www.facebook.com/medicinewh...2339152591911/881971635295323/?type=3&theater


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Here's a nice secret - up in Maine, nobody is enforcing the rule that DH trails aren't supposed to be tight anymore!


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Man, I'm jealous. Most of what we have in my vicinity is either sand or adobe. However the rocks in Joshua Tree National Park (look it up; arguably the prettiest place I've ever been) where my wife and I were on Sunday kind of dwarf those depicted here. Accordingly, we hiked, but I was wearing my e-bionic legs (JK).


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Harryman said:


> Well, that's awfully specific, but we do have loam and decent soil between @ 8-11k ft up on the Peak. Lots of rocks and good riding too. There are sections I've never cleaned in 25 years of trying.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/medicinewh...2339152591911/881971635295323/?type=3&theater
> 
> View attachment 1170802


I had a great time riding in Colorado Springs area in September. Overall, I think the Colorado Springs area riding ranks up there with western North Carolina (Pisgah, Dupont State Forest). Both areas are beautiful with varied riding terrain, but the riding is significantly tougher in Colorado Springs due to the elevation (especially for this middle-aged, overweight flatlander).

Next year, I think I'm gonna try to round up some friends to try riding in British Columbia. I've never been there.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> And didn't dope either? Hmmmm.


He cheated with dope, not a motor. He didn't need a motor, he was a beast! I was on his team for a few months back in the 90's before he signed with motorola.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

AGarcia said:


> I had a great time riding in Colorado Springs area in September. Overall, I think the Colorado Springs area riding ranks up there with western North Carolina (Pisgah, Dupont State Forest). Both areas are beautiful with varied riding terrain, but the riding is significantly tougher in Colorado Springs due to the elevation (especially for this middle-aged, overweight flatlander).
> 
> Next year, I think I'm gonna try to round up some friends to try riding in British Columbia. I've never been there.


I've never ridden Colorado Springs, but if it's more rugged than Pisgah, I'll pass! Pisgah proper is about as much as I want. Love DuPont, 20 min from my house!


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Gutch said:


> I've never ridden Colorado Springs, but if it's more rugged than Pisgah, I'll pass! Pisgah proper is about as much as I want. Love DuPont, 20 min from my house!


No, the trails not as rugged as Pisgah (except for Heizer trail, that was tough!), but the altitude makes climbing a LOT harder!.

I also did some riding in and around the Charlotte area, but DuPont was actually my favorite (I'm on the right).









Mellower than Pisgah, lots of flowy riding. Super scenic. Waterfalls, river crossings. Beautiful. Honestly, I'd love to eventually retire in the area. Pretty much everyone I met was so relaxed and friendly. Indeed, here's what I have on the back of my car....in California.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

AGarcia said:


> No, the trails not as rugged as Pisgah (except for Heizer trail, that was tough!), but the altitude makes climbing a LOT harder!.
> 
> I also did some riding in and around the Charlotte area, but DuPont was actually my favorite (I'm on the right).
> 
> ...


This is why I live here! The bike scene is very cool. Big rock, cedar rock, burnt Mtn, good trails everywhere. Crossed 5 streams 3 weeks ago riding "Best of DuPont" real cool. I'm just below the NC border. SC homes and taxes are cheaper. Road riding is huge here as well. Big George Hincapie hotel/restaurant is 5 miles from my home. Ebikes are only getting warm reception on roads or bike paths for now...


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Blatant features marketed:
1600 W max
160 Nm torque
50 kph max (31 mph)

https://www.exess-bikes.de/index_en.htm

Have to look further down to see it's rated as 1000 W. I question the GX 1x12 drivetrain's ability to handle 160 Nm torque. Is rim choice, DT 35mm ID, ideal for those 27.5x3.0 Nobby Nic tires? Did they do much lab and field testing? Probably couldn't cause it faces legal issues. xD









The geo suggests stability for high speed riding. Long CS, in combination with the power, suggest strong ability to take on steep climbs that normal riders can't clear.

The future that some worry about is already unfolding? xD


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

dv8zen said:


> View attachment 1170973
> 
> 
> Blatant features marketed:
> ...


That's a nicely designed bike; they're not claiming it to be a Class 1, 2 or 3.

*"HIGH PERFORMANCE E-MTB"*

Bottom of that page comes the disclaimer_* "This bike may not be authorized according to the local traffic regulations of your country."*_

FWIW Luna is selling that Bafang mid-drive for DIYers.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Thanks for the perspective. I've heard that emtb riders, as they become more fit, spend a vast majority of the time in the eco/lowest modes. Kind of conveniently forgotten that trend, after I saw the big #s.

Wonder what Santa Cruz and other popular players come out with. Whatever these guys do, it'll help define the future, considering they're so influential with the following they have.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

This bike does illustrate the problem that land managers will have distinguishing between what's legal and what isn't; from across a parking lot it would be hard to tell it apart from a Levo or Haibike or...


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Should limit all sales over 250w to Europe only. Don’t even sell them in the US. This should go for every emtb.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

This is the **** that scares me.

https://www.vitalmtb.com/videos/mem...-V10c-DH-Bike-KRANKED-E-RIDES,22876/sspomer,2

Aside from the fact that this thing looks like a blast to ride, it is 2400 watts and very difficult to distinguish from a normal DH mtb. But unlike a human powered DH mtb, this one you can pedal assist up just about anything with ease, and then rip down. I imagine this thing would really tear up existing trail systems.

You guys talking about 250w limited systems seem not to appreciate that the market will deliver bikes like the above to people who want them, and those people will ride them in places whether sanctioned or not. I find it hard to believe that any land manager is going to be able to distinguish between 250w limited bikes and this monster well enough to enforce only a limited ban on ebikes.

Hell, I doubt most land managers have the resources to enforce a general ban on ebikes anyway, especially when the 250w ebikes are difficult to distinguish from regular MTBs.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I wouldn't buy it just based on the stupidity of that video.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Precisely. Better to regulate and embrace them. It's the same dynamic as banning drinking on college campuses. Bad actors are going to do stupid **** no matter what.
> 
> The "market" can't deliver products that the CPSC or other regulatory agencies will not certify or approve. That happens with all kinds of products. Yes, some knuckleheads will grey market them, but if importation is banned, the "market" won't build them for the US consumer.


That's actually the exact opposite of what they feel is "better". They don't have the resources to regulate so they have just banned them. Much easier that way.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I can attest to this, as I was peripherally involved in some LM decisions on e-bikes here. They have zero interest in trying to figure out what type/class of bike to allow/disallow, because they know they can't. Will people poach anyway? Probably. But if it becomes a problem it's easy to call the sheriff to the trailhead and throw the book at them, without any concerns about trying to prove what wattage the bike is or how it's classified. 

If lots of people start poaching, they'll just park at a popular trailhead and confiscate bikes/write tickets a couple of times and word will get out fast. But so far, the signage has been enough that I haven't seen an e-bike in several months, where I used to at least occasionally see them. Local shops are just carrying commuter e-bikes at this point, and I've seen several e-mtbs pop up for sale used for cheap, which I'm guessing has to do with the fact that there's nowhere to ride them here.

-Walt


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Walt said:


> I can attest to this, as I was peripherally involved in some LM decisions on e-bikes here. They have zero interest in trying to figure out what type/class of bike to allow/disallow, because they know they can't. Will people poach anyway? Probably. But if it becomes a problem it's easy to call the sheriff to the trailhead and throw the book at them, without any concerns about trying to prove what wattage the bike is or how it's classified.
> 
> If lots of people start poaching, they'll just park at a popular trailhead and confiscate bikes/write tickets a couple of times and word will get out fast. But so far, the signage has been enough that I haven't seen an e-bike in several months, where I used to at least occasionally see them. Local shops are just carrying commuter e-bikes at this point, and I've seen several e-mtbs pop up for sale used for cheap, which I'm guessing has to do with the fact that there's nowhere to ride them here.
> 
> -Walt


Exactly. Same in S. Utah. We don't play the "guess the wattage" game. Anything with a motor must ride OHV trails.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Le Duke said:


> I'm not particularly concerned about steep, I just want to see/feel something that, even if briefly, resembles the Blue Ridge between Harrisonburg, VA and Pisgah, NC. And that means dark, rich soil.


LOL you moved to the wrong place then


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

RickBullottaPA said:


> The "market" can't deliver products that the CPSC or other regulatory agencies will not certify or approve. That happens with all kinds of products. Yes, some knuckleheads will grey market them, but if importation is banned, the "market" won't build them for the US consumer.


You're kidding right? Show me an agency that is certifying or approving ebikes in the US. The CSPC sits on it's hands unless someone brings a complaint. The Class 1-3 regulations call for the manufacturers to self regulate, with zero direction or funding for enforcement. Most states don't even have that. Only the US manufacturers who are selling in the EU will have their ebikes certified to EU standards, becuase the EU demands it. Otherwise, it's a free for all. You can import, sell and define ebikes anyway you'd like here, and once you expand your view beyond what your local bike shop sells, you can see it's big numbers, not just a guy in his garage.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Just saw this on The Hill.

America's wilderness is no place for motorized mountain bikes | TheHill


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> Just saw this on The Hill.
> 
> America's wilderness is no place for motorized mountain bikes | TheHill


Where did you get the "motorized" part? It appears to just be an article advocating against mountain bikes in wilderness.

-Walt


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Walt said:


> Where did you get the "motorized" part? It appears to just be an article advocating against mountain bikes in wilderness.
> 
> -Walt


The title.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> The title.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


It is in the URL, but it is not in the title (nor mentioned in the article).

-Walt


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

kpdemello said:


> I find it hard to believe that any land manager is going to be able to distinguish between 250w limited bikes and this monster well enough to enforce only a limited ban on ebikes.


If they can't distinguish 250W from 2400W, how are they going to distinguish 250W from a regular MTB?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Walt said:


> It is in the URL, but it is not in the title (nor mentioned in the article).
> 
> -Walt


They speak of motorized vehicles and conflate them with mechanized vehicles, and use that as a reason to keep them out of wilderness.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

EricTheDood said:


> If they can't distinguish 250W from 2400W, how are they going to distinguish 250W from a regular MTB?


Better hope they can, or normal mountain bikes will get banned from some places too.

-Walt


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Le Duke said:


> They speak of motorized vehicles and conflate them with mechanized vehicles, and use that as a reason to keep them out of wilderness.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


Yep, that is some pretty shady blogging right there.... The url has Motorized in it, so it shows up for searches, but the article is only really attacking mechanized travel and trying to confuse the 2 as being the same.

Here is the url broken up:

http:// thehill. com/ opinion/ energy-environment/ 363779-*americas-wilderness-is-no-place-for-motorized-mountain-bikes*


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

My concern is that, in the fight to allow land managers the freedom to allow MTBs access to certain, specific Wilderness areas, we will be confused with eBikes. This article reinforces that fear.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Le Duke said:


> My concern is that, in the fight to allow land managers the freedom to allow MTBs access to certain, specific Wilderness areas, we will be confused with eBikes. This article reinforces that fear.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


I don't know if that was intentional or not. It's like comparing bad vs worse.

Seems like a sizable number of non-bikers are completely oblivious to the differences and frankly don't care.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Possibly the wrong place and time for this statement, but I have no problem keeping the Wilderness as is.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

EricTheDood said:


> I don't know if that was intentional or not. It's like comparing bad vs worse.
> 
> Seems like a sizable number of non-bikers are completely oblivious to the differences and frankly don't care.


Yup, the whole 'mountain bikes have motors now' mindset is nothing but bad news for us.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

EricTheDood said:


> If they can't distinguish 250W from 2400W, how are they going to distinguish 250W from a regular MTB?


Honestly that is our biggest fear as mountain bikers. It is one of the major reasons for all the vitriol against e-bikers. We fear that these bigger e-machines will proliferate, cause damage to the land and perhaps other trail users, and that land managers will just say, "Bah, too much trouble figuring this out, lets just ban all bikes, motor or not"

For now, I'm happy to just have a ban on all e-mtbs on non-motorized trails and I hope they never really catch on. But if you open the flood gates, I fear it is going to get all mountain bikes banned for good.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

fos'l said:


> Possibly the wrong place and time for this statement, but I have no problem keeping the Wilderness as is.


Same here. I'm not automatically pro-mtb when it comes to wilderness. There is an argument to be made for and against, but I think it makes sense to set aside certain areas to be as primitive / wild as possible.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> If they can't distinguish 250W from 2400W, how are they going to distinguish 250W from a regular MTB?


I could see even that being challenging, and to some degree bicycles will get lumped together will electric bikes in some eyes. However as long as motorized remains a separate category, LMs should be able to make a determination of motor vs. no motor once they get close. And they won't have to argue with the rider about what size motor it is, checking for stickers, mods, etc. If motorized is specifically allowed on a given trail, LMs can figure out what the rules for motorized might be.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

The collective paranoia and fear of e-Bikes is actually quite comical. We have plenty of data points from other parts of the world that have not had issues. Nor am I aware of any trail or user conflicts in my area where there are quite a few e-Bikes on the MTB trails.

If you want to be afraid of something, be afraid of the effect that always-on smartphones, dopamine-jacking social media, and the digitized culture of consumption will have. On the plus side, when they're all sitting on their couch, plugged in directly to the grid, staring at patterns of colored lights and pressing the "buy" button, they won't be on the trails...


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

fos'l said:


> Possibly the wrong place and time for this statement, but I have no problem keeping the Wilderness as is.


Don't tell Davey Simon or anyone on the NorCal forum.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

There are ebikers pushing petitions for laws allowing ebikes on trails wherever mountain bikes are allowed, removing the ability for LMs to decide. If they succeed, what we have feared will come true.


----------



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

Ebikers will convert to virtual mountain biking when technology improves and the trails will be safe again.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Ebikers will convert to virtual mountain biking when technology improves and the trails will be safe again.


Ha. Perhaps. Maybe we should team up and make "the Peleton of Mountain Biking".

Hey, wait...that's not such a bad idea...

Who's in?


----------



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

RickBullottaPA said:


> Of course you know that's simply not the case - no such overarching law would ever be implemented across federal, state, and local properties.


Seems to me it is, equalizing bicycles and ebikes is different than guaranteeing access for one or the other.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Of course you know that's simply not the case - no such overarching law would ever be implemented across federal, state, and local properties. Just as there aren't laws guaranteeing MTBs of any kind access to any public land - only the opposite (laws that blanket ban certain types of usage). Local discretion and oversight will continue to be the primary source for determining appropriate access - which is the right way to do it. There are plenty of multi-use trails that should not have MTBs, much less eBikes. There are plenty that can accomodate a broad range of users.
> 
> I would rather see the regs relaxed so that local land manager/park authorities have more discretion. Near us, we have a National Historic Area that borders are state park. The trail system is intertwined. The state park is VERY pro-MTB. The head ranger at the federal property would have loved to permit MTBing (in fact, we worked together on trailbuilding knowing that we might not ever get to ride them). However, her hands were tied with bureaucratic blanket bans on bikes. The effort to selectively get MTBs permitted is a long and arduous (and expensive) process. Local empowerment is needed.


The petitions very much are the case. Hopefully you are correct that they will not lead to overarching law.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

Worked in City today near the Trump towers police everywhere and delivery guys on ebikes everywhere do I don't think they are in forcing counted 11 on my way out of the city.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

kpdemello said:


> Honestly that is our biggest fear as mountain bikers. It is one of the major reasons for all the vitriol against e-bikers. We fear that these bigger e-machines will proliferate, cause damage to the land and perhaps other trail users, and that land managers will just say, "Bah, too much trouble figuring this out, lets just ban all bikes, motor or not"
> 
> For now, I'm happy to just have a ban on all e-mtbs on non-motorized trails and I hope they never really catch on. But if you open the flood gates, I fear it is going to get all mountain bikes banned for good.


Sure, but will a blanket ban stop Class 4 riders from poaching the trails?

Can non-cyclists tell the difference between a Class 4 e-bike and a regular long travel enduro MTB?

Class 4 e-bikes exist because of maturation of battery and brushless motor technology (relative affordability). They are not the product of slippery-slope legislation. They're not right around the corner - they're here now.

So finally, do Class 4 e-bikes threaten regular MTB access?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Ebikers will convert to virtual mountain biking when technology improves and the trails will be safe again.


Really?


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

Lol


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

vbiking?


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> Ebikers will convert to virtual mountain biking when technology improves and the trails will be safe again.


Truth. If willing to provide a credit card #, a virtual drone will drop down and recharge your battery on the fly.

Come to think of it, we may see this happen in the real world...thankfully I should be dead by then.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> There are ebikers pushing petitions for laws allowing ebikes on trails wherever mountain bikes are allowed, removing the ability for LMs to decide. If they succeed, what we have feared will come true.


Ebikes are coming. I think we can all agree with that. So maybe it's time for land managers to start designating trails for them now. E transportation will dominate every area of transportation in the very near future, Trying to deny they are coming won't solve any of the issues. It won't be long before the majority of mtb's sold will be e mtb's. Then what?


----------



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

ALimon said:


> Ebikes are coming. I think we can all agree with that. So maybe it's time for land managers to start designating trails for them now. E transportation will dominate every area of transportation in the very near future, Trying to deny they are coming won't solve any of the issues. It won't be long before the majority of mtb's sold will be e mtb's. Then what?


If things go the way electric bike manufactures are planning there will be no need to designate trails for them because they will be allowed wherever bicycles are.



Gutch said:


> Really?


You don't think? It's already a pretty big deal for road bikes.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Ebikes are coming. I think we can all agree with that. So maybe it's time for land managers to start designating trails for them now. E transportation will dominate every area of transportation in the very near future, Trying to deny they are coming won't solve any of the issues. It won't be long before the majority of mtb's sold will be e mtb's. Then what?


Yes, they are coming but I doubt (and hope) they will not be the majority.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> If things go the way electric bike manufactures are planning there will be no need to designate trails for them because they will be allowed wherever bicycles are.
> 
> You don't think? It's already a pretty big deal for road bikes.


Yeah, maybe. I had one of those TDF piece of turds and it was a PITA. My Kurt kinetic worked better. Anyrate, why would that interest ebikers? Why not mtbrs? I think it would be ill received.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> Yes, they are coming but I doubt (and hope) they will not be the majority.


They will not be the majority IMO. Mtbrs will still want a 30# or less do all rig. That could never be achieved. It's the light handling bike that makes riding so fun.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> Sure, but will a blanket ban stop Class 4 riders from poaching the trails?


No, idiots will idiot.



EricTheDood said:


> Can non-cyclists tell the difference between a Class 4 e-bike and a regular long travel enduro MTB?


No. Non cyclists at best classify bikes as 10 speeds, mountain bikes and those funny looking ones with big fat tires.



EricTheDood said:


> Class 4 e-bikes exist because of maturation of battery and brushless motor technology (relative affordability). They are not the product of slippery-slope legislation. They're not right around the corner - they're here now.


Absolutely. Not in great numbers, because they're an expensive toy and not well known yet, but both of those things will change as Chinese clones become more available.



EricTheDood said:


> So finally, do Class 4 e-bikes threaten regular MTB access?


Not really. They certainly threaten ebike access though. While I think there will be places where mtbs will lose access due to ebikes, I think it will be limited to places where mtb opposition is already great, and they're looking for another excuse or places that are supremely overcrowded and adding in ebikes is the last straw. The vast majority of mtb trails will be unaffected. The biggest threat to ebike access IMO will be the industry itself embracing higher powered emtbs. Which is inevitable, once you add motors, power and torque become important selling points.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Ebikes are coming. I think we can all agree with that. So maybe it's time for land managers to start designating trails for them now. E transportation will dominate every area of transportation in the very near future, Trying to deny they are coming won't solve any of the issues. It won't be long before the majority of mtb's sold will be e mtb's. Then what?


Mountain biking is not transportation, nor does it have anything to do with transportation. Hiking, mountain biking, equestrian riding, xc skiing, fatbiking, etc. also have nothing to do with transportation/commuting when it comes to non-motorized trail use. People use non motorized trails to get away from the transportation b.s., and the non-motorized aspect of the recreation is a big part of why they're out there. Mountain biking is about the ride, one's interaction with their bike and the trail. E- mountain biking is about going somewhere and covering distance. While the distinction may seem minute in detail, it's actually the point.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Ebikes are coming. I think we can all agree with that. So maybe it's time for land managers to start designating trails for them now. E transportation will dominate every area of transportation in the very near future, Trying to deny they are coming won't solve any of the issues. It won't be long before the majority of mtb's sold will be e mtb's. Then what?


Proper land management shouldn't be based on what toys people buy, or want to use where ever they'd like. Take drones for example, they're booming, you can buy them everywhere, yet 100% banned over public parklands here, with hefty fines associated. People still fly them ofc, because they are oblivious, or ignore the signs, but under your reasoning, landmanagers should have designated drone flying areas simply because people own drones and want them.

I'd much rather allow the emtb market to mature, then judge the impact of higher powered emtbs and riders, then let land managers decide if and where emtbs fit into their trail systems.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Ebikes are coming. I think we can all agree with that. So maybe it's time for land managers to start designating trails for them now. E transportation will dominate every area of transportation in the very near future, Trying to deny they are coming won't solve any of the issues. It won't be long before the majority of mtb's sold will be e mtb's. Then what?


 Great for transportation, not so much for muti use off road trails. Then what? Stick in the front spokes maybe?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

watermonkey said:


> Mountain biking is not transportation, nor does it have anything to do with transportation. Hiking, mountain biking, equestrian riding, xc skiing, fatbiking, etc. also have nothing to do with transportation/commuting when it comes to non-motorized trail use. People use non motorized trails to get away from the transportation b.s., and the non-motorized aspect of the recreation is a big part of why they're out there. Mountain biking is about the ride, one's interaction with their bike and the trail. E- mountain biking is about going somewhere and covering distance. While the distinction may seem minute in detail, it's actually the point.


Another uninformed opinion by someone who has never ridden an eMTB on a trail.

Riding eMTB is about the same exact thing riding any MTB is about. You have *more* interaction with your eMTB than you regular MTB, because you have to make decisions about power levels, and battery conservation, in addition to *all* of the other bike factors you have on your non-E MTB. A two hour ride on an eMTB is just like a two hour ride on your MTB, except you have *more* trail interaction, because you see *more* obstacles.

I predict within five years that the majority of competitive MTB racers, at least DH and Enduro, with be training on eMTBs part of the time. Your skill level goes up faster, and you learn a lot about riding, just because you are seeing more trail. Also, wrestling a heavier bike downhill takes more effort and you learn a lot about momentum.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## PurpleMtnSlayer (Jun 11, 2015)

watermonkey said:


> Mountain biking is about the ride, one's interaction with their bike and the trail. E- mountain biking is about going somewhere and covering distance. While the distinction may seem minute in detail, it's actually the point.


To me mountain biking is about that sweet sweet adrenal gland release. I want to ride the bike that will give me the biggest rush. Right now that's a 170mm travel Enduro bike (and a 450cc 4T), but in the future it maybe an ebike.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Harryman said:


> Proper land management shouldn't be based on what toys people buy, or want to use where ever they'd like. Take drones for example, they're booming, you can buy them everywhere, yet 100% banned over public parklands here, with hefty fines associated. People still fly them ofc, because they are oblivious, or ignore the signs, but under your reasoning, landmanagers should have designated drone flying areas simply because people own drones and want them.
> 
> I'd much rather allow the emtb market to mature, then judge the impact of higher powered emtbs and riders, then let land managers decide if and where emtbs fit into their trail systems.


Yup. Tons of dirt bikes and ATVs are sold in my state. LM's don't care and they're disallowed virtually everywhere.

If you live in the desert and buy a boat, nobody owes you a lake.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

honkinunit said:


> Another uninformed opinion by someone who has never ridden an eMTB on a trail.
> 
> Riding eMTB is about the same exact thing riding any MTB is about. You have *more* interaction with your eMTB than you regular MTB, because you have to make decisions about power levels, and battery conservation, in addition to *all* of the other bike factors you have on your non-E MTB. A two hour ride on an eMTB is just like a two hour ride on your MTB, except you have *more* trail interaction, because you see *more* obstacles.
> 
> I predict within five years that the majority of competitive MTB racers, at least DH and Enduro, with be training on eMTBs part of the time. Your skill level goes up faster, and you learn a lot about riding, just because you are seeing more trail. Also, wrestling a heavier bike downhill takes more effort and you learn a lot about momentum.


Another uninformed response from someone that can't grasp the difference between motorized and non-motorized recreation. And so you know, since you decided to make the assumption, I have legally ridden both embts and my enduro on the same multi use trails that I mountain bike on. We even used a dirtbike to bed in a new section of trail that, wait for it, was designed to be non-motorized, thus excluding e-bikes from the beginning...because the land managers are fully aware of the difference between motorized and non-motorized rec. E-mountainbiking is not mountainbiking, nor is tearing around on an enduro - while they both take skill and physical effort, they are both motorized forms of recreation. I think that your obtuse perspective is exactly what is needed to keep embts off of non-motorized trails, so, in a way, I appreciate it. Please, keep shouting from you soapbox that your motorized vehicle is exactly the same as a moutainbike.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

honkinunit said:


> Another uninformed opinion by someone who has never ridden an eMTB on a trail.
> 
> Riding eMTB is about the same exact thing riding any MTB is about. You have *more* interaction with your eMTB than you regular MTB, because you have to make decisions about power levels, and battery conservation, in addition to *all* of the other bike factors you have on your non-E MTB. A two hour ride on an eMTB is just like a two hour ride on your MTB, except you have *more* trail interaction, because you see *more* obstacles.
> 
> I predict within five years that the majority of competitive MTB racers, at least DH and Enduro, with be training on eMTBs part of the time. Your skill level goes up faster, and you learn a lot about riding, just because you are seeing more trail. Also, wrestling a heavier bike downhill takes more effort and you learn a lot about momentum.


 Similar, not exactly the same. My power decisions involve stopping and stuffing food down my neck. They may be similar, but it's not the same. And yes, I demoed one.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

watermonkey said:


> Another uninformed response from someone that can't grasp the difference between motorized and non-motorized recreation. And so you know, since you decided to make the assumption, I have legally ridden both embts and my enduro on the same multi use trails that I mountain bike on. We even used a dirtbike to bed in a new section of trail that, wait for it, was designed to be non-motorized, thus excluding e-bikes from the beginning...because the land managers are fully aware of the difference between motorized and non-motorized rec. E-mountainbiking is not mountainbiking, nor is tearing around on an enduro - while they both take skill and physical effort, they are both motorized forms of recreation. I think that your obtuse perspective is exactly what is needed to keep embts off of non-motorized trails, so, in a way, I appreciate it. Please, keep shouting from you soapbox that your motorized vehicle is exactly the same as a moutainbike.


Well, you WERE the one claiming omnipotence with regard to precisely what motivates every mountain/e-biker on the planet. Sorry to break it to you, your baseless assumptions are worth exactly what every other baseless assumption is worth.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

watermonkey said:


> Another uninformed response from someone that can't grasp the difference between motorized and non-motorized recreation. And so you know, since you decided to make the assumption, I have legally ridden both embts and my enduro on the same multi use trails that I mountain bike on. We even used a dirtbike to bed in a new section of trail that, wait for it, was designed to be non-motorized, thus excluding e-bikes from the beginning...because the land managers are fully aware of the difference between motorized and non-motorized rec. E-mountainbiking is not mountainbiking, nor is tearing around on an enduro - while they both take skill and physical effort, they are both motorized forms of recreation. I think that your obtuse perspective is exactly what is needed to keep embts off of non-motorized trails, so, in a way, I appreciate it. Please, keep shouting from you soapbox that your motorized vehicle is exactly the same as a moutainbike.


WTF does a dirtbike have to do with an eMTB? Nothing.

There is *zero* chance you have actually ridden a Class 1 eMTB on an actual trail for any amount of time, because you wouldn't be making these statements if you had.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> WTF does a dirtbike have to do with an eMTB? Nothing.
> 
> There is *zero* chance you have actually ridden a Class 1 eMTB on an actual trail for any amount of time, because you wouldn't be making these statements if you had.


A dirtbike is not an e-bike, just as an e-bike is not a mountain bike, and a mountain bike is not a roller skate. They are all unique vehicles, and common sense says that's how they should be managed.

If you need further clarifications, please refer to the sticky at the top of this forum.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> WTF does a dirtbike have to do with an eMTB? Nothing.
> 
> There is *zero* chance you have actually ridden a Class 1 eMTB on an actual trail for any amount of time, because you wouldn't be making these statements if you had.


Funny how you think a dirt bike has "nothing" to do with an eMTB yet you think an eMTB has everything to do with a MTB, except for the things you listed and lets ignore the elephant in the room. I think a dirt bike has a good bit in common with an MTB, not sure how eMTBs escape that with "nothing".


----------



## PurpleMtnSlayer (Jun 11, 2015)

As someone who owns a mtb and a dirt bike I can confirm not a single part is cross compatible, even the grips! 

Also, as someone who has built up an ebike and a mtb, I can confirm all parts are cross compatible except for the cranks. 

This is also true for how they ride and their impact on the trails.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

PurpleMtnSlayer said:


> As someone who owns a mtb and a dirt bike I can confirm not a single part is cross compatible, even the grips!
> 
> Also, as someone who has built up an ebike and a mtb, I can confirm all parts are cross compatible except for the cranks.
> 
> This is also true for how they ride and their impact on the trails.


Sure but&#8230;

They all have two wheels inline
They all have handlebars
They all have road and offroad versions
They all have saddles
All of them you should wear a helmet while riding
They all have forks
etc.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

PurpleMtnSlayer said:


> As someone who owns a mtb and a dirt bike I can confirm not a single part is cross compatible, even the grips!
> 
> Also, as someone who has built up an ebike and a mtb, I can confirm all parts are cross compatible except for the cranks.


You've obviously forgotten about the motor, battery, controller, wiring, and gearbox.
Might want to look a little closer and you'll see that a mountain bike doesn't have any of these parts, while an e-bike does. And, once again playing Capt Incredibly Obvious, that's why they're different.

How the hell is this hard for some people to understand? :???:


----------



## PurpleMtnSlayer (Jun 11, 2015)

Just trying to simplify it for you: cranks and Motor are an assembly


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

PurpleMtnSlayer said:


> Just trying to simplify it for you: cranks and Motor are an assembly


Oh?
Can you point me to where the crank and motor assembly is on my mountain bike?
Exactly.

If you're here just to try to annoy through purposeful obtuseness, I'd suggest now is a good time to stop.


----------



## PurpleMtnSlayer (Jun 11, 2015)

I’m hoping we’re both right: ebikes turn into mini-motos and they rule the trails. There is going to be some serious schadenfreude when the future of ebikes arrives.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

PurpleMtnSlayer said:


> As someone who owns a mtb and a dirt bike I can confirm not a single part is cross compatible, even the grips!
> 
> Also, as someone who has built up an ebike and a mtb, I can confirm all parts are cross compatible except for the cranks.
> 
> This is also true for how they ride and their impact on the trails.


"Cept for that motor part, ya e bikes and mt bikes are the same. And mt bike weighs 50 or so lbs? Not. And I wish my legs had a motor, for now its just coffee and bacon.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

PurpleMtnSlayer said:


> I'm hoping we're both right: ebikes turn into mini-motos and they rule the trails. There is going to be some serious schadenfreude when the future of ebikes arrives.


"We"? 
Sorry, but I've never said anything remotely along those lines.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> " And mt bike weighs 50 or so lbs? Not.


You obviously haven't had the same mtb experiences I have in the past.


----------



## PurpleMtnSlayer (Jun 11, 2015)

slapheadmofo said:


> "We"?
> Sorry, but I've never said anything remotely along those lines.


Universal we as in those who are scared of ebikes and those who aren't.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Yes, they are coming but I doubt (and hope) they will not be the majority.


There's no doubt they will become the majority. Todays younger generation is the next generation of mtb'ers. And what do the younger kids want? Any gadget that's fun and easy and the manufacturers know it. That's why you see more and more manufacturers producing their own version of e mtb practically daily. I have a friend in the industry that works at specialized. He said they think by 2025 2 out of 3 bikes sold will be electric.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> There's no doubt they will become the majority. Todays younger generation is the next generation of mtb'ers. And what do the younger kids want? Any gadget that's fun and easy and the manufacturers know it. That's why you see more and more manufacturers producing their own version of e mtb practically daily. I have a friend in the industry that works at specialized. He said they think by 2025 2 out of 3 bikes sold will be electric.


I guess it's hard to know. But there's a good number of us who aren't looking for the easiest way. Hopefully the next generation will be the same.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> Proper land management shouldn't be based on what toys people buy, or want to use where ever they'd like. Take drones for example, they're booming, you can buy them everywhere, yet 100% banned over public parklands here, with hefty fines associated. People still fly them ofc, because they are oblivious, or ignore the signs, but under your reasoning, landmanagers should have designated drone flying areas simply because people own drones and want them.
> 
> I'd much rather allow the emtb market to mature, then judge the impact of higher powered emtbs and riders, then let land managers decide if and where emtbs fit into their trail systems.


Aren't drones allowed to fly where airplanes and helicopters fly? Designated areas.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

leeboh said:


> Great for transportation, not so much for muti use off road trails. Then what? Stick in the front spokes maybe?


Not where you live, but here they won't be a "big" issue.


----------



## DL723 (Sep 25, 2017)

Majority for commuting seems likely. Just look at China. Even locally,4/10 bikes I see on the way to work are ebikes. 

Mountain bikes seem less likely. Mainly for the same reason this thread is huge. There is a giant stigma attached to them. Every bike store I go to I ask about their thoughts on ebikes on the trails. Of course they bias to selling you one. But when I ask if they ride them personally? Usually get the answer they test rode for a month and it was a blast...but don't own one for regular use. 

You're right about kids though. I have a buddy who actually thinks emtbs are cheating. But is thinking about buying his daughter a ebike for her first bike..


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> I guess it's hard to know. But there's a good number of us who aren't looking for the easiest way. Hopefully the next generation will be the same.
> 
> Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk


If you mtb solely for exercise, I understand. But, do we look for the hardest way to make money, do dishes etc? No, we don't. All ebikers don't ride them because they are easier, they ride them for a smile!


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

watermonkey said:


> Mountain biking is about the ride, one's interaction with their bike and the trail.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Gutch said:


> Aren't drones allowed to fly where airplanes and helicopters fly? Designated areas.


No they are not.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> There's no doubt they will become the majority. Todays younger generation is the next generation of mtb'ers. And what do the younger kids want? Any gadget that's fun and easy and the manufacturers know it. That's why you see more and more manufacturers producing their own version of e mtb practically daily. I have a friend in the industry that works at specialized. He said they think by 2025 2 out of 3 bikes sold will be electric.


Actually, the National Interscholastic Cycling Association is getting more kids on to bikes than anything else. These kids are amazing mountain bikers who love the sport. They want nothing to do with ebikes.

Emtb's will eventually fade away as more and more areas shut them out.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Silentfoe said:


> Actually, the National Interscholastic Cycling Association is getting more kids on to bikes than anything else. These kids are amazing mountain bikers who love the sport. They want nothing to do with ebikes.
> 
> Emtb's will eventually fade away as more and more areas shut them out.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Fade away!! Hahaha. Wishful thinking...


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Gutch said:


> Fade away!! Hahaha. Wishful thinking...


Maybe.

I think they are currently a growing market because they're new and interesting.

It is quickly reaching a critical mass however, where more and more land managers are saying no. Even LM's who once allowed emtb's are changing their minds. It will only get worse as the emtb's get more powerful. I have personally talked with two ebike owners who said the were returning their emtb's because they were lied to by their dealer as to where they could ride them.

It won't be soon and it may take 20 or so years but I do think it will level off and fade rather than continuously grow.

Ebikes for commuting are a whole different animal and I hope they take over the world.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Silentfoe said:


> Maybe.
> 
> I think they are currently a growing market because they're new and interesting.
> 
> ...


Fair enough. No question the emtbs will be more stressed than eroad. I think the opposite that 250w will gain traction. But it doesn't matter what I think, I'm not a LM. I am a landowner and allow all forms of recreation on trails thru my land.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Fair enough. No question the emtbs will be more stressed than eroad. I think the opposite that 250w will gain traction. But it doesn't matter what I think, I'm not a LM. I am a landowner and allow all forms of recreation on trails thru my land.


I think you might see some changes in 30-40 years when the current generation of land managers (and the current generation of grey-haired NIMBYs) have moved on to greener pastures. Until then, motors are just an impossible sell no matter how much you dress them up as just like normal bikes (to be clear, I personally think 250W e-bikes are very very similar to normal bikes and could be allowed *almost* everywhere just fine).

For people who grew up with e-bikes as a normal thing (ie, kids <10) the stigma may not be as strong. Once those kids are running the world (terrifying thought, at least based on my crazy children) they may have different ideas about how to manage motorized bikes on trails.

But I tend to agree with SilentFoe overall - as e-mtbs get more popular and visible, they seem (around here, anyway) to be getting quickly banned. I guess if enough people wanted to ignore that and poach some kind of crisis *could* result in some sort of limited access but I don't think the shops here really even sell them anymore. Even my 70 year old neighbors know they're banned from trails.

The people who are ok with poaching aren't typically the ones to show up in force to trail access meetings to demand accommodation. So I have a hard time imagining access being restored any of the places e-bikes are banned anytime soon, barring some sort of hard-reboot of the BLM and USFS.

But I've been wrong before, of course.

-W


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Gutch said:


> Aren't drones allowed to fly where *model* airplanes and *model* helicopters fly? Designated areas.


Fify

More specifically, they're generally *not* allowed in airspace shared by real aircraft.

And to go pro you need a real pilots license.

I'm all for designated areas for e-bikes and generally keeping them separate from real bicycles.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Moe Ped said:


> Fify
> 
> More specifically, they're generally *not* allowed in airspace shared by real aircraft.
> 
> ...


Thx, that's what I meant. They race them at a ark near me, pretty impressive actually.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> I guess it's hard to know. But there's a good number of us who aren't looking for the easiest way. Hopefully the next generation will be the same.
> 
> Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk


I agree. But have you seen the next generation? Not looking good for our sport.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Moe Ped said:


> Fify
> 
> More specifically, they're generally *not* allowed in airspace shared by real aircraft.
> 
> ...


Exactly. We have a commercial drone guy who does shoots for our org. He carries insurance, an FAA license and we have to get yearly permits for him to fly over city park, and utility land where we've built trails. Plus, let the rangers when know we'll be out, so when they get complaints about it, they know what's up. You can sort of fly them in your backyard unless your neighbor cites privacy concerns..... Funny they never tell you that at Bestbuy.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Walt said:


> I think you might see some changes in 30-40 years when the current generation of land managers (and the current generation of grey-haired NIMBYs) have moved on to greener pastures. Until then, motors are just an impossible sell no matter how much you dress them up as just like normal bikes (to be clear, I personally think 250W e-bikes are very very similar to normal bikes and could be allowed *almost* everywhere just fine).
> 
> For people who grew up with e-bikes as a normal thing (ie, kids <10) the stigma may not be as strong. Once those kids are running the world (terrifying thought, at least based on my crazy children) they may have different ideas about how to manage motorized bikes on trails.
> 
> ...


30-40 years seems a bit far considering how fast e technology is growing. I'd say the real turning point will be when the land managers start purchasing e mountain bikes themselves.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

I got to experience some trail miles (15-20 miles, 1.5h - 2h) on an emtb with Shimano motor (250W rated). It sounds like a RC car's motor inside that metal case; definitely not silent, but it can be drowned out by wind noise. The Boost setting is not intuitive at all--feels like a motor vehicle. It's perfect for straightforward climbs, but it was throwing me off on singletrack since it was assisting for a whole second if I just gave it one pedal stroke. Eco and trail were very natural, just like regular riding. You still had to downshift for climbs and upshift for descents--can't just rely on the motor to do all the work, so calling it assist is good wording. You'd stall on climbs or spin out otherwise, and it's hard to restart on a climb on an ebike. The difference between eco and trail were very subtle. I could see the display showing how much assistance it's giving in the bottom. Think it was 50% max for trail, but wasn't able to reliably get that much out of it (25-50% assist depending on my own effort). Boost went up to 100% if I was pushing 175 bpm intensity.

Speaking of 100% boost and 175 bpm intensity, I was "killing" a cat 4 fireroad climb at a whopping 10-14 mph. Still, the KOM holder averaged 11 mph (he had a bikeshop name after his, so regional racer prob). Strava estimates my power output at 450W for the effort. Strava doesn't like that and flagged the ride saying that it suspects I was on a motor vehicle (haha, that wording xD). Everywhere else, I was slower. Properly marked it as an "E bike ride" and there were no segments at all. I averaged 12.9 mph for the ride.

I got somewhat lazier, not really wanting to pedal much faster than 22 mph. The gearing wasn't ideal for it; spinning as fast as I could with 34x11, I could only reach 29 mph. Can't really spin that fast on a bumpy trail--it really needs more top end. The motor/controller is supposed to cut off at 20 mph, but it steps down power assist to about 50% at 17 mph, about 25% at 18 mph, and 10% at 18.5 mph. Even with Boost, it was assisting in spurts holding at around 18mph. I managed to drain the battery to nothing, and it automatically switched to eco when it was down to 1 flashing bar, colored red, and was giving about 10% assist. I didn't discover the button on the display until this moment, since I was curious if it would show how much range I had left. It said 1 mile, but I was ~3 miles away and it went almost 2. Showed 0 bars and still powered the display after that. It wasn't fully charged when I first hit the dirt--it was 4 out of 5 bars, but quickly dropped to 3.

No one gave me any hassle or anything. People I know either called me a cheater, when I showed them what I was on, or said "Hey Turbo" as I passed them. When riding behind someone, and I couldn't pass, I could just turn if off. It's not really needed when riding with others. I was just riding a heavy bike, and it's not really that bad pedaling one. No skids, besides from my own mistakes. The XT brakes on the emtb weren't enough to lockout the rear Rekon+ tire with my weight still centered. 

This ebike seemingly is for someone who wants to do these kind of physically taxing rides day after day, without days of rest in between (ex. 1+ hour commutes with lunch and post work rides, and rides on days off). The motor helps lets you maintain a typical pace, even if you happen to be in recovery, or have legs like spaghetti. It's good for those that want a bike as their primary transportation. If you're lacking a bit of power in your legs, maybe due to an injury/disease, or just lack of exercise, it's a good idea, especially if you want to ride with seasoned riders. Just adjust how much power you need--much less worry about not being 100% fit for a ride (ex. tired from work or not feeling good), nor about your ability to do a certain mileage and elevation. Biggest downside for the sickly and weak is that it weighs a lot. It requires skills to utilize the power properly, on top of riding skills. That all said, I'm telling my buddy to consider ebikes for his daughters, over high end mtbs. Hard for an emtb to beat a dedicated high end mtb in anything besides "dirt roadie" style challenges, but I doubt fitness building and skill optimization are memorable parts of mtb. It's the fresh new experiences and unique challenges that become true memories. Fitting a bike into your lifestyle in a major practical manner is a big plus too, on top of not being so exhausted and able to look up being a safety plus.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Nice writeup dv8zen. I'm a little disappointed about the way you say the Shimano motor works, it sounds *exactly* like the way my Bosch was working before I upgraded the firmware. Upgrading the firmware cured things like the extra half-second of assist after stopping pedaling, and the difficulty in getting started. It makes me wonder if the large e-motor manufacturers are getting together and standardizing the way their systems work. If so, look for a firmware upgrade from Shimano to make things much better. 

Even after the Bosch upgrade, the power assist works the same way as the speed approaches 20MPH. It starts to cut back on assist just under 18MPH and by 19.2MPH it is no longer assisting. I guess they wanted some fudge factor there. Pedaling my eMTB at 20MPH is more difficult than pedaling any of my other bikes at 20MPH, with the exception of my DH bike. 

You touched on something I believe is going to radically change the perception of ebikes - riders who want to ride every day, without burnout. I believe MTB racers will adopt eMTB as a training tool. There are periods in training where you want to ride, but still recover. Spinning on the road doesn't help an MTB racer as much as an "easy" MTB ride, and an eMTB would allow that. Also, DH and enduro riders who want to get in downhill training but don't have a lift nearby. Haibike sells a full on DH eMTB.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

honkinunit said:


> I believe MTB racers will adopt eMTB as a training tool. There are periods in training where you want to ride, but still recover. Spinning on the road doesn't help an MTB racer as much as an "easy" MTB ride, and an eMTB would allow that.


Quoted for hilarity.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

dv8zen said:


> Speaking of 100% boost and 175 bpm intensity, I was "killing" a cat 4 fireroad climb at a whopping 10-14 mph. Still, the KOM holder averaged 11 mph (he had a bikeshop name after his, so regional racer prob). Strava estimates my power output at 450W for the effort. Strava doesn't like that and flagged the ride saying that it suspects I was on a motor vehicle (haha, that wording xD). Everywhere else, I was slower. Properly marked it as an "E bike ride" and there were no segments at all. I averaged 12.9 mph for the ride.


Strava has an eBike mode.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Last time I looked, admittedly a few months ago, Strava did not have full functionality when in ebike mode. IIRC the various ride segments were not available and I couldn't compare speed vs watt hours on the various climbs which was what I was looking for at the time.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> Quoted for hilarity.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


You don't seem like the type of person who laughs. Ever.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

WoodlandHills said:


> Last time I looked, admittedly a few months ago, Strava did not have full functionality when in ebike mode. IIRC the various ride segments were not available and I couldn't compare speed vs watt hours on the various climbs which was what I was looking for at the time.


Works pretty much like regular Strava (segments etc); of course you can't directly compare e-bike rides with regular rides. (Unless you personally logged a "regular" bike ride as an e-bike ride)

I guess Strava figures electricity is a natural enough form of energy to add to the list of muscle, wind and gravity powered activities.

Petroleum is just too refined!


----------



## hobbit (Apr 23, 2007)

Specialized Curtis Keene uses a Levo for training purposes.


----------



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

WoodlandHills said:


> Last time I looked, admittedly a few months ago, Strava did not have full functionality when in ebike mode. IIRC the various ride segments were not available and I couldn't compare speed vs watt hours on the various climbs which was what I was looking for at the time.


You can create your own segments.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> Last time I looked, admittedly a few months ago, Strava did not have full functionality when in ebike mode. IIRC the various ride segments were not available and I couldn't compare speed vs watt hours on the various climbs which was what I was looking for at the time.


Pretty sad if people are getting Climbing KOM's running Strava in Pedal Bike mode if they are on a eBike.....


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

I'd be flagging that mofo, especially if that were my KOM. xD

Yea, you have to create new segments, to compare to other ebikers. Segregation... xD

Hard to judge based on short term experience, but I think they certainly have high potential to be game changers. Info merely needs to get out. Hard to put it into words, but it's like climbs don't seem very steep any more while pedaling on one. It certainly is easier to pedal up than to hike up, by far. Like a tailwind on the flats. You can laugh at real winds, especially headwinds.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

hobbit said:


> Specialized Curtis Keene uses a Levo for training purposes.


No, he doesn't.

He may ride one occasionally, mostly because his sponsor is Special Ed and he has to, but he absolutely does not train on one.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> Pretty sad if people are getting Climbing KOM's running Strava in Pedal Bike mode if they are on a eBike.....


I believe on the Specialized Levo it blocks strava unless you are using the ebike mode.


----------



## hobbit (Apr 23, 2007)

Curtis uses it for recovery rides and often enough to have tricked it out with a 29" wheelset instead of the stock fatties.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

If you use the Mission Control app, the Levo will upload to Strava in e-bike mode. If you use a Garmin or phone to use Strava, it will upload as whatever you want. If you make your rides public, you can use e-bike mode and it will have e-bike segments, not bike segments. You can also use it in regular bike mode so that you can use the regular bike segments, but then you need to click on the "hide ride from leaderboards" checkbox so that the ride won't go into the leaderboards. If anyone were to use an ebike for regular bike segments, for sure you should flag them.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

chazpat said:


> I guess it's hard to know. But there's a good number of us who aren't looking for the easiest way. Hopefully the next generation will be the same.
> 
> Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk





Gutch said:


> If you mtb solely for exercise, I understand. But, do we look for the hardest way to make money, do dishes etc? No, we don't. All ebikers don't ride them because they are easier, they ride them for a smile!


Honestly, I think that shows that you do not understand.

No, I do not mtb solely for exercise. Yes, that is a part of it but there are lots of reasons I mtb. One reason is for the challenge, the sense of accomplishment. Otherwise, I would not ride my single speed, or my CX on singletrack, or take the fork in the trail labeled "most difficult". I don't ride up hills just to enjoy riding down, it's about the full experience. And it's not just a physical experience but also a mental experience. I also trail run, same way (though running is more for exercise for me). I run where there are hills despite there being a nice flat trail close to me that I rarely run.

I think you and some of the other ebikers ride for a very different reason and that is why both sides are having such a hard time understanding each other.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



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

RickBullottaPA said:


> Perhaps, but isn't torturing Stravassholes a lot of fun?


If being an @sshole is your idea of fun then have at it.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

chazpat said:


> I think you and some of the other ebikers ride for a very different reason and that is why both sides are having such a hard time understanding each other.


Not really. I know lots of mountain bikers that ride primarily for fun; probably the majority of riders I know actually, including myself.

You can talk about your own reasons for riding, but don't forget that your reasons aren't everyone's.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



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

RickBullottaPA said:


> Most Stravassholes should learn to just enjoy the ride (and eat more fiber).


Some people should learn to focus on their own ride .


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

honkinunit said:


> WTF does a dirtbike have to do with an eMTB? Nothing.
> 
> There is *zero* chance you have actually ridden a Class 1 eMTB on an actual trail for any amount of time, because you wouldn't be making these statements if you had.


 And a dirt bike vs a 1,2,3,000 watt e bike with a throttle? Vs an e motorcycle? Blurry lines.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Not that blurry. A dirt bike makes 25,000-50,000 watts.  Weighs 200-300 lbs. Top speed 70-120 MPH. Burns gasoline. Makes 90-120 decibels of noise WFO.


And a mountain bike makes 0 watts.

Ebikes make anywhere from 250 to 3000+ watts.

Before you get butt hurt and tell me a mountain bike makes as many watts as a rider can put out, keep in mind you just told us how many watts a motorcycle puts out. Which it doesn't do without a rider on it.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

What is "Butt Hurt"? Is this what e-bikes do that is so popular. In my day we called it the down low.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

chazpat said:


> I guess it's hard to know. But there's a good number of us who aren't looking for the easiest way. Hopefully the next generation will be the same.
> 
> Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk





slapheadmofo said:


> Not really. I know lots of mountain bikers that ride primarily for fun; probably the majority of riders I know actually, including myself.
> 
> You can talk about your own reasons for riding, but don't forget that your reasons aren't everyone's.


Hence why I said "Yes, that is a part of it but there are lots of reasons I mtb."

edit: ^%$# multi quote doesn't turn itself off once used


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Not that blurry. A dirt bike makes 25,000-50,000 watts. Weighs 200-300 lbs. Top speed 70-120 MPH. Burns gasoline. Makes 90-120 decibels of noise WFO.


And are fun as f***!


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Perhaps, but isn't torturing Stravassholes a lot of fun?


Don't be a jerk.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

leeboh said:


> And a dirt bike vs a 1,2,3,000 watt e bike with a throttle? Vs an e motorcycle? Blurry lines.


Quite a treacherous position to take.

It is not in the interest of MTBers to state that there are any blurry lines anywhere, whether we're talking about regular MTBs, Class 1, 2, 3, 4, or e-Motos.

The whole slippery-slope argument can be turned around back onto regular MTBs, where anything on two wheels is a danger to hikers and equestrians.

The anti-bike crowd can take it a step further. If they see a guy on a e-bike putzing along at 15mph, and MTBers label this guy as dangerous, then what does that make regular MTBers bombing down ridges at 30-40mph? A lot of these folks have an agenda and will absolutely cherry pick your own words and turn them against you.

So instead, the position should be that the lines are crystal clear, i.e. here are the reasons why regular bikes are okay, here are the reason why Class 1s are questionable, and here are the reasons why all others should be banned. There's no confusion.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> Some people should learn to focus on their own ride .


I agree that people should focus on their own ride and not what kind of bike the other guy is riding.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

chazpat said:


> Honestly, I think that shows that you do not understand.
> 
> I think you and some of the other ebikers ride for a very different reason and that is why both sides are having such a hard time understanding each other.


LMAO. You pretend to understand why I ride an ebike? Do you know why I ride my XC bike, my enduro bike, my DH bike, my cross bike, my three road bikes, my two commuters, my motorcycle, my track car, my 4x4, why I climb 14'ers, why I backpack?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> LMAO. You pretend to understand why I ride an ebike? Do you know why I ride my XC bike, my enduro bike, my DH bike, my cross bike, my three road bikes, my two commuters, my motorcycle, my track car, my 4x4, why I climb 14'ers, why I backpack?


Bet I do.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> Quite a treacherous position to take.
> 
> It is not in the interest of MTBers to state that there are any blurry lines anywhere, whether we're talking about regular MTBs, Class 1, 2, 3, 4, or e-Motos.
> 
> ...


 Hmm, interesting. The lines are absolutely blurring. How about anything with a motor is the problem? And it is not in my interest as a mt biker to support or approve of motorized vehicles. 30-40 mph? Not on MA trails. Those would be dirt roads or paved road speed, or maybe lift served. Good rides I might average 6-7 mph, wheeee!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

chazpat said:


> Honestly, I think that shows that you do not understand.
> 
> I think you and some of the other ebikers ride for a very different reason and that is why both sides are having such a hard time understanding each other.





honkinunit said:


> LMAO. You pretend to understand why I ride an ebike? Do you know why I ride my XC bike, my enduro bike, my DH bike, my cross bike, my three road bikes, my two commuters, my motorcycle, my track car, my 4x4, why I climb 14'ers, why I backpack?


Uh, please reread what I wrote. As in exactly what you quoted. Where did I pretend to understand why you ride?


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

honkinunit said:


> I agree that people should focus on their own ride and not what kind of bike the other guy is riding.


I agree, right up until the point that the other guys bike has a motor...prior to that, I could care less.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Yeah, that guy who lost his leg in Iraq, the diabetic man trying to start exercising again to lose weight and save his life, or the woman recovering from her chemo that wants to get outside shouldn't be allowed to ride bikes on the same trails as you. Ugh. Don't be so binary.


Just to play devils advocate, why do any of those people you mentioned _NEED_ to ride an eBike on a MUT? Can they not do the same exact thing with an eBike on paved paths and streets where a motor on a bike is less controversial and in no way can add to trail breakdown or trail conflict?

The overall issue here is Trail Breakdown from more use and user conflicts from speed differentials.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

---


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Why do handicapped people need parking spots close to a store? Can't they just shop at Amazon?


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Will this thread hit 1000 by year's end?

Place yer bets...


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Easily, considering how many people are here. Still much to learn about emtbs, attitudes, and the general "climate" surrounding sharing the outdoors.

Can maybe make an analogy about trail sanitation. People don't want trails dumbed down, or new ones built that can be considered to be lame. They want something that is suited to their tastes, including being made to offer a suitable challenge. 

Some people tune their experience to the same trail based on how they feel (energetic or mellow), and what bike out of their quiver that they chose to ride. An emtb just seems to be another part of that quiver to me. Trails I avoid, due to the suffer rating of climbs and what not, would be something I would be much more likely to ride due to being on an emtb.

People who are already on these forums and already familiar with mtb are more likely to have etiquette and mannerisms that are socially responsible, than newcomers. Would be useful to learn and practice how to approach irresponsible people on the trail and inform them of etiquette, without being too hostile nor showing hate/prejudice. You know, being civilized.

So, how would you approach someone being uncivilized, aiming for a positive and peaceful outcome (ex. experienced trail user vs irresponsible ebiker)? How about from a reversed scenario than whatever you're thinking up? Example: angry trail user who hates motors vs ebiker (you) who doesn't understand what angered the other guy other than being on the wrong equipment, in the wrong place, at the wrong time? When you put yourself in the other person's "shoes"...


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

rsilvers said:


> Why do handicapped people need parking spots close to a store? Can't they just shop at Amazon?


Why don't we pave all the trails so that people confined to wheelchairs can enjoy them?


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

rsilvers said:


> Why do handicapped people need parking spots close to a store? Can't they just shop at Amazon?





chazpat said:


> Why don't we pave all the trails so that people confined to wheelchairs can enjoy them?


Chaz understands where I was going with that analogy.

There are for sure many rights that the ADA needs to protect. There *NEEDS* to be wheelchair access to public services, restrooms, shopping, etc.

There does NOT need to be Wheelchair access in the wilderness.

There must be some sort of Balance.

Claiming that eBikes of all shapes and sizes NEED to have access to ALL Multi-use dirt trails because someone with a disability wants it, is not a valid argument.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

Lived on bmx bikes till I was 18, bought a mtb after had just started riding when it was stolen. Up until a few months ago I hadn't really ridden in around 18 years aside from the hand full of times I showed the kids some tricks on there bmx bikes. I soon learned that mountain biking is a whole other animal and guys that have been doing this for a while can climb hills like beasts. So my first time I climbed as far as I could then turned around and road down. So for month now I've been riding alone trying to build my stamina. Does anyone fear that ebikes allow some pretty green riders to climb some if these hills they would normally not stand a chance against and come flying down putting others in danger.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

chazpat said:


> Why don't we pave all the trails so that people confined to wheelchairs can enjoy them?


That is actually changing the trail. Allowing a silent e-bike with 1 HP is not harming anyone. Some people just find it offensive to their sense of biking.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

STAGER1 said:


> Does anyone fear that ebikes allow some pretty green riders to climb some if these hills they would normally not stand a chance against and come flying down putting others in danger.


Don't underestimate one's sense of self preservation.

I'd be more concerned about green riders breezing up to the top and then shitting up the trails on the way down, stopping before every tech section.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

STAGER1 said:


> Does anyone fear that ebikes allow some pretty green riders to climb some if these hills they would normally not stand a chance against and come flying down putting others in danger.


No. People are only going to try that between 0 and 1 time in their lives before they realize they can't do it it safely.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

But couldn't that one time hurt someone else?


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Klurejr said:


> There are for sure many rights that the ADA needs to protect. There *NEEDS* to be wheelchair access to public services, restrooms, shopping, etc.
> 
> There does NOT need to be Wheelchair access in the wilderness.
> 
> ...


I don't think this is the analogy. ADA changes the infrastructure - adds ramps and paving. e-bikes just want to be allowed to be there, which is much less demanding. This would be like simply "allowing" wheelchairs into a store, but not forcing the store owner to put in a ramp. It is not asking much at all.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

STAGER1 said:


> Lived on bmx bikes till I was 18, bought a mtb after had just started riding when it was stolen. Up until a few months ago I hadn't really ridden in around 18 years aside from the hand full of times I showed the kids some tricks on there bmx bikes. I soon learned that mountain biking is a whole other animal and guys that have been doing this for a while can climb hills like beasts. So my first time I climbed as far as I could then turned around and road down. So for month now I've been riding alone trying to build my stamina. Does anyone fear that ebikes allow some pretty green riders to climb some if these hills they would normally not stand a chance against and come flying down putting others in danger.


 Yes I do. I really don't think a seasoned mountain biker will be a problem but it will be a new credit card e-biker that feels they have a right to do what they want that will generate the user conflict we all fear. This is why you have the E-biker on here that doesn't think it's a problem, they know how to conduct themselves.
And lets be serious, all of us want some individuality. I don't want to be grouped in with the assist crowd because that is not who I am. It's kind of like asking a pro downhiller if he wears spandex.


----------



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

The ADA consideration should not guide policy that doesn't effect ~90% of users.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

STAGER1 said:


> But couldn't that one time hurt someone else?


Yes, but I know when I try something I am not sure that I can do, I want tons of space and clear out the area. Also I just wouldn't even ride right behind someone on a steep climb, unless maybe in a race.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

STAGER1 said:


> Does anyone fear that ebikes allow some pretty green riders to climb some if these hills they would normally not stand a chance against and come flying down putting others in danger.


Already has happened. I read a story somewhere, perhaps in this thread, about it. I believe it was about some couple that called emergency services to retrieve their e-bikes, after they chose to abandon them due to the trail being too technical for them to ride, and get out of the "wild" by foot. They probably feared for all sorts of things, from snakes to mtn lions, leading them to seek emergency assistance. xD

My primary worry is still about fires from shorted batteries and what not, which more than likely will be from a cheap ebike, conversion, DIY setup, etc. rather than a production quality ebike. Cali could draw up some legislation that has ebikes (with Li-Ion batteries) only allowed in undeveloped areas below a certain fire danger level... probably can tag drones/quad-copters and other e-powered stuff in the same bill...


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

But unfortunately not everyone is like you. I work a fairly dangerous job which involves working at great heights. Sometime on swing stages those scafold hanging of the sides of buildings you constantly see people falling from in the news. And I can tell you I've seen more then one guy try to prove himself by being an idiot when death is a clear possibility. The lack of responsibility and recklessness of man with never fail.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

rsilvers said:


> That is actually changing the trail. Allowing a silent e-bike with 1 HP is not harming anyone. Some people just find it offensive to their sense of biking.


But I am worried that they would in fact change some of the trails i ride on. These trails are heavily traveled directional trails, mostly tight and twisty, not long climbs nor descents but lots of short ups and downs. A few ebikes I don't think would be an issue. But if there are a lot of ebikes, there will be a lot more passing which would lead to the narrow single track getting wider. As I have said before, ebikes will not be an issue on some trails but on others they very well might be. And I will admit, if I am constantly having to pull over to let people pass, it will be annoying. Yes, we do pass on these trails but with everyone on pedal bikes and going in the same direction, it works amazingly well. Earlier in this thread, people were talking about ebikes becoming the majority. That would definitely change the experience for those of us on pedal bikes.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Heard a story from an ebike rider from NYC, "Mark Sparx", who got ticketed during the ebike crackdown. He got a $50 ticket and the NYPD personnel wanted to take the bike. Their superior didn't let them, since the bike had pedals. Rider decided to fight the ticket, and the judge found pedal-assist was legal. "Self-propelled" ebikes are the illegal kind, which can have pedals, but don't need to be pedaled to be propelled.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Yes, NYC bans throttle bikes. No throttle is ok.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> Honestly, I think that shows that you do not understand.
> 
> No, I do not mtb solely for exercise. Yes, that is a part of it but there are lots of reasons I mtb. One reason is for the challenge, the sense of accomplishment. Otherwise, I would not ride my single speed, or my CX on singletrack, or take the fork in the trail labeled "most difficult". I don't ride up hills just to enjoy riding down, it's about the full experience. And it's not just a physical experience but also a mental experience. I also trail run, same way (though running is more for exercise for me). I run where there are hills despite there being a nice flat trail close to me that I rarely run.
> 
> I think you and some of the other ebikers ride for a very different reason and that is why both sides are having such a hard time understanding each other.


Umm, I just started buying Levo's a couple years ago. Been riding since BMX. Live in a mtb destination area. Trust me, I understand EVERYTHING mtb. But yeah, the ebike is something different and fresh. If you've ridden your whole life, sometimes you welcome a change every now and then. I like BOTH sports and don't really care why people ride what they ride, just have fun. At the end of the day, it's still just a hobby!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Umm, I just started buying Levo's a couple years ago. Been riding since BMX. Live in a mtb destination area. Trust me, I understand EVERYTHING mtb. But yeah, the ebike is something different and fresh. If you've ridden your whole life, sometimes you welcome a change every now and then. I like BOTH sports and don't really care why people ride what they ride, just have fun. At the end of the day, it's still just a hobby!


Well, I guess I misunderstood your "If you mtb solely for exercise, I understand. But, do we look for the hardest way to make money, do dishes etc? No, we don't."


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

rsilvers said:


> I don't think this is the analogy. ADA changes the infrastructure - adds ramps and paving. e-bikes just want to be allowed to be there, which is much less demanding. This would be like simply "allowing" wheelchairs into a store, but not forcing the store owner to put in a ramp. It is not asking much at all.


This is actually what most ADA trail guidelines are about - not modifying to make accessible, just making sure that access is not denied.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Klurejr said:


> Chaz understands where I was going with that analogy.
> 
> There are for sure many rights that the ADA needs to protect. There *NEEDS* to be wheelchair access to public services, restrooms, shopping, etc.
> 
> ...


I am sorry you feel this way must really piss you off to see a handicap e biker parked in the handicap parking spot at the trail head on public park land .


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

rider95 said:


> I am sorry you feel this way must really piss you off to see a handicap e biker parked in the handicap parking spot at the trail head on public park land .


We still kick handicapped ebikers off of the trails.

As long as there are places for them to ride, they are not granted access under the ADA to ride anywhere they want.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> We still kick handicapped ebikers off of the trails.
> 
> As long as there are places for them to ride, they are not granted access under the ADA to ride anywhere they want.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


True by the letter of the law, but why kick them off when there is no actual reason why it matters? When you see an unleashed dog, do you kick the dog-walker off the trail - that is not only also against rules in most areas, but is actually a real problem.

I think the reason is that it just bugs you. I get it. I am bugged by posts that have ads for Tapatalk. Why spam the boards with such ads?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

rsilvers said:


> True by the letter of the law, but why kick them off when there is no actual reason why it matters? When you see an unleashed dog, do you kick the dog-walker off the trail - that is not only also against rules in most areas, but is actually a real problem.


Seriously? The letter of the law?

Let's just call it...the law.

Technically not a law but a policy.

There is an actual reason. So it matters.

Thanks for the red herring thrown in.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> Seriously? The letter of the law?
> 
> Let's just call it...the law.


Well yeah, because the law was created back when there was a problem with motocross bikes that were 400 lbs, noisy, damaging, and very fast. There were no silent bicycles with modest assist that still required peddling. So the law was written with a broad stroke as there was never anything so close to a normal bike until recently. So you could use reasonable enforcement and not kick off modest assist bikes that were not being obnoxious. When I am riding my Giant Trance, I slow down to almost nothing when I pass hikers, say hello, etc. Someone on a Turbo Levo can do the same thing, and they are not causing any issues. Police generally use discretion when enforcing traffic laws on the road. For example, they don't pull over every car with potentially too dark tinted glass even though they could.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

rsilvers said:


> Well yeah, because the law was created back when there was a problem with motocross bikes that were 400 lbs, noisy, damaging, and very fast. There were no silent bicycles with modest assist that still required peddling. So the law was written with a broad stroke as there was never anything so close to a normal bike until recently.


Actually not at all. But nice try.

The ebike policy was written recently.

The federal agencies have no desire to play the wattage game. They know some emtb's are low watts, and others are in the thousands. They aren't going to babysit. So they banned them all from non motorized trails.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> Actually not at all. But nice try.
> 
> The ebike policy was written recently.
> 
> The federal agencies have no desire to play the wattage game. They know some emtb's are low watts, and others are in the thousands. They aren't going to babysit. So they banned them all from non motorized trails.


The is certainly easier for them.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

https://www.blm.gov/policy/ib-2015-060

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

They should change the term "electronic" to "electric."


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

rsilvers said:


> The is certainly easier for them.


In many places, since there aren't the resources for any enforcement, this is the default. They fully acknowledge that people will poach, but like any regulation, most will follow it.

I was having a discussion with a state trails guy recently, and he was talking about their OHV trails, how they were designed for up to 50" wide side by sides, yet there are local shops selling 4 passenger ones that are 60+ inches wide. They simply don't fit, and the buyers are demanding that they widen the trails to accomodate them, since they're like $25-$30k and there's no where to drive them. He said, nope, we're never going to do that, we just tell them to go to Moab.

Which is pretty much how it is with ebikes around here, the land managers view allowing them as more trouble than it's worth.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

E-bike people are not asking for any changes to any trails though. I assuming they just don't want to be kicked out if they are behaving as if on a normal MTB.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

rider95 said:


> I am sorry you feel this way must really piss you off to see a handicap e biker parked in the handicap parking spot at the trail head on public park land .


Not in the slightest. You are misunderstanding my statement.

The regular posters here know you are Handicapped and carry an ADA placard, however that does not give you the right to ride any eBike you want on any trail or path you want. My understanding is you ride a Class 1 pedal assist eBike, not a 3000 watt throttle controlled eBike.

My comment is the ADA is not a reason to grant blanket access to all trails.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

I actually don't like how the ADA makes places be changed to accommodate people. That costs a ton of money the others must bear. But, I would let technology help augment disabled people to access anywhere. So allowing disabled to use electric devices on any trail is a no-brainer. It doesn't cost others a thing. And certainly, kicking them out rather than using discretion is odd, even if legally prescribed.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rsilvers said:


> E-bike people are not asking for any changes to any trails though. I assuming they just don't want to be kicked out if they are behaving as if on a normal MTB.


 THE issue is allowing motorized vehicles on non motorized trails. That is the change. A somewhat big change as seen by the # of posters here.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

leeboh said:


> THE issue is allowing motorized vehicles on non motorized trails. That is the change. A somewhat big change as seen by the # of posters here.


It is just discrimination. Some just don't want them in their sight. There is no actual problem with a Turbo Levo riding on the path. It is just like Sierra Club people not wanting their ambiance ruined by seeing a MTB. I sort of get the ambiance thing. I was not happy when my family went out for a nice meal at Capitol Grill, dressed reasonably, and the table next to us was full of people wearing t-shirts and shorts. Still, I wouldn't lobby to ban them from tainting my experience.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

rsilvers said:


> I actually don't like how the ADA makes places be changed to accommodate people. That costs a ton of money the others must bear. But, I would let technology help augment disabled people to access anywhere. *So allowing disabled to use electric devices on any trail is a no-brainer.* It doesn't cost others a thing. And certainly, kicking them out rather than using discretion is odd, even if legally prescribed.


What is your definition of Electric Devices? Are you in favor of 4 wheeled electric powered wheelchairs being giving access to your local MTB trail that has rocks and roots on it? What happens when said ADA placard holders want the rocks and roots removed and replaced with a flat surface so their chair can go.... It is a slippery slope.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

rsilvers said:


> It is just discrimination. Some just don't want them in their sight. There is no actual problem with a Turbo Levo riding on the path. It is just like Sierra Club people not wanting their ambiance ruined by seeing a MTB. I sort of get the ambiance thing. I was not happy when my family went out for a nice meal at Capitol Grill, dressed reasonably, and the table next to us was full of people wearing t-shirts and shorts. Still, I wouldn't lobby to ban them from tainting my experience.


Preserving the existing user experience is actually a pretty big deal. And remember - you're not being discriminated against when the LM says you can't mine, log timber, ride an ATV, or ride a bike (e or otherwise). You are always welcome to ride a non-e bike, or hike.

This is recreation. Not voting rights or due process or something. You don't have any rights to recreate on public lands any way you want (nor would any thoughtful person want such a right to exist, as every trail would quickly be destroyed).

-Walt


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Klurejr said:


> What is your definition of Electric Devices? Are you in favor of 4 wheeled electric powered wheelchairs being giving access to your local MTB trail that has rocks and roots on it? What happens when said ADA placard holders want the rocks and roots removed and replaced with a flat surface so their chair can go.... It is a slippery slope.


No, I don't want the trail changed. Which is the sort of thing ADA makes business do. When I said "electric devices" I was thinking of either e-bikes, or some future walking exoskeleton or bionic legs.

I am not really a fan of the ADA and mostly agree with this video:


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Walt said:


> Preserving the existing user experience is actually a pretty big deal. And remember - you're not being discriminated against when the LM says you can't mine, log timber, ride an ATV, or ride a bike (e or otherwise). You are always welcome to ride a non-e bike, or hike.


That perspective is valid logic, and the same as telling gay people that they are not being discriminated against for not being allowed to marry people of the same gender, because they are free to marry someone of the opposite gender, just like everyone else.

I don't get trying to draw an equivalence between class-1 e-bikes and logging or ATV riding, since those makes noise and/or change the land. I tested out a Turbo Levo demo, and passed several dog-walkers, and I would bet a lot that every one of them thought I was on a normal MTB.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

rsilvers said:


> No, I don't want the trail changed. Which is the sort of thing ADA makes business do.


There's nothing remotely similar going on with trails. There is no sweeping requirement for MUTs to be modified to allow disabled access to the best of my knowledge. There are guidelines published that show specifics of how this should be done voluntarily if a LM chooses to do so.

If I'm mistaken, please share a link to any statutes you know of that say differently; I'd be very interested in reading them.

Also, as I've said before, I think someone would have to be pretty dickish to be against legitimately disabled folks using an e-bike on trails that typically don't allow them if they so choose. The numbers would be very small, and the "impact" would be negligible.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

rsilvers said:


> That perspective is valid logic, and the same as telling gay people that they are not being discriminated against for not being allowed to marry people of the same gender, because they are free to marry someone of the opposite gender, just like everyone else.


Yeah, so, again, this is recreation. Nobody is going to take you seriously comparing riding a bike for fun (unless you're one of the very few people who commute via singletrack) to equal rights for people of different races, genders, sexual orientations, etc.

As I've said many times, 250w/15.5 bikes are ok with me. But they're not ok with the vast majority of the general trail-using public (if you think this place is hostile, try a city council meeting!) And there are legitimate concerns about how to enforce power/speed limits that have yet to be addressed. The solution where I live, and on federal lands in general, has been a blanket ban. Come to the table with useful solutions and you *might* have a shot at changing that in our lifetimes.

If you insist on claiming to be discriminated against, cry me a river. You'll get openly laughed out of the actual conversations between stakeholders and land managers with that kind of attitude.

-Walt


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Walt said:


> Yeah, so, again, this is recreation. Nobody is going to take you seriously comparing riding a bike for fun (unless you're one of the very few people who commute via singletrack) to equal rights for people of different races, genders, sexual orientations, etc.


The logic is solid. In either case, you are telling someone that they are not being discriminated against because they are free to behave like most other people if they wanted to. And in either case, it does not actually effect other people, except being offensive to some others beliefs. The solution is for people against gay marriage to not marry someone of their own gender, and for people against e-bikes, to not ride one.



Walt said:


> As I've said many times, 250w/15.5 bikes are ok with me.


The problem with speed cutoffs is that when you exceed 15.5 or 20.0, the motor cuts out, but leaves you in too tall a gear to push, so you have to bounce between gears as the motor cuts in and out. The solution is to have a 250 watt motor and no speed limit. You can't go very fast anyway due to drag - at least on MTBs.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rsilvers said:


> It is just discrimination. Some just don't want them in their sight. There is no actual problem with a Turbo Levo riding on the path. It is just like Sierra Club people not wanting their ambiance ruined by seeing a MTB. I sort of get the ambiance thing. I was not happy when my family went out for a nice meal at Capitol Grill, dressed reasonably, and the table next to us was full of people wearing t-shirts and shorts. Still, I wouldn't lobby to ban them from tainting my experience.


 Um, no. Not allowed here in MA. DCR, land managers and many conservation areas as well as say the TToR do not allowed motorized vehicles on the multi use trails. So many great areas to pedal. I see you are here in MA? Like 6 or so places to motor, Foxboro, Freetown and some places out west in MA. You are welcome to e bike there. Discrimination? That's rich.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rsilvers said:


> The logic is solid. In either case, you are telling someone that they are not being discriminated against because they are free to behave like most other people if they wanted to. And in either case, it does not actually effect other people, except being offensive to some others beliefs. The solution is for people against gay marriage to not marry someone of their own gender, and for people against e-bikes, to not ride one.
> 
> The problem with speed cutoffs is that when you exceed 15.5 or 20.0, the motor cuts out, but leaves you in too tall a gear to push, so you have to bounce between gears as the motor cuts in and out. The solution is to have a 250 watt motor and no speed limit. You can't go very fast anyway due to drag - at least on MTBs.


 Read the rules in MA concerning DCR ( state parks land management) No motorized vehicles allowed on multi use off road trails. So that's what we have to work with. Road/ commute, e bike are awesome, start there.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

The gay marriage analogy is NOT applicable in anyway shape or form to eBike's on trails. Also, that is way off topic to bring it up in the context of eBiking. Please refrain from any discussion about same sex marriage or they will be deleted.

It will be way to easy for this conversation to veer way off course discussing that topic and it has no place here.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

rsilvers said:


> No, I don't want the trail changed. Which is the sort of thing ADA makes business do. When I said "electric devices" I was thinking of either e-bikes, or *some future walking exoskeleton or bionic legs.*


I would love to see Hiker groups thoughts on that.


----------



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

rsilvers said:


> It is just discrimination. Some just don't want them in their sight.


Consider reverse discrimination. There's already a lot more real estate where motorized things are welcome than where there not, ebikes could will squeeze no motor zones even tighter. For a hiker seeking to unplug that's the equivalent of losing trails.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

leeboh said:


> Like 6 or so places to motor, Foxboro, Freetown and some places out west in MA. You are welcome to e bike there. Discrimination? That's rich.


One thing that is nice about e-bike is you can much more easily ride to the trail rather than put the bike on a car. But no, I can't ride to Foxboro or Freetown. In fact, they are too far to even drive to with any regularity.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> I would love to see Hiker groups thoughts on that.


They're probably undoubtedly segregated from hikers, and are now considered to be e-hikers as long as they're using such gear.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

rsilvers said:


> The logic is solid. In either case, you are telling someone that they are not being discriminated against because they are free to behave like most other people if they wanted to. And in either case, it does not actually effect other people, except being offensive to some others beliefs. The solution is for people against gay marriage to not marry someone of their own gender, and for people against e-bikes, to not ride one.
> 
> The problem with speed cutoffs is that when you exceed 15.5 or 20.0, the motor cuts out, but leaves you in too tall a gear to push, so you have to bounce between gears as the motor cuts in and out. The solution is to have a 250 watt motor and no speed limit. You can't go very fast anyway due to drag - at least on MTBs.


Yeah, those 250w emtbs without speed limits are as slow as molasses...






Keep going with the argument that land mangers "discriminate" against emtbers because it's against their "beliefs", it's amusing.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Silentfoe said:


> We still kick handicapped ebikers off of the trails.
> 
> As long as there are places for them to ride, they are not granted access under the ADA to ride anywhere they want.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


I hope you beat the hell out of them too, especially if they became handicapped fighting for our country. Can't wait until this issue becomes important to the ACLU.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

The guy in that video seems pretty dam fast to me.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

So fast that he's scared of going faster on such a trail. xD

Clearly shows how "IMBA-style" wide trails are a bad idea, as they speed everyone up. If that were me being passed at 3:33, I'd be slightly traumatized, because it's an experience that's alien to me. I'll remember it, then try to process it to see how I'd cope with future similar occurrences. If I deem it a problem, such as questioning what if I were in the way and this person couldn't control their vehicle, I'd likely blame the tool that enabled the person (motorized or not), to prevent more people like 'em from repeating it. If I knew I had some law protecting me or had something to ensure this person would be responsible for their actions, I'd be more likely to tolerate it. Without such, I'd just presume if there were a collision, the person would likely try to avoid extra hardship by fleeing and hiding. 

Doesn't seem like the motor was engaged much to go that fast down that slope. Just very light hum at around 3:28... I see it as part of the mtb vs other trail user problem. I'd think an emtber is more likely to control their speed to a stop, since it's less inconvenient to re-accelerate back up to desired speed. Similar issue at road intersections--it's inconvenient for a roadie in clipless pedals to come to a stop at stop signs and red lights, since they need to change gears, unclip, and get out of their position, which interrupts their rhythm/flow. I figure a less exhausted ebiker, who's not in some rush or mission, is more likely to be much more civilized.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

With 29er wheels, 3" tires, a 32 tooth chainring, and a 10-tooth rear, you would have to spin at 155 rpm to achieve 72 kph. A Turbo Levo would be doing 29 mph at a 100 rpm cadence, which I can't sustain, but some people can. Those people could make fast downhill videos on any bike.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

fos'l said:


> I hope you beat the hell out of them too, especially if they became handicapped fighting for our country. Can't wait until this issue becomes important to the ACLU.


That's rich.

Fyi, I'm a 100% disabled veteran. As a guide, I've worked with the National Ability center in Park City Utah. Guess what they don't offer in any way, shape, or form there? Ebikes. The disabled vets use hand cycles, modified bicycles, off road wheel chairs or similar. Not a single one is powered by a motor. Disable vets in general want to accomplish something, they don't want it handed to them.

Yes, if you ride an ebike on our trails and claim to be handicapped, I will point you to Warner valley or other OHV areas where you can ride to your hearts content. My "give a f*%k meter" broke a long time ago.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> Yes, if you ride an ebike on our trails and claim to be handicapped, I will point you to Warner valley or other OHV areas where you can ride to your hearts content. My "give a f*%k meter" broke a long time ago.


You can work on special bathrooms for e-bike riders too. They can be separate, but just as good.

One of the main benefits of an e-bike is you can ride with faster friends and not feel like you are slowing them down. That is gone if you can't ride on the same trails, and they are not gonna want to ride on motorcycle trails.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

rsilvers said:


> One of the main benefits of an e-bike is you can ride with faster friends and not feel like you are slowing them down.


This is often mentioned as an important benefit. Please explain to me why it is important enough to make nationwide legal changes to allow a motorized vehicle on a non motorized trail. I've been riding bikes for decades, what has worked before and still seems to work, is that the faster people wait for the slower. Sometimes I'm the former, sometimes I'm the latter. Cycling in a group is a social event, I generally know ahead of time what sort of pace the ride is going to have before we start, and I've implicitly agreed to that pace by showing up. If you don't want to ride at that pace, or are too much of an azz to wait, you don't go on that ride. It's simple.

I've been waiting for my wife on every single bike ride for 30 years and she still doesn't need an ebike to save me a few minutes of waiting.

It's a really weak argument.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

rsilvers said:


> You can work on special bathrooms for e-bike riders too. They can be separate, but just as good.


This needs to stop. You are insulting people who *actually* face discrimination.

I mean, I'm *friendly* to e-bikes. I *own* an e-bike! What on earth is wrong with e-bike people that we have these kinds of inane discussions? You are alienating potential allies with this discrimination garbage! You want access to trails? Admit that they have motors and can be faster in some situations. Admit that we need creative solutions to make sure 3000W "bikes" don't start showing up. Put time and money into advocating for access/improving trails for a better user experience for everyone.

But hey, whining and playing victim is a good strategy too. I bet that will work out really well.

-Walt


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

rsilvers said:


> You can work on special bathrooms for e-bike riders too. They can be separate, but just as good.
> 
> One of the main benefits of an e-bike is you can ride with faster friends and not feel like you are slowing them down. That is gone if you can't ride on the same trails, and they are not gonna want to ride on motorcycle trails.


Sometimes you just get the "tough **** award". I have friends who do things I can't do. I am not actively trying to find a way to modify the experience so I can hang. Either my friends alter their expectations and we all hang together or they don't. Not everyone needs a participation trophy.

You're not going to win here. We aren't the ones keeping you from riding your ebike on trails. What we are doing is telling you the why's and reasons for your not being able to.

Beyond that...you're just spinning your wheels here in a never ending bitchfest.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Walt said:


> You want access to trails? Admit that they have motors and can be faster in some situations. Admit that we need creative solutions to make sure 3000W "bikes" don't start showing up. Put time and money into advocating for access/improving trails for a better user experience for everyone.


They can make any given rider faster, but it seems like just yesterday I was riding a demo Turbo Levo. On a trail loop that my best time with my Giant Trance was 47:20, I was able to do in 40:40 with the Levo. Faster, yes. Too fast? No.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Harryman said:


> This is often mentioned as an important benefit. Please explain to me why it is important enough to make nationwide legal changes to allow a motorized vehicle on a non motorized trail. I've been riding bikes for decades, what has worked before and still seems to work, is that the faster people wait for the slower. Sometimes I'm the former, sometimes I'm the latter. Cycling in a group is a social event, I generally know ahead of time what sort of pace the ride is going to have before we start, and I've implicitly agreed to that pace by showing up. If you don't want to ride at that pace, or are too much of an azz to wait, you don't go on that ride. It's simple.
> 
> I've been waiting for my wife on every single bike ride for 30 years and she still doesn't need an ebike to save me a few minutes of waiting.
> 
> It's a really weak argument.


It is them (faster riders) who invite me to ride, not me asking to ride with them. I usually decline because I want to be considerate and not slow them down. Sometimes I do it, and I keep up well enough for a while, but have had hypoglycemic reactions, but don't want to ask them to constantly stop to let me consume glucose. Anyway, I don't think everyone needs to enumerate what problems they have, as others will say "Too bad, don't participate at all." I am just saying it doesn't cost you anything to support tolerance.

True, speed differential of people riding together is not a reason I would use as to why the rules should change so much as a reason why some people want to own e-bikes. The best reason for changing the rules would be just for freedom of choice and to give people options in a way that doesn't actually harm the existing user base.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

I could hire a coach, become Vegan, and train my ass off but still not shave 7 min off of a 47 min loop. I think you just proved a point that e-bikes and bicycles are not the same. They don't go the same speed. I sympathise with people have unique needs but giving blanket access because of need for choice isn't a good move.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

rlee said:


> I could hire a coach, become Vegan, and train my ass off but still not shave 7 min off of a 47 min loop. I think you just proved a point that e-bikes and bicycles are not the same.


Adding more watts to my watts is going to make me faster. But I still stopped completely when I passed the unleashed dog with walker. To her, I was just on a bike. She didn't know that over the course of many miles I shaved off some minutes. She was more concerned about being embarrassed that her dog was misbehaving. I did nothing to harm her, or the trail.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

rsilvers said:


> Adding more watts to my watts is going to make me faster. But I still stopped completely when I passed the unleashed dog with walker. To her, I was just on a bike. She didn't know that over the course of many miles I shaved off some minutes. She was more concerned about being embarrassed that her dog was misbehaving. I did nothing to harm her, or the trail.


 But you have a cycling background. What do you think the new credit card e-biker would have done?


----------



## hobbit (Apr 23, 2007)

Im not so sure the new credit card ebiker even exists as far as mtbs are concerned. I can't imagine anyone's first mtb is going to be a minimum 3K emtb. More likely they will upgrade from a cheaper standard mtb, or first ebike would be a commuter. Every ebiker I know personally has stepped up from a standard bike rather than being new to the sport.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

rlee said:


> But you have a cycling background. What do you think the new credit card e-biker would have done?


Are you suggesting that a noob on an e-bike is more likely to have problems with other trail users than a noob on a regular bike?


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

rlee said:


> I could hire a coach, become Vegan, and train my ass off but still not shave 7 min off of a 47 min loop. I think you just proved a point that e-bikes and bicycles are not the same. They don't go the same speed.


They surely aren't the same, but pointing out a 15% average speed difference is an argument in favor of the e-bike.

Step way back and look at it in the eyes of the non-cycling crowd. 15% is nothing.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

15% average, 100%+ peak, especially on climbs. Wait until the sierra club hikers have to dive off the trails for bikes hauling a$$ going both uphill and downhill.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Yes a noob on a ebike has the possibility of conflict. If a new rider could ride on a ebike as fast as I can on my mountain bike There could be a problem. I am not talking about Grandpa or that respect full granola eater that is out to sniff flowers or look at birds. It is the middle age man who's wife probably won't let him buy a Harley so he buys a e-bike. We as seasoned bikers know how to conduct ourselves with other trail users. 
Think what would happen if they opened up your dog walking area to shuttle rides. With a ebike they are all shuttle rides.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rsilvers said:


> One thing that is nice about e-bike is you can much more easily ride to the trail rather than put the bike on a car. But no, I can't ride to Foxboro or Freetown. In fact, they are too far to even drive to with any regularity.


 Interesting. Too far? My legs seem to work just fine pedaling to trailheads. In recent summers bikepacking I have pedaled around the Quabbin Res and Lake Winnipesaukee from my house north of Boston. So where do you ride your e bike if these places are " too" far to drive?


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Walt said:


> Preserving the existing user experience is actually a pretty big deal. And remember - you're not being discriminated against when the LM says you can't mine, log timber, ride an ATV, or ride a bike (e or otherwise). You are always welcome to ride a non-e bike, or hike.
> 
> This is recreation. Not voting rights or due process or something. You don't have any rights to recreate on public lands any way you want (nor would any thoughtful person want such a right to exist, as every trail would quickly be destroyed).
> 
> -Walt


I guess the point here is rights vs reasonable.
Where I live trails have changed due to 29ers... perhaps not drastically but the new parts are less twisty .. etc.

I tried an e-bike .... they are not what I expected and I was quite pleasantly surprised... and given my 8yr old kid races XC and I'm 50 I'm thinking that at some point I made need a bike just to be able to go out and keep up. (Or given a 15mph limit stay in sight)

I really don't see the big deal... I'd just be doing the same thing I do now with an assist. 
Why would anyone want to ban someone doing that?

Those in their 20's and 30's might be a long ways off this... I on the other hand want to ride as long as possible and as 60 or 65 gets closer the reality kicks in.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Steve-XtC said:


> I guess the point here is rights vs reasonable.
> Where I live trails have changed due to 29ers... perhaps not drastically but the new parts are less twisty .. etc.
> 
> I tried an e-bike .... they are not what I expected and I was quite pleasantly surprised... and given my 8yr old kid races XC and I'm 50 I'm thinking that at some point I made need a bike just to be able to go out and keep up. (Or given a 15mph limit stay in sight)
> ...


 54 here, at 60 my legs just fall off and I have to sit on the couch and watch tv? Ever hear of a masters division? Not banned, just not legal where I ride, Its a motorized vehicle and all.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Steve-XtC said:


> I guess the point here is rights vs reasonable.
> Where I live trails have changed due to 29ers... perhaps not drastically but the new parts are less twisty .. etc.
> 
> I tried an e-bike .... they are not what I expected and I was quite pleasantly surprised... and given my 8yr old kid races XC and I'm 50 I'm thinking that at some point I made need a bike just to be able to go out and keep up. (Or given a 15mph limit stay in sight)
> ...


I agree. I've ridden a pedal assist. Absolutely no difference between the pedal assist and my stumpy. They ride exactly the same, speed is basically the same. One bike is slightly easier to pedal in certain situations, but still not as fast on the trails as my stumpy.


----------



## MJC1973 (Dec 12, 2017)

watermonkey said:


> 15% average, 100%+ peak, especially on climbs. Wait until the sierra club hikers have to dive off the trails for bikes hauling a$$ going both uphill and downhill.


First off - yes this is my very first post here. Hi everyone. I tend to lurk instead of type but this topic has caught my attention and I wanted to join in......

I own many bikes and have ridden mountain bikes since the days well before Mag21's. I raced XC locally back in the days when Tomac vs Ned was my inspiration to train. I even had a Tioga disk wheel on the back wheel of my rigid XC Miyata racer with a 110mm stem and bars so narrow the brake levers almost touched. I loved Onza bar ends. So I have seen a lot in the MTB world. Hopefully my long history with MTB shows the anti e-bike crowd here that I am far from a noob out to destroy trails. 
So having said that - your comment of e-bikes hauling a$$ "up" trails to the point where hikers are diving out of the way paints a picture that simply is not true. Far from the truth actually. Its this kind of fact distortion that is hard for me to accept. I've ridden for long enough to remember when guys that rode in the woods and in the mountains did it for fun and did it to get out with like minded friends. It saddens me to see what the "mountain bike" community has become as of late.....Strava chasing elitists who seems to have forgotten where the sport came from and spread untruths about riders who don't conform to their idea of what mountain biking should be. Sad.

Don't even get me started on the "Pink Bike" crowd who seem to love to compare mountain biking to Moto. Full face helmets, bragging about the size of the "roost" they make while coming out of turns, commenting to ride pictures with phrases like "Brapp". Please - spare me and don't tell me for one minute that this gravity fed bike crowd are any different than e-bikes in terms of carrying speed in the woods that would scare a hiker.

I have many bikes in the garage and love them all - and yes, I have a new e-bike. 2017 Scott E-Genius. Its brilliant. I only have a few rides on it thus far but my comments to the haters that spread outright lies about these bikes is this. Try one. Ride trail on one. Climb on one. Descend on one. Spend time to see what they are all about before you say "get off my trail" and report e-bikes to the first person that will listen to your whining. 
I am lucky in that I live in Western Canada and have tonnes of alpine trail at my doorstep that are all e-bike friendly. My local trail trail association has confirmed to me that e-bikes are welcome to share the trail. The trail supervisors in my Provence even use e-bikes and have a fleet of them. They test certain new sections of trial on e-bikes. While some don't agree with them, e-bikes certainly aren't the devil that US riders make them out to be. Canada is a far less litigious society that the US so we dot have the same trail restrictions as the US does (it exists but not to the extent of in the US). Lucky that way I suppose. Dare I say more "free" to that extent. 
My point is this - there are a lot of lies out there spewing from this site about the new e-bikes and its time those spewing the lies look at the bigger picture. Some of the comments on this site from haters are so cold....it makes me wonder if they in fact are not the "true mountain bikers" in this case as they have obviously forgotten why this sport was founded in the first place. 
Its not about numbers, stats, the law, how much you suffer on a ride, lobbyists, rights blah blah blah. Its about being happy in the woods and in the mountains. Just ride your own damn bike and leave people alone who don't fall into your odd category of a "real rider". I hate to say it but you all sound exactly like the whinny hikers back in the day who hated us all. 
Will I change anybodys mind here about what an e-bike is and what it means to the cycling world? Nope. No illusions there. My goal is to simply have a few here to stop the outright lies. It aint cool.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

watermonkey said:


> 15% average, 100%+ peak, especially on climbs. Wait until the sierra club hikers have to dive off the trails for bikes hauling a$$ going both uphill and downhill.


Love it, let 'em dive.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Klurejr said:


> Not in the slightest. You are misunderstanding my statement.
> 
> The regular posters here know you are Handicapped and carry an ADA placard, however that does not give you the right to ride any eBike you want on any trail or path you want. My understanding is you ride a Class 1 pedal assist eBike, not a 3000 watt throttle controlled eBike.
> 
> My comment is the ADA is not a reason to grant blanket access to all trails.


Our you speaking for the MTBR forum or is this just your personal opinion that handicap e mt bikers should not be allowed on public trails that allow reg mt bikers?


----------



## MJC1973 (Dec 12, 2017)

Gutch said:


> Love it, let 'em dive.


Dude - you're not helping.....Just sayin'


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Helping what? I can’t stand the Sierra club. Sorry if it affends you. And actually it was half sarcastic as to the over dramatic comment of Pedelecs speed on trails. Diving out of the way? Really?


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

rider95 said:


> Our you speaking for the MTBR forum or is this just your personal opinion that handicap e mt bikers should not be allowed on public trails that allow reg mt bikers?


You still do not seem to be comprehending any of my comments. Please go back and re-read everything I posted.

All of my comments on this site are my personal opinions unless someone is clearly breaking site rules and I need to enforce those rules and delete posts.


----------



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

ALimon said:


> I agree. I've ridden a pedal assist. Absolutely no difference between the pedal assist and my stumpy. They ride exactly the same, speed is basically the same. One bike is slightly easier to pedal in certain situations, but still not as fast on the trails as my stumpy.


Most here report significant speed gains, this test shows about double- https://dirtmountainbike.com/bike-reviews/e-bikes/e-mtb-vs-mtb-enduro-test.html

for sure I can understand the appeal


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Most here report significant speed gains, this test shows about double- https://dirtmountainbike.com/bike-reviews/e-bikes/e-mtb-vs-mtb-enduro-test.html
> 
> for sure I can understand the appeal


I can relate to that. I compared my experience to the KOM rider for that cat 4 climb, but it was halved for me compared to my best effort. I wasn't putting out a best effort on the emtb, so it was doing more than halving the climb time. Sheesh, in Boost mode, it basically propels itself. You can just do nonsense pedaling and it'll accelerate to whatever 250W equates to--I had to stop pedaling since I wasn't used to such speed on flat narrow singletrack. xD In Trail mode, the same effort ("nonsense pedaling") resulted in going a whole 6-8 mph. Just sit back, spin, and steer, and it feels like you're being towed up by another fit rider in the Boost mode. Boost mode is what sets the emtb apart. If anyone else is trying to say they're different or alike, they're talking about different modes...

I liked the experience. Cut out a lot of the climbing time, still got a workout, got to experience things I haven't done in a while since it's understandable to not like climbs that are long grinds. xD Not gonna call 'em green/enviro friendly, not gonna call 'em just like bikes... definitely different, and have little doubt that I'll see more on the trail. I'll be glad that they're not ridden by hateful judgmental people as seen in these kinds of threads, as they seem to be against them.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> https://dirtmountainbike.com/bike-reviews/e-bikes/e-mtb-vs-mtb-enduro-test.html


EMTB - 1 HR 5MINS
AVE HEART RATE - 129bpm

MAX 154bpm

ASCENT - 2923FT

DESCENT - 2739FT
*
AVE SPEED - 11.7MPH*

CALORIES - 1120

MTB - 2HRS 12MINS
AVE HEART RATE - 134 bpm

MAX 160bpm

ASCENT - 2923 FT

DESCENT - 2739 FT

*AVE SPEED - 7.1MPH*

CALORIES - 1205

Read more at https://dirtmountainbike.com/bike-reviews/e-bikes/e-mtb-vs-mtb-enduro-test.html#VSR42trfFZWD4cAB.99

---

Wow, 11.9 mph average with the e-MTB, which includes the downhills.

Better start diving out of the way of these speed demons!


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

EricTheDood said:


> Wow, 11.9 mph average with the e-MTB, which includes the downhills.


That is the overall average. As many have reported the eBikes are not faster on downhills, generally about the same speed, so all the increase is gained on the climbs.

It would be more telling to have the average speeds for climbing only.

This data set is incomplete for drawing logical conclusions.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I agree. I've ridden a pedal assist. Absolutely no difference between the pedal assist and my stumpy. They ride exactly the same, speed is basically the same. One bike is slightly easier to pedal in certain situations, but still not as fast on the trails as my stumpy.


 It has a motor that at least doubles the power and it goes the same speed? That there is funny, you in politics? Then why have an e bike if they are the same? You want to ride a heavier more expensive bike? Hmmm.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> That is the overall average. As many have reported the eBikes are not faster on downhills, generally about the same speed, so all the increase is gained on the climbs.
> 
> It would be more telling to have the average speeds for climbing only.
> 
> This data set is incomplete for drawing logical conclusions.


With heart rates of 129 and 134 bpm, I would imagine they went from 6-7 mph on the climbs to 11 mph. Not sure how fast they took the DH, but generally there's speed limits on those too. I guess this is where the term, uphill flow comes from. Since you're going uphill at speeds that you'd get on flatland. I was hitting 12-14 mph on a non-technical cat 4 climb, with 175+ bpm, one that I'd typically ride at 6-7 mph average if I were out for endurance, and not to get climbing KOMs.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Mountain bikes are already at the bleeding edge of acceptable speeds on MUTs - if you have spent *any* time doing access/advocacy/trailbuilding work, you know this very well. Adding just 20% to that speed makes it a whole different game for shared use.

-Walt


----------



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

EricTheDood said:


> Wow, 11.9 mph average with the e-MTB, which includes the downhills.


Isn't that what I said? Nearly twice as fast? Potentially twice the trail miles per rider.

I never said they were Ferraris, just countering a post claiming they were exactly the same as mountain bikes.


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Walt said:


> Mountain bikes are already at the bleeding edge of acceptable speeds on MUTs - if you have spent *any* time doing access/advocacy/trailbuilding work, you know this very well. Adding just 20% to that speed makes it a whole different game for shared use.
> 
> -Walt


Why? 
The non-riding trail user doesn't care that your climbing at 11mph instead of 7 mph... more often than not its the defending at 35mph they object to.

It's only the Strava/KOM chasers who seem concerned about climbing speed.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Klurejr said:


> That is the overall average. As many have reported the eBikes are not faster on downhills, generally about the same speed, so all the increase is gained on the climbs.
> 
> It would be more telling to have the average speeds for climbing only.
> 
> This data set is incomplete for drawing logical conclusions.


This one has better climbing data:

https://dirtmountainbike.com/bike-reviews/e-bikes/e-mtb-vs-mtb-climbing-test.html

These are EU spec emtbs with 15.5mph cutoffs.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

MJC1973 said:


> First off - yes this is my very first post here. Hi everyone. I tend to lurk instead of type but this topic has caught my attention and I wanted to join in......
> 
> I own many bikes and have ridden mountain bikes since the days well before Mag21's. I raced XC locally back in the days when Tomac vs Ned was my inspiration to train. I even had a Tioga disk wheel on the back wheel of my rigid XC Miyata racer with a 110mm stem and bars so narrow the brake levers almost touched. I loved Onza bar ends. So I have seen a lot in the MTB world. Hopefully my long history with MTB shows the anti e-bike crowd here that I am far from a noob out to destroy trails.
> So having said that - your comment of e-bikes hauling a$$ "up" trails to the point where hikers are diving out of the way paints a picture that simply is not true. Far from the truth actually. Its this kind of fact distortion that is hard for me to accept. I've ridden for long enough to remember when guys that rode in the woods and in the mountains did it for fun and did it to get out with like minded friends. It saddens me to see what the "mountain bike" community has become as of late.....Strava chasing elitists who seems to have forgotten where the sport came from and spread untruths about riders who don't conform to their idea of what mountain biking should be. Sad.
> ...


Please. List the "lies" you are seeing here concerning emtb's.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Steve-XtC said:


> Why?
> The non-riding trail user doesn't care that your climbing at 11mph instead of 7 mph... more often than not its the defending at 35mph they object to.
> 
> It's only the Strava/KOM chasers who seem concerned about climbing speed.


This is exactly right. When I demoed the Turbo Levo, my loop time went from 47 minutes to 40. That is like going from 11 average mph to 13.

The dog walkers didn't notice because I still slowed down to nothing when passing them, just as I always do. An e-bike doesn't help me go downhill any faster, but I could climb faster, which is why my average speed went up. There is no reason to assume that just because people can go faster when climbing, that they will start buzzing dog-walkers. I often ride for hours without seeing anyone.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Is there some general correlation that people interested in speed are assholes, that is causing some of this misunderstanding, regarding the fear of loss of trail access? xD

I mostly see people wanting to cut out the grinds. I don't understand the bias and prejudice.

I just see assholes, idiots, and irresponsible people as the problem, no matter what they're using. They could be hikers, bird watchers, runners, dog walkers, bikers, ebikers, equestrians, moto/atv riders, etc. Trying to put some sense into people who don't care just seems to be futile.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

E+ individuals need to realize two basic facts. The first is there's no sense discussing access with individuals who are totally opposed to e-bikes including some who think they shouldn't be allowed where the law permits them. You're just wasting your time (like I wasted mine for years). The second is that it's unlikely you'll ever encounter any resistance on the trail. Riders, runners and equestrians probably can't distinguish your bike from any other MTB, and MTB riders don't give a crap (except on forums). Been riding my e-bike(s) for three years without incident (except when MTB riders assisted me with a problem).


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

fos'l said:


> Been riding my e-bike(s) for three years without incident (except when MTB riders assisted me with a problem).


What happened with that? But I do foresee it is only other MTBers who would report someone, not hikers or dog walkers.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

fos'l said:


> E+ individuals need to realize two basic facts. The first is there's no sense discussing access with individuals who are totally opposed to e-bikes including some who think they shouldn't be allowed where the law permits them. You're just wasting your time (like I wasted mine for years). The second is that it's unlikely you'll ever encounter any resistance on the trail. Riders, runners and equestrians probably can't distinguish your bike from any other MTB, and MTB riders don't give a crap (except on forums). Been riding my e-bike(s) for three years without incident (except when MTB riders assisted me with a problem).


True that ?. If trail systems don't post "no ebikes" your gonna see Ebikes. How would the everyday consumer know differently?


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Steve-XtC said:


> Why?
> The non-riding trail user doesn't care that your climbing at 11mph instead of 7 mph... more often than not its the defending at 35mph they object to.
> 
> It's only the Strava/KOM chasers who seem concerned about climbing speed.


Multi-Direction Trails that are shared use.

If the trails are narrow, which many are, and a person riding downhill at 15mph encounters someone riding uphill at 5mph the closing speed is now 20mph.

If the person riding down is at 15 and the person riding up is at 15, then the closing speed is 30mph.

This is also know as Differential speed. I ride a motorcycle to work everyday and here in California Lane Sharing is a common practice. When I first started doing it over 6 years ago I rode with a faster differential speed than I do now. Back then I had "close calls" with automobiles changing lanes, etc on a nearly weekly basis. Now that I have slowed my differential speed when lane sharing I rarely have close calls.

This is not about pedal riders being concerned about "fake" strava times. I am sure that is a concern to some, but that is not the crux of the argument.

There is a reason so many Dirt Bike and other OHV trails are single direction, to avoid collisions from fast closing speeds. The vast majority of existing Multi-Use Trails are not directional, so closing speed must be considered as part of any access discussion.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Well, as it is now you have mtbrs going down as fast as their skill set will allow and families walking up at 3-5mph. Danger city. If downhillers “yield” to uphill traffic, there is no problem. Those are standard bike rules, at least here.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Well, as it is now you have mtbrs going down as fast as their skill set will allow and families walking up at 3-5mph. Danger city. If downhillers "yield" to uphill traffic, there is no problem. Those are standard bike rules, at least here.


Yes, but people will get very annoyed if the *uphill riders* are also going 10-15 mph. You've increased your potential for conflict dramatically with both hikers and other mountain bikers.

Directional trails would help here, but most of the MUT in the US is not directional (and unlikely to become so) as would better (less open/flowly and more tech/twisty) trail design. Unfortunately people don't like techy twisty very much lately.

-Walt


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Why does everyone assume an ebike rider is going to max out on the uphills? I mean , honestly I would, but don’t believe everybody would. Look at the ebiker demographics. Older, well off, and mainly experienced. Specialized realizes this and that’s why they took the plunge. $ yes. 250w Class 1 obviously are gonna be everywhere in time.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

How about access on mtb trails only? Everybody just enjoys the new faster pace?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Gutch said:


> How about access on mtb trails only? Everybody just enjoys the new faster pace?


I think e-bikes would be fine on mtb-only trails (which are *almost all* directional as well). I've said so many times.

-Walt


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Around in circles.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Most here report significant speed gains, this test shows about double- https://dirtmountainbike.com/bike-reviews/e-bikes/e-mtb-vs-mtb-enduro-test.html
> 
> for sure I can understand the appeal


That's a pretty vague statement. If an out of shape rider that can't pedal for **** jumps on a pedal assist bike he should double his speed and that's not saying much. I'm a fit, fast rider and when I rode a Levo I didn't get any speed advantage except on longer steeper climbs. I actually found the Levo slowing me down on the dh and sections where the motor shut off on me. Any fit rider who rides a pedal assist will not be faster on a pedal assist. How do I know, I rode one on my normal lops. Times were basically the same.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ALimon said:


> That's a pretty vague statement. If an out of shape rider that can't pedal for **** jumps on a pedal assist bike he should double his speed and that's not saying much. I'm a fit, fast rider and when I rode a Levo I didn't get any speed advantage except on longer steeper climbs. I actually found the Levo slowing me down on the dh and sections where the motor shut off on me. Any fit rider who rides a pedal assist will not be faster on a pedal assist. How do I know, I rode one on my normal lops. Times were basically the same.


I'm assuming you rode in ECO mode. I agree, it does hold you back on downhills with the motor sometimes. A lot depends obviously on the trail. Tight twisty tech is harder on the Levo.


----------



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

ALimon said:


> That's a pretty vague statement. If an out of shape rider that can't pedal for **** jumps on a pedal assist bike he should double his speed and that's not saying much. I'm a fit, fast rider and when I rode a Levo I didn't get any speed advantage except on longer steeper climbs. I actually found the Levo slowing me down on the dh and sections where the motor shut off on me. Any fit rider who rides a pedal assist will not be faster on a pedal assist. How do I know, I rode one on my normal lops. Times were basically the same.


You seem to be in the minority, most people on this forum say they can cover at least 50% more ground in the same time compared to a bicycle, many of them double. I know a really fit rider who is a speed demon and he loves ebikes because he says they're much faster. Also I'm pretty sure the guy riding in the test I linked was an accomplished rider.

I couldn't imagine anyone buying them if they were really the same speed as a bicycle, what would be the appeal?


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

J.B. Weld said:


> You seem to be in the minority, most people on this forum say they can cover at least 50% more ground in the same time compared to a bicycle, many of them double. I know a really fit rider who is a speed demon and he loves ebikes because he says they're much faster. Also I'm pretty sure the guy riding in the test I linked was an accomplished rider.
> 
> I couldn't imagine anyone buying them if they were really the same speed as a bicycle, what would be the appeal?


I only tried once but it illustrates the "speed question"

I borrowed my brothers and I'm not a racing fit rider nor am I super unfit...
The ride too a lot longer on the bike but that's because I cycled to the trails not drove.
(This is a workout in itself but if I ever did ride it I'd be on my Carbon XC hard tail not my trail bike) 
When I did get to the trails they are a mix of one-way and shared access fireroads

Rather unsurprisingly the eBike is faster climbing on fire trails but then so is my XC bike... (or it would be if I ever took it there)

It was WAY slower on the DH and jumps... and I chickened out of the road gap...

On the technical climbs at times it was faster than the XC would have been and at times probably slower ... but that would be the same with the trail vs XC

I stuck to Eco and Trail modes because of two reasons...
Firstly I had no intention of riding the route back unassisted.... it's bad enough on a road bike let alone a bike with no charge....
But also you can only go so fast ...

I could have actually done something about this because 80-90% of the uphill technical trail is totally avoidable using the fire trails... but I didn't because I like riding the tech climbs... and I'm not fussed about speed...
On the DH's there are a few I wouldn't do on my XC ... (I probably could but they would be no fun and I'd probably hurt myself and the bike)


> I couldn't imagine anyone buying them if they were really the same speed as a bicycle, what would be the appeal?


Well 
1/ I cycled to the trail so like going there on a road bike but then having a mid travel bike when you get there

2/ I did the full loop with a couple of big jumps excepted... 
3/ I don't really enjoy fireroad and if/when I do ride it its somewhere else
4/ Where I usually ride (close to me not my brother) it would probably quite a bit faster but certainly as of yet the "faster" doesn't interest me..

and specifically not on YOUR above comments ....
I expect all this will change when I'm 65+

Against what OTHERS have said I'd not be not some guy who retired and decided to take up MTB... I'd be someone who wanted to continue but is no longer as fit as when I was 21....

Yes then I'll be going FASTER than a 65yr old with health problems.... in fact my wish is to be able to go out with my (then to be) 23yr old who's racing top level XC in the under 8's at the moment.... so I'll hopefully be going the same speed as a race fit 23yr old.... which is faster than I go now and doubtless an even bigger difference in what I can do then.

Bringing it back to your question... that is one of my main attractions.... 
So it depends what you mean by faster vs those who come up with doom and gloom about closing speed or it causing more problems with hikers


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

So...it is faster, but its not really faster?


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

watermonkey said:


> So...it is faster, but its not really faster?


Yep ... and most importantly for those saying how because it's faster people will complain ... it's only faster in specific conditions (i.e. not DH when your over 15mph) and then only if you want...

Not everyone will be obsessed with speed.... some might just want to go further.. others keep up with friends/family .. others have a disability or injury... etc.

Personally I'm not attracted myself at the moment... but I'd borrow my brother's again so I can cycle to and from the trails (it doesn't make sense where I live) but I can see why others might be or if I lived where my brother does.

The only way "speed" motivates me is in being able to ride with my kid ... who if he continues will be riding faster at that point than I am presently


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

I would love to do some testing with an eBike in my regular trail system to see how much faster I could make the climbs when I have a motor assisting me.

To make a statement of the likes that only 65+ riders and those with handicaps are going to be riding eBikes on MUT's is a bit foolish don't you think? eBikes are being marketed and sold to younger people who just want to go faster as well. I don't see how that can be refuted unless someone has actual sales numbers for every single purchase of an eBike in the last 12 months that shows the age of the rider who purchased it and a reason along with the purchase for why the user wanted a motor on their mtb.

1> Yes there are 65+ riders who just want to keep up with the younger guys.

2> Yes there are Handicapped individuals who want one to be able to ride at level they could not without a motor.

3> Yes there are eBike riders who are younger and just want to go faster than they could on a purely human powered bike.

You cannot have 1 and 2 without 3.

*3 is why people are so touchy about eBikes in the US.*

Can we end this discussion now? ;-)


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Klurejr said:


> I would love to do some testing with an eBike in my regular trail system to see how much faster I could make the climbs when I have a motor assisting me.
> 
> To make a statement of the likes that only 65+ riders and those with handicaps are going to be riding eBikes on MUT's is a bit foolish don't you think? eBikes are being marketed and sold to younger people who just want to go faster as well. I don't see how that can be refuted unless someone has actual sales numbers for every single purchase of an eBike in the last 12 months that shows the age of the rider who purchased it and a reason along with the purchase for why the user wanted a motor on their mtb.
> 
> ...


You can't go FASTER on an eBike than a DH bike... 
The speed record for a DH bike is about 140 MPH .... because gravity makes a much much much bigger difference going DH than a 500W or whatever E-Assist

You can CLIMB faster in many circumstances but that is still slower than most of us descend.... What I think you mean in bullet 3 is *complete a circuit more quickly*...

I'm sure this is attractive to some by SO WHAT ??? Why does that matter to anyone? 
It's not limited to the list of 3 its a very long list... including cycling to the trails, going FURTHER not faster ...

I personally think buying an bike to complete a trail/segment/loop in a shorter time is completely pointless but I agree some might... some might just rent one.... the point is why is that bad and this is really likely to be a small minority ..???

Any detrimental effect is likely over-shadowed by the other groups ...


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Steve-XtC said:


> I'm sure this is attractive to some by SO WHAT ??? Why does that matter to anyone?


It matters to Land Managers.


----------



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

Steve-XtC said:


> I personally think buying an bike to complete a trail/segment/loop in a shorter time is completely pointless but I agree some might... some might just rent one.... the point is why is that bad and this is really likely to be a small minority ..???


If riders do 2 laps instead of 1 the traffic on that trail is effectively doubled, you may not care about it but some other users looking for a more tranquil experience might.

Some big manufactures are predicting ebike sales will surpass bicycle sales in the not so distant future so I think implementing policy on the basis that they're a fringe group is foolhardy. I've nothing against ebikes and I really enjoy speed so no hate here, they're just not bicycles IMO.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> You seem to be in the minority, most people on this forum say they can cover at least 50% more ground in the same time compared to a bicycle, many of them double. I know a really fit rider who is a speed demon and he loves ebikes because he says they're much faster. Also I'm pretty sure the guy riding in the test I linked was an accomplished rider.
> 
> I couldn't imagine anyone buying them if they were really the same speed as a bicycle, what would be the appeal?


I definitely could ride longer loops and cover more distance which was cool. The advantage is on the up hill. If I took a pedal assist in a bike park it would be of no benefit. The pedal assist basically allows you ride at pro caliber speeds until you run out of juice with far less effort. I gan guarantee you an average mtb rider on a pedal assist would get dropped by a top tier rider on a normal bike.


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

J.B. Weld said:


> If riders do 2 laps instead of 1 the traffic on that trail is effectively doubled, you may not care about it but some other users looking for a more tranquil experience might.
> 
> Some big manufactures are predicting ebike sales will surpass bicycle sales in the not so distant future so I think implementing policy on the basis that they're a fringe group is foolhardy. I've nothing against ebikes and I really enjoy speed so no hate here, they're just not bicycles IMO.


That's a fair point but I think also it applies to just increased MTB sales... or encouraging cycling for fitness.

I remember the days before suspension forks, let alone FS and the MTB use here in the UK was tiny compared to now.

What has happened is more dedicated centres and better access and overall we get "chased off" places a lot less even "unofficial places".

The US seems to have got itself into a fairly different position to Canada or Europe over this. Our National Parks are of course smaller than yours .. in fact you could drop England into some of yours so it's a bit puzzling to us.

We also have a Forestry Commission and parking charges for MTB owners are a big source of income for them. They are polling us about what facilities will make more of us ride more rather than trying to reduce access. (The recent questionnaire from the Forestry Commission had all sorts of fancy suggestions from them such as hot showers and stuff...)

My most regular trails are actually owned by the Queen.... (really - Crown estates) and again they are really encouraging MTB use.

There are also the unofficial places and though relations are sometimes sketchy when someone organises a huge event and people drop litter etc. for quite a few of the local villages it's a significant source of income and I've been pleasantly surprised at the efforts of villagers making MTBers welcome or at least not unwelcome.

Like I say, puzzling when you have so much more space than we do...

One thing about the trail centres is they are all weather (not natural but sympathetic surfaces) or we'd only get about 5 days riding a year here... and these surfaces probably hold up better than natural and also are actively maintained by official volunteers.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> If riders do 2 laps instead of 1 the traffic on that trail is effectively doubled, you may not care about it but some other users looking for a more tranquil experience might.
> 
> Some big manufactures are predicting ebike sales will surpass bicycle sales in the not so distant future so I think implementing policy on the basis that they're a fringe group is foolhardy. I've nothing against ebikes and I really enjoy speed so no hate here, they're just not bicycles IMO.


Tranquil experience? LOL C'mon man I like your posts but that was a terrible argument. There's a reason nothing is tranquil anymore.... The planet is over populated and therefor to many god damn people everywhere!!!!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I can take an e-bike like the Kenovo, which is for all practical purposes a DH sled, and I can ride it up anything I want (really fast, too), instead of pushing my actual DH sled up there for 2 hours at 2mph. 

Think I'll be faster on the DH than I would on my XC bike?

Look, there are LOTS of ways to use an e-bike. You can be an elderly handicapped person who wants to get out with the grandkids, or you can be a DH shredder who wants to get his armor on and go rip up the gnar doing multiple laps on the local family hiking trail. And everything in between. 

The motor makes a ton of new and different things possible. But some of those things (every trail is now a shuttle trail, for example) are less desirable than others. Some of them are downright unacceptable. 

Hence the controversy and widespread bans on e-bikes on trails. 

-Walt


----------



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

ALimon said:


> Tranquil experience? LOL C'mon man I like your posts but that was a terrible argument. There's a reason nothing is tranquil anymore.... The planet is over populated and therefor to many god damn people everywhere!!!!


You must live in California. Or probably you're joking.

Anyway you illustrate my point, the fact that there are still some quiet and tranquil places available is why I oppose e-bike=bicycle. Not that it matters much.


----------



## Rivet (Sep 3, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Tranquil experience? LOL C'mon man I like your posts but that was a terrible argument. There's a reason nothing is tranquil anymore.... The planet is over populated and therefor to many god damn people everywhere!!!!


I suggest you take a drive on Hwy 93 in Nevada and tell me again how overpopulated the planet is. Certainly there are a lot more people now than there ever was but there are HUGE swaths of this planet that are desolate.


----------



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

Steve-XtC said:


> Like I say, puzzling when you have so much more space than we do...


This is a broad generalization so please forgive me. Your land has long since been tamed, manicured and dominated, whereas the (US) still has large tracts of unfettered wildlands that support large predators capable of consuming humans. Just about every outdoor activity is available within these boundaries including hunting, fishing, 4WD, ATV, skiing, boulder trundling, and the opportunity to get lost or eaten by a mountain lion in places where you can only walk, or sometimes ride a bike. I think some fear that once lost, wilderness might never be regained, which may be one reason why some people are so touchy about ebikes in the US.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

Klurejr said:


> I would love to do some testing with an eBike in my regular trail system to see how much faster I could make the climbs when I have a motor assisting me.
> 
> To make a statement of the likes that only 65+ riders and those with handicaps are going to be riding eBikes on MUT's is a bit foolish don't you think? eBikes are being marketed and sold to younger people who just want to go faster as well. I don't see how that can be refuted unless someone has actual sales numbers for every single purchase of an eBike in the last 12 months that shows the age of the rider who purchased it and a reason along with the purchase for why the user wanted a motor on their mtb.
> 
> ...


Right - an ebike helps slower riders keep up with faster riders. Until faster riders get an ebike too.

Then what might the slower riders do to keep up? Just maybe....more power?

There is nothing at all wrong with all that, as long as people don't categorize them as bicycles.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

ALimon said:


> Tranquil experience? LOL C'mon man I like your posts but that was a terrible argument. There's a reason nothing is tranquil anymore.... The planet is over populated and therefor to many god damn people everywhere!!!!


There are a couple of trails I ride here in CO that I've never seen another person on. Not a hiker, equestrian, or cyclist.

While I agree that there are too many people, I don't feel it's necessary to make things MORE accessible. I'm fine with things being hard.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> You must live in California. Or probably you're joking.
> 
> Anyway you illustrate my point, the fact that there are still some quiet and tranquil places available is why I oppose e-bike=bicycle. Not that it matters much.


He lives in the UK according to one of his other posts.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Rivet said:


> I suggest you take a drive on Hwy 93 in Nevada and tell me again how overpopulated the planet is. Certainly there are a lot more people now than there ever was but there are HUGE swaths of this planet that are desolate.


Which is why it is so weird that people are looking to expand to other planets. Las Vegas was made from nothing, and there is room for hundreds of more Las Vegases. Also there is plenty of space for landfills. All of the trash for the entire US for the next 1000 years could be stored in a small dot on the map.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

rsilvers said:


> Which is why it is so weird that people are looking to expand to other planets. Las Vegas was made from nothing, and there is room for hundreds of more Las Vegases. Also there is plenty of space for landfills. All of the trash for the entire US for the next 1000 years could be stored in a small dot on the map.


I love this argument: There is plenty of space therefore plenty of room for people, like people exist in a self sustaining microcosm. Look at the logistics for Burning man some time. Just the basic infrastructure to support that many people in one location over a week is daunting. Imagine multiple cities in Nevada like Las Vegas. Where are they getting water? Electricity? Where are they disposing of their sewage?

It is more than landfills. It is the entire baggage that comes with people including how you feed them, how you deal with their waste and even how you deal with the dead. Each carries a burden that gets more and more unsustainable the more people you add to the mix. I mean the US was shipping our waste to china to dispose of, until china classified it as hazardous and has now made it much more difficult for us to dispose of.

I won't even get into the argument regarding e-bikes in the US, but I saw a person with an e-commuter on the back of their car driving closer to their job so they could ride it in. It can't get more insane than that.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

JACKL said:


> Right - an ebike helps slower riders keep up with faster riders. Until faster riders get an ebike too.


I don't know how it will play out but it would be very annoying if a common scenario arises where less skilled riders on ebikes are passing me on the straights and uphill then they're in the way on the downhill or technical stuff. So I think it will be a problem if less skilled riders on ebikes ride them around like people on regular bikes are in the way.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

rockcrusher said:


> Where are they getting water? Electricity? Where are they disposing of their sewage?.


I didn't mean to say it is easy to triple the population of the Earth so much as to say how silly it is to think inhabiting other planets is more practical than making it work on Earth.


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

Unfortunately for you the "lies" you speak of only become lies in the narrow prism of class 1 ebikes.

This thread is about why ebikes are touchy in the US, and ignoring higher powered / throttled class exceeding ebikes that do exist and are on trails, is a bit like ignoring the elephant in the room.

To wit, were eu/us class 1s the defacto standard, I will happily share the trails with you. Unfortunately, there is no standard and as such in the US the Federal Government which is the largest land managing entity for multi user trails (MUTs) and strapped for cash and personnel made the easier decision to, rightly or wrongly classify (depending on your personal flavor of koolaid), all ebikes as motorized vis a vis non-motorized MUTs access.

Given the current wild west environment and infancy of ebikes, I feel the ebikes are coming prognosticators will be sorely sad if they learned the wrong lessons from Mtbs history and fail to balance their efforts for increased access advocacy with their desire to poach. Which is what the chicken little anti e crowd sees as a self fulfilling prophecy that will lead not only to no ebike access but potentially mtb access endangerment too.

And that is my slightly winded take on why ebikes are touchy in the US.

There is sage advice throughout this thread for a best scenario though:

1. Trail Advocacy (see all of Walt's well reasoned posts).
2. Ebikers need to drive the market and manufacturers away from Class 2 and higher and establish emtb=class 1 period and anything higher is an emoped and anything with throttle an emoto (Good luck...). And it would go along way towards goodwill if ebikers were diligently self policing (read public shaming) individuals that ride anything but a class 1.
3. Fight club that shiz! Sorry to say but pointing to mtb history of poaching is nothing more than illuminating past bad behavior, which I am sure you learned in kindergarten, does not justify your current/future bad behavior. I.e Keep it on the down low and make #1 the "public" image of e-mtbers.

Good luck, having ridden a giant and a levo on singletrack they are curios to me. I can see a future with many or none. It all depends on ebikers themselves now. Regardless, for the US this will continue to be a touchy topic, so don't be your own worst enemy and alienate potential allies you will need if legal trail access and widespread acceptance is the long term goal.

I know ebikes are all about "speed and power" especially class 1, so try restraint and go for tortoise over hare. It will improve your chances, but remember access gained is often at a glacial pace so hunker down for the long haul or enjoy your novelty fad. We don't know which it will be, good luck moving the conversation in your desired direction.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

rsilvers said:


> I didn't mean to say it is easy to triple the population of the Earth so much as to say how silly it is to think inhabiting other planets is more practical than making it work on Earth.


Oh totally. However our desire to colonize other planets is probably seated in the knowledge that we will eventually screw it all up anyway and at least we could start over somewhere else and probably make the same mistakes again. We are not very good a learning from our mistakes.


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

And I wouldnt be suprised to learn the trail you are referring to includes motos, ala Greens at Monarch Crest. Ah the delicious Irony, so for all the ebikers that poo poo the idea of moto trails as a valid alternative to MUTs access, should really look to the CO high country to realize there are some epic gems to enjoy while you dilligently work towards expanded trail access.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Velocipedist said:


> 2. Ebikers need to drive the market and manufacturers away from Class 2 and higher and establish emtb=class 1 period and anything higher is an emoped and anything with throttle an emoto (Good luck...). And it would go along way towards goodwill if ebikers were diligently self policing (read public shaming) individuals that ride anything but a class 1.


If class-1 e-bikes were allowed starting tomorrow, then makers would focus on class-1 e-bikes as people would want to buy that kind.

On the other hand, if class-1 and class-2 are equally banned, then only poachers will be riding on certain trails - and the rest of the people on the road, and market demand for class-2 will be much greater.


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

You seem to not understand advocacy, for instance many alumni of many fine institutions have sucessfully pushed their Universities investments to divest from the fossil fuels industry. 

In that sense I would envision passionate ebikers would vocally and financially drive home their desire for clear segmentation to occur e.g emtb = class 1 emoped= class 2&3 emoto anything higher / throttle engaged. 

That kind of sensible advocacy paired with demonstrated trail stewardship will be more likely to improve your chances of gaining the access to MUTs that you too obviously covet. So please stop being disingenous as your desire for access betray your words while your actions demonstrate you understand the inherent value of non motorized MUTs. 

You must see how simply arguing that the market will dictate and if only you had instantaneous access to all trails would class 1s come to to lead the market is weak and without merit. The horse is out of the stable / that ship has sailed, the FS and BLM are united in polciy that adheres to the Forest Service Travel Rule and interprets all ebikes as motorized. Arguing this point seems akin to arguing that the weather is cold or hot i.e. at what point do you not accept reality and then simply on a friggin coat.

Your efforts will bear more fruit when you understand the ground you are trying to grow on.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

I think we all have different trail experiences. Where I ride, and I rode today, I did not see a single other bike or person. It would have made no different to anyone if I rode my Giant Trance or a Focus Jam2. And if I passed a dozen people, it also would have made no difference. Compare that to the dog walkers with unleashed dogs, which are very common, and they actually do impact me negatively with their poop, chasing, and random movements. We all need to share the trails, so when I see a walker, I give them the right of way to make sure they don't have a bad experience from seeing a bike.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

rsilvers said:


> I think we all have different trail experiences. Where I ride, and I rode today, I did not see a single other bike or person. It would have made no different to anyone if I rode my Giant Trance or a Focus Jam2. And if I passed a dozen people, it also would have made no difference. Compare that to the dog walkers with unleashed dogs, which are very common, and they actually do impact me negatively with their poop, chasing, and random movements. We all need to share the trails, so when I see a walker, I give them the right of way to make sure they don't have a bad experience from seeing a bike.


Thanks for the anecdote. It's irrelevant.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

This is not going to be resolved in the favor of e-bikes. There will not be enough e-bike advocacy to get substantive changes. People will just ride them, and no one will care if they are discreet looking, except a few former hall-monitor authoritarian types.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Silentfoe said:


> Thanks for the anecdote. It's irrelevant.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


His anecdotes are as relevant as the ones you and everyone else shares on this forum. No need to be rude.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I agree that there are unlikely to be problems with slow, polite middle-aged men riding on trails with very few other trail users. 

Those folks could be riding ICE dirtbikes for all anyone really cares. 

However, for those of us who ride on trails where we encounter many other users, many of whom are *not* old polite slow guys, adding power/speed to the mix might not be a good idea. 

This is why I think local control over access is the best solution. There are a ton of trails in Moab that would be awesome for e-bikes and on which you'll never see a hiker. But the BLM has a blanket ban. Dumb. Likewise there are state-owned trails here in UT that are super crowded where e-bikes are allowed and the results aren't likely to be pretty even if the only direct effect is more crowding. Equally dumb.

This is setting aside the problem of there being no real enforcement of the various class 1/2/3 standards from either the manufacturer or land management ends, of course. If batteries get significantly better and people are out there on 5kW "bikes", all bets are off. 

-Walt


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

rockcrusher said:


> I won't even get into the argument regarding e-bikes in the US, but I saw a person with an e-commuter on the back of their car driving closer to their job so they could ride it in. It can't get more insane than that.


Judge much?

I carry my ebike on my car the first eight miles of my 20 mile commute because I would most likely be killed if I rode the first eight miles.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Walt said:


> I agree that there are unlikely to be problems with slow, polite middle-aged men riding on trails with very few other trail users.
> 
> Those folks could be riding ICE dirtbikes for all anyone really cares.
> 
> ...


Around here in Orange County, CA, we have all sorts of users all the time. Horses, runners, hikers, bikers... Never had any issues either on my regular bike or the e-bike. Then again, I'm one of the slow, polite middle-aged types... It may be different with younger types, like you say, however.

Still, I rarely see younger or older folks being jerks on the trails around here... My guess is jerks are gonna be jerks no matter what they're riding, whether that be e-assist bikes or regular bikes.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

AGarcia said:


> His anecdotes are as relevant as the ones you and everyone else shares on this forum. No need to be rude.


Nice try. I don't share anecdotes to back up my point because...they're irrelevant.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Silentfoe said:


> Nice try. I don't share anecdotes to back up my point because...they're irrelevant.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


See post #889.... for one.... But what do I know? Maybe my dictionary is different than yours, so my understanding of the term "anecdote" may be off.

"Fyi, I'm a 100% disabled veteran. As a guide, I've worked with the National Ability center in Park City Utah. Guess what they don't offer in any way, shape, or form there? Ebikes. The disabled vets use hand cycles, modified bicycles, off road wheel chairs or similar. Not a single one is powered by a motor. Disable vets in general want to accomplish something, they don't want it handed to them. "


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

AGarcia said:


> See post #899.... for one.... But what do I know? Maybe my dictionary is different than yours, so my understanding of the term "anecdote" may be off.


I'm on Tapatalk. I have no idea what post #899 is. Did I cite an example of something? Did I say that because of something I experienced, that everything else would mirror that experience?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Silentfoe said:


> I'm on Tapatalk. I have no idea what post #899 is. Did I cite an example of something? Did I say that because of something I experienced, that everything else would mirror that experience?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Sorry, 889.

Point is, all of us here are, in one manner or another, sharing our experiences and perspectives. In that respect, a large part of our experiences are anecdotal to others on this forum. No shame, harm or crime in that.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

AGarcia said:


> Sorry, 889.
> 
> Point is. all of us here are, in one manner or another, sharing our experiences and perspectives.


Very true. But as I said, when you share an experience, and then equate all other experiences will be based of that single encounter...

Plus, his point is irrelevant to the topic

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

silentfoe said:


> nice try. I don't back up my points because...they're irrelevant.
> 
> Sent from my sm-g955u using tapatalk


fify


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

EricTheDood said:


> fify


You're cute.

Funny enough, I'm the one of the few here who actually works very closely with land managers. I know their reasonings. When I share them, and the why behind their policies, you all just brush them off. And that's the answer to the OP's question.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Silentfoe said:


> Funny enough, I'm the one of the few here who actually works very closely with land managers. I know their reasonings. When I share them, and the why behind their policies, you all just brush them off. And that's the answer to the OP's question.


And funny enough, I'm one of the few around here with a law degree and substantial experience interpreting state and federal law. And when I share my understanding of laws and regulations, based on substantial experience, you just brush it off....


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

So, how would people feel about a "disabled" (their definition, not mine) veteran riding a Class 1 e-bike at 20mph, uphill, on cliff edge, non-directional trails in Moab? 

Sound good?



Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

AGarcia said:


> And funny enough, I'm one of the few around here with a law degree and substantial experience interpreting state and federal law. And when I share my understanding, based on substantial experience, you just brush it off....


No, I think it's funny honestly. You are playing the lawyer semantics game with a federal policy. Let me know when you take them on. I'll bring the popcorn.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

silentfoe said:


> no, i think it's funny honestly. You are playing the lawyer semantics game with a federal policy. Let me know when you take them on. I'll bring the popcorn.


nvmd.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

AGarcia said:


> I can assure you it's no game. I make a pretty decent living at it.


Like I said. Let me know. They'll love it when you tell them ebikes aren't self propelled.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Silentfoe said:


> Like I said. Let me know. They'll love it when you tell them ebikes aren't self propelled.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Enjoy your next ride. I'll do the same.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> You must live in California. Or probably you're joking.
> 
> Anyway you illustrate my point, the fact that there are still some quiet and tranquil places available is why I oppose e-bike=bicycle. Not that it matters much.


Sadly I do live in CA. But Durango is in my future!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Walt said:


> I can take an e-bike like the Kenovo, which is for all practical purposes a DH sled, and I can ride it up anything I want (really fast, too), instead of pushing my actual DH sled up there for 2 hours at 2mph.
> 
> Think I'll be faster on the DH than I would on my XC bike?
> 
> ...


NO. You will not be faster on the dh. A LINE is my favorite trail... I would destroy an e dh bike on a trail bike all day long.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

ALimon said:


> NO. You will not be faster on the dh. A LINE is my favorite trail... I would destroy an e dh bike on a trail bike all day long.


You should read what he actually wrote.

If people aren't faster on downhills with 180mm of suspension, slack/long/low geo and DH tires, compared to an XC bike, why would they ride the bigger bike at all?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

J.B. Weld said:


> This is a broad generalization so please forgive me. Your land has long since been tamed, manicured and dominated,


No apology needed ...



> whereas the (US) still has large tracts of unfettered wildlands that support large predators capable of consuming humans. Just about every outdoor activity is available within these boundaries including hunting, fishing, 4WD, ATV, skiing, boulder trundling, and the opportunity to get lost or eaten by a mountain lion in places where you can only walk, or sometimes ride a bike. I think some fear that once lost, wilderness might never be regained, which may be one reason why some people are so touchy about ebikes in the US.


But the reasons/method of the taming/manicures and domination has (almost if I can generalise) nothing to do with any of those activities....

Even a few 4WD's and such is pretty minor compared with farming, logging and housing/industrial developments...

Mostly the recreation is following the taming... rather than the other way. 
At least here in the UK its also partially reversing .. at least it's driving sustainable native species (though I'm not keen on Wolves and Bears but trees are good) and driving preservation of various raptors etc.

I know the scale is different but recreation does have some positive effects on the degree of taming close to inhabited areas. (As opposed to true wilderness)


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rsilvers said:


> I think we all have different trail experiences. Where I ride, and I rode today, I did not see a single other bike or person. It would have made no different to anyone if I rode my Giant Trance or a Focus Jam2. And if I passed a dozen people, it also would have made no difference. Compare that to the dog walkers with unleashed dogs, which are very common, and they actually do impact me negatively with their poop, chasing, and random movements. We all need to share the trails, so when I see a walker, I give them the right of way to make sure they don't have a bad experience from seeing a bike.


 So where do you ride your e bike in MA? Freetown and Foxboro are too far? Poaching trails?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rsilvers said:


> This is not going to be resolved in the favor of e-bikes. There will not be enough e-bike advocacy to get substantive changes. People will just ride them, and no one will care if they are discreet looking, except a few former hall-monitor authoritarian types.


 Until you get you the trails shut down or your motor vehicle confiscated. Then get slapped with a fine.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Until you get you the trails shut down or your motor vehicle confiscated. Then get slapped with a fine.


If he isn't causing any problems on the trails, who's going to go after him?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

EricTheDood said:


> If he isn't causing any problems on the trails, who's going to go after him?


Mountain bikers will. We self police or we don't have nice things.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Where I envision this going out here in crowded California is that there will eventually be a huge pushback on e-bikes as they proliferate on trails. I see that there will need to be some sort of a registration/inspection policy enacted similar the the "green sticker" program for OHV's. (Study the history of the Chappie-Z'berg legislation of 1971)

This could lead the way for the funding of e-bike trails/riding areas.

It is not a stretch that e-bikes will be inspected for compliance before entering these areas; much as moto's are currently being inspected for spark arrestors and decibel limits. Probably an annual tech inspection with a color-coded confirmation sticker.

Of course those e-bikes over 750 watts will need the moped registration or even green stickers but that's already part of CA law.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Does Robo cop ride a mtb? 😂


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> If he isn't causing any problems on the trails, who's going to go after him?


 Motor vehicles are illegal for the most part in MA on off road multi use trails. The HOH( hatefull old hikers) Hikers of ( some) clubs. And anyone who wants to see the trails stay open and in good shape. One of my neighbors kids( 16 or so) got a dirt bike. Rode it around on the local conservation area trails. Not legal at all. Signs at the entrances stating that too. I took the high road, had conversation. Seems quite a few neighbors had some issues, noise and speed etc. Called environmental police, set up a sting. 2 atvs, 2 dirt bikes, impounded and riders fined. So there's that.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

At 16, I would have been the guy on the dirt bike!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> NO. You will not be faster on the dh. A LINE is my favorite trail... I would destroy an e dh bike on a trail bike all day long.


Yes, in bizarro mountain bike world, motors don't make you faster and neither does suspension...

Seriously, what on earth are you talking about?

-Walt


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Walt said:


> Yes, in bizarro mountain bike world, motors don't make you faster and neither does suspension...
> 
> Seriously, what on earth are you talking about?
> 
> -Walt







More Travel... BIG ENGINE slower than a DH bike top to bottom on a DH that is known for being open... hence the 29ers this year

Of course road/track racing motorbikes are faster as MTB's so far only do 140mph and there are plenty of road bikes go faster than that on smooth tarmac.

Even the 11th fastest Ducati 1098S, pastes an MTB at 169 miles per hour ... the 1069cc 160 HP engine makes it a whopping 29 mph faster... though if you think you can get that down A Line you might be able to raise a lot of sponsorship to give it a try.

And of course a 500W e-bikes assist is huge 0.67HP... so not really far off the 160HP of the Ducati if you say it real quick...

https://themysteriousworld.com/top-10-fastest-bikes-in-the-world/


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Cool video! Kinda irrelevant since I'm talking about MUTs, though.

Regardless, my point is that you can take a DH bike up *anything you want* if you've got a motor. Is that a good thing for mountain biking trail access? I know my own answer (based on what happens to trails that can be shuttled in the various places I live - they get closed to bikes pretty quick, or made uphill-only), I guess you can come to your own conclusions.

Maybe it would be easier to imagine what would happen if there was a chairlift to the top of every one of your favorite trails. Would that make the experience better? How do you think hikers and trail runners and families would like it?

-Walt


----------



## MJC1973 (Dec 12, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> Please. List the "lies" you are seeing here concerning emtb's.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


No thanks. I've read your posts. Not worth my time to reply to your request. You seem mean.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> At 16, I would have been the guy on the dirt bike!


That's my fear, opening the gateway for 16 year olds on cheap but powerful Chinese/modified ebikes that are not easily distinguishable from legal ebikes with no one policing the trail.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

How many cheap wal-mart mtbs do you see on the trails? I never see them where I ride. Same will hold true for China crap Emtb’s. JMO.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

Gutch said:


> How many cheap wal-mart mtbs do you see on the trails? I never see them where I ride. Same will hold true for China crap Emtb's. JMO.


All the time.....I always wonder if these people are going to be the ones I read about on the Fire Authority Twitter feed about having to be air lifted after a crash.


----------



## Mt.Biker E (Mar 25, 2006)

Velocipedist said:


> Unfortunately for you the "lies" you speak of only become lies in the narrow prism of class 1 ebikes.
> 
> This thread is about why ebikes are touchy in the US, and ignoring higher powered / throttled class exceeding ebikes that do exist and are on trails, is a bit like ignoring the elephant in the room.
> 
> ...


Good Post!

this was a quick search while eating lunch at work and not digging deep into things. 
hacking mods of a Levo and other threads on speed hacks & upgrades




https://electricbikereview.com/forum/threads/turbo-levo-tuning.9995/page-3
Specialized turbo X modding??? | Pedelecs - Electric Bike Community
https://www.ebiketuning.com/


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Mt.Biker E said:


> Good Post!
> 
> this was a quick search while eating lunch at work and not digging deep into things.
> hacking mods of a Levo and other threads on speed hacks & upgrades
> ...


Apparently this makes it so you will "loose your warranty".

I don't know exactly how one would loose a warranty but he's lost all credibility before he even starts.

Ah, and then the video. Yup.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Moe Ped said:


> Where I envision this going out here in crowded California is that there will eventually be a huge pushback on e-bikes as they proliferate on trails. I see that there will need to be some sort of a registration/inspection policy enacted similar the the "green sticker" program for OHV's. (Study the history of the Chappie-Z'berg legislation of 1971)
> 
> This could lead the way for the funding of e-bike trails/riding areas.
> 
> ...


That's pretty much what I expect too as the technology advances and the populations increase where it's legal. Instead of the industry working with land managers to figure out the best way to manage emtbs in the future, assist them in doing that, and in so doing preserve more places where riding an emtb makes sense, it'll be the other way around. They'll lose access and end up with less in the long run.

Having been around at the beginning of mtbs, we could ride anywhere until there were enough mtbs to be annoying to all the other users, then we lost access, and in many of those places never got it back.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Harryman said:


> Having been around at the beginning of mtbs, we could ride anywhere until there were enough mtbs to be annoying to all the other users, then we lost access, and in many of those places never got it back.


History has a nasty habit of repeating itself!

1000 posts came faster than I expected; anybody game on predicting # 2000???

By the Ides of March?


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Steve-XtC said:


> And of course a 500W e-bikes assist is huge 0.67HP... so not really far off the 160HP of the Ducati if you say it real quick...


Correct.

In the grand scheme of things, 0.67hp and 160hp are both closer to zero than say, the energy released by an imploding star.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

honkinunit said:


> Judge much?
> 
> I carry my ebike on my car the first eight miles of my 20 mile commute because I would most likely be killed if I rode the first eight miles.


Yes I do. If you need a car to carry your bike to park and then ride in Seattle then you can get judged. It is wanton wastefulness. Drive a gas powered vehicle to ride an electrical vehicle to do something you could do without the electricity. In Seattle there are great bike paths and frankly riding is usually faster than driving, especially when you consider that parking is minimal and expensive.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Hey man, no need to judge so harshly. By the way, have you done the math on ebikes? I would guess they are more efficient then non-ebikes....https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...bBCMQFggyMAI&usg=AOvVaw0eBZqpxAJ-K-OdfeNdFbmn


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Linktung said:


> Hey man, no need to judge so harshly. By the way, have you done the math on ebikes? I would guess they are more efficient then non-ebikes....https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...bBCMQFggyMAI&usg=AOvVaw0eBZqpxAJ-K-OdfeNdFbmn


Yeah maybe if an e-bike was ridden at the same speed as a regular bike; but there's that old aero-drag-one-half-velocity-squared math thingy. I suspect that most e-bikes are ridden in such a manner that whatever food mpg they may be saving is lost to "breaking the wind".

There's a sizable body of work that shows that electric vehicles don't become "green" (carbon footprint-wise) until well into their service life; the recycling of modern batteries really hasn't been sorted out yet.

For the typical USA commute if you really want to save the planet carpool 4-up in a Prius. (or something like it)


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Oh just found someone who did the math, ebikes consume 2-4 times less primary energy than human riders eating a conventional diet.....The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles
PDFEbikes.ca › ca › Ebike_Energy
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...GBD4QFgglMAA&usg=AOvVaw3OdrBHHH2Xb8Gmjb66DzkA


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Linktung said:


> Oh just found someone who did the math, ebikes consume 2-4 times less primary energy than human riders eating a conventional diet.....The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles
> PDFEbikes.ca › ca › Ebike_Energy
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...GBD4QFgglMAA&usg=AOvVaw3OdrBHHH2Xb8Gmjb66DzkA


I tend to believe it. There is a TON of energy used to produce the food we eat, we just don't see it happening. Just turning uranium or coal or natural gas into electricity and then into forward motion is pretty efficient and straightforward.

I know the ~900 miles of commuting my wife has done on her e-bike in the last 3 months has saved us a lot in gas and wear and tear. I'm sure it has also massively reduced our overall energy consumption.

-Walt


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Oh just found someone who did the math, ebikes consume 2-4 times less primary energy than human riders eating a conventional diet.....The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles
> PDFEbikes.ca › ca › Ebike_Energy
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...GBD4QFgglMAA&usg=AOvVaw3OdrBHHH2Xb8Gmjb66DzkA


Hmm, so ebiking requires less energy overall yet we hear all these claims that they provide more exercise&#8230;

Math is hard.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Moe Ped said:


> For the typical USA commute if you really want to save the planet carpool 4-up in a Prius. (or something like it)


As a human, there is very little we can do to save the planet. Biking and planting trees are the two activities that actually do make a difference. Even though biking might not be more efficient then carpooling in a Prius, it is still better for the planet. Everytime I ride it could inspire another person to commute by bike. Eat locally and ride a pedal assist or unassisted bike. Bikes do not rely on automobile infrastructure which is also a big drain of resources. Someone told me the other day that cyclists need to pay for the roads. My reply was to dig them up and replace roads with singletrack and trees. Then I will gladly pay more in road taxes then the average motorist.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

chazpat said:


> Hmm, so ebiking requires less energy overall yet we hear all these claims that they provide more exercise&#8230;
> 
> Math is hard.


I guess there are situations when an ebike can provide more exercise, like if I ride with assist off. An ebike gets people more exercise if their other option is driving or not riding.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Linktung said:


> Oh just found someone who did the math, ebikes consume 2-4 times less primary energy than human riders eating a conventional diet.....The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles
> PDFEbikes.ca › ca › Ebike_Energy
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...GBD4QFgglMAA&usg=AOvVaw3OdrBHHH2Xb8Gmjb66DzkA


BTW I'm quite familiar with that 14 year old college term paper; Justin went on to found Grin Technologies of Cycle Analyst e-bike computer fame. Good stuff; I'm a customer.

He make an interesting first-order approximation in comparing inefficiencies; did you notice that best-case local energy and local food yields a near draw in comparing e-bikes to regular bikes? And guess what, as I mentioned before it all goes out the window if the e-bike is ridden faster and BTW this is mentioned in that paper.

E-bikes being 2 to 4 times more efficient is B.S. IMHO.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Ebikes rock for commuting. I wish we could get everyone who lives within 20 miles of work to ride one. If only the infrastructure existed and inclement weather didn't make people wuss out.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Linktung said:


> I guess there are situations when an ebike can provide more exercise, like if I ride with assist off. An ebike gets people more exercise if their other option is driving or not riding.


Yes but then the ebike is not being consuming less energy, it is consuming more. And I'm not too sure the author of that paper (it's on an ebike website btw) factored in that the rider is still going to need to consume calories, but I did skim.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Interesting paper, Linktung. So it costs more to produce food to eat than to produce the electrical parts and energy for the ebike. Actually kind of frightening, looking further into the future if/when electrical energy is cheap/abundant, to the point that humans will be seen super inefficient and have tasks be replaced by electricity based stuff, only retaining unique human traits, unless artificial general intelligence makes that obsolete too. xD

chaz, that's kind of like saying cycling provides more exercise than running/walking. Figure out why cyclists make that claim, despite the math saying otherwise...


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Whatcha do is get an e-bike with regen braking (see Grin Technologies) and pedal with the e-brakes on; then when you get home drain your batteries through a grid-tie inverter.

You've gotten your exercise and you've saved the planet.


----------



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

Linktung said:


> KHeJGBD4QFgglMAA&usg=AOvVaw3OdrBHHH2Xb8Gmjb66DzkA[/url]


That is flawed, I bet I consume the same or less calories riding 20 miles a day as the average person who drives (or ebikes) instead.


----------



## hobbit (Apr 23, 2007)

I ride a Levo, but don't think they provide more exercise in a straight comparison to a normal mtb. On a typical 2 hour ride I probably put the same effort on the Levo as my previous capra - the difference is that in that 2 hours I've covered 20 miles and 2500 ft of climbing instead of 10 miles and 1200 ft. Although I suppose if an ebike is actually getting you out instead of sitting on a couch you could argue it offers more exercise. Main thing for me is my 2 hour loop now has 2500 ft of descents rather than 1200 ft 😁


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Moe Ped said:


> BTW I'm quite familiar with that 14 year old college term paper; Justin went on to found Grin Technologies of Cycle Analyst e-bike computer fame. Good stuff; I'm a customer.
> 
> He make an interesting first-order approximation in comparing inefficiencies; did you notice that best-case local energy and local food yields a near draw in comparing e-bikes to regular bikes? And guess what, as I mentioned before it all goes out the window if the e-bike is ridden faster and BTW this is mentioned in that paper.
> 
> E-bikes being 2 to 4 times more efficient is B.S. IMHO.


Oh cool, he sounds like an interesting fellow, and yeah I was surprised that he wrote that 14 years ago like ebikes were a big thing then. It makes me wonder if anything has changed since then. I know LI ion batteries have only gotten better.

It is a long paper and honestly I only skimmed it too. Frankly, I don't care either way, and yeah there are always going to be certain unknowns. As far as my commute goes it doesn't change much speed wise between assisted and unassisted. I go faster on the uphills while riding electric but the wind drag is fairly minimal at those speeds. My assisted bike also tracks better so there is less tire drag. Since we are on a mountain bike website too, aero drag isn't going to factor into a comparison versus assisted and unassisted. The heavier bike is going to provide more uphill drag though.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> That is flawed, I bet I consume the same or less calories riding 20 miles a day as the average person who drives (or ebikes) instead.


Sure, well technically all studies are flawed to some degree, but you can't expect all studies to use your experience as the only baseline. I ride assisted and unassisted so this study would make sense for me.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> That is flawed, I bet I consume the same or less calories riding 20 miles a day as the average person who drives (or ebikes) instead.


Exercise for weight loss has come under controversy based on how there's a cultural trend regarding "eating for recovery". People overly reward themselves with food/drink after completing strenuous exercise, going beyond negating the calorie burn.

Commuting 10 miles each way as a lifestyle doesn't necessarily come with such an appetite increase. When I commuted, co-workers were pretty shocked that I actually used my breaks and lunch to work out more. xD I had up to 1200 kcal for breakfast and had supper, without anything else.


----------



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

Linktung said:


> Since we are on a mountain bike website too, aero drag isn't going to factor into a comparison versus assisted and unassisted. The heavier bike is going to provide more uphill drag though.


Depends on a lot of things but surprisingly wind is often more of a factor than weight. At 250 watts on a 5% grade a 10mph headwind will slow you down more than 20 extra pounds. Bike Calculator


----------



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

Linktung said:


> I ride assisted and unassisted so this study would make sense for me.


Do you eat less when you ride while assisted?


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

No doubt about it. I drink less energy juice as well.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Linktung said:


> Oh cool, he sounds like an interesting fellow, and yeah I was surprised that he wrote that 14 years ago like ebikes were a big thing then. It makes me wonder if anything has changed since then. I know LI ion batteries have only gotten better.
> 
> It is a long paper and honestly I only skimmed it too. Frankly, I don't care either way, and yeah there are always going to be certain unknowns. As far as my commute goes it doesn't change much speed wise between assisted and unassisted. I go faster on the uphills while riding electric but the wind drag is fairly minimal at those speeds. My assisted bike also tracks better so there is less tire drag. Since we are on a mountain bike website too, aero drag isn't going to factor into a comparison versus assisted and unassisted. The heavier bike is going to provide more uphill drag though.


Tracks better? Can you elaborate?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

He may mean that they’re so damn heavy and with a 2.8 or 3.0 the Levo’s feel glued to the ground. Traction ahoy!


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

dv8zen said:


> Exercise for weight loss has come under controversy based on how there's a cultural trend regarding "eating for recovery". People overly reward themselves with food/drink after completing strenuous exercise, going beyond negating the calorie burn.


Yup. Same with diet soda.

I lost a ton of weight years ago when I was riding exclusively on the road. But that's expected when one rides 15-20 hours a week.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Well, they have show diet soda can have the opposite effect for reasons other than people thinking they saved calories so they can consume more. They trick your body into thinking it is getting sweet stuff and then when it doesn't, you crave more. Or something like that.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

So I see the Levo is still being used as the whipping boy by the purists. Incorrectly I might add. The Levo has no power in the upper speeds. Even if you mod it to higher [flat land] speed, it falls on it's face at the first sign of a hill. Don't get me wrong, it has oodles of power in the lower gears. It just doesn't have any power at high speed. I've done extensive testing on asphalt and it will ride at around 10 mph at 6% grade. The bike also has to be pedaled to get assist. Riding downhill at speed is nothing like riding uphill at speed while trying to pedal. Body position is way different, then there are the pedal strikes, getting bounced out of your seat, traction differences, etc. etc. Rumors that a bike like that is going to get trails shut down are laughable. Then there is the whole derate thing because of heat. Purists don't even know that on a hot summer day the Levo motor will get hot and derate. It would be kinda hard to roost up some trail when you are in derate at 50% power LOL.

Anyway, I haven't checked in a for a while and I see nothing has changed much around here on mtbr. Same old negativity. I got around 2000 miles on my ebike and my real world experience is much different. Every time I stop and talk to hikers they are really excited about my bike. Sometimes I get heckled by a mountain runner, sometimes by women riders. Luckily the ebike can quickly leave those types behind. Some riders are really interested when I tell them that my wife has an ebike and that there is no way she could ride in the mountains without one. It has been great for our marriage. I've had a guy that is older than a dinosaur pass me on his ebike. My first thought wasn't, "who does this guy think he is". It was, "that is really cool". I hope I can get out and still ride when I am that age. The other day I tried to keep up a race quality dude on a regular bike on a technical trail that was mostly flat. The dude totally dropped me and my ebike. Of course he was sweating his ars off and I was quite comfortable. Having an ebike doesn't mean you automatically have the skills to ride fast. 
Cheers.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

The posters against Ebikes on this forum are mtbrs where the emtb is banned in their areas and they fear if they are allowed, it could jeopardize mtb trail access. Then there’s the eletist riders that drink too much Starbucks. There is also negativity on the forum over emtbs, particularly the huge wattage Frankenbikes. (Which are extremely rare) I believe in time with more education, we’ll see more of the 250w Pedelecs showing up. I’m not sure if I was legal riding on a deserted beach at 7am on my Levo, but man was it fun as crap.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

I believe the such anti-ebike consumer response will direct the trend of ebike design to be more simplified and invisible. Blur the line between normal bikes and emtbs further, with more overlap.

The full-size heavy ebike as we know it might just evolve into a robust gearbox emtb.


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

This thread is about why ebikes are touchy in the US, and ignoring higher powered / throttled class exceeding ebikes that do exist and are on trails, is a bit like ignoring the elephant in the room.

To wit, were eu/us class 1s the defacto standard, I will happily share the trails with you. Unfortunately, there is no standard and as such in the US the Federal Government which is the largest land managing entity for multi user trails (MUTs) and strapped for cash and personnel made the easier decision to, rightly or wrongly classify (depending on your personal flavor of koolaid), all ebikes as motorized vis a vis non-motorized MUTs access.

Given the current wild west environment and infancy of ebikes, I feel the ebikes are coming prognosticators will be sorely sad if they learned the wrong lessons from Mtbs history and fail to balance their efforts for increased access advocacy with their desire to poach. Which is what the chicken little anti e crowd sees as a self fulfilling prophecy that will lead not only to no ebike access but potentially mtb access endangerment too.

And that is my slightly winded take on why ebikes are touchy in the US.

There is sage advice throughout this thread for a best scenario though:

1. Trail Advocacy (see all of Walt's well reasoned posts).
2. Ebikers need to drive the market and manufacturers away from Class 2 and higher and establish emtb=class 1 period and anything higher is an emoped and anything with throttle an emoto (Good luck...). And it would go along way towards goodwill if ebikers were diligently self policing (read public shaming) individuals that ride anything but a class 1.
3. Fight club that shiz! Sorry to say but pointing to mtb history of poaching is nothing more than illuminating past bad behavior, which I am sure you learned in kindergarten, does not justify your current/future bad behavior. I.e Keep it on the down low and make #1 the "public" image of e-mtbers.

Good luck, having ridden a giant and a levo on singletrack they are curios to me. I can see a future with many or none. It all depends on ebikers themselves now. Regardless, for the US this will continue to be a touchy topic, so don't be your own worst enemy and alienate potential allies you will need if legal trail access and widespread acceptance is the long term goal.

I know ebikes are all about "speed and power" especially class 1, so try restraint and go for tortoise over hare. It will improve your chances, but remember access gained is often at a glacial pace so hunker down for the long haul or enjoy your novelty fad. We don't know which it will be, good luck moving the conversation in your desired direction.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Videos like this aren't making the case for trail advocacy any easier. People have diff mtb riding styles. One style might be described as go fast and lock-up the rear wheel in turns hooliganism... (ex. 5:58 and at least 2 more in this vid)


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

When I started riding in our main area the motorcycles, mountain bikers, hikers and equestrians all used the same trails. Then the motorcycles got banned. then a bunch of trails got shut down to mtb. If ebikes took off I could see more closures. I blame Imba for this. The change of trails from XC Tech to groomers everywhere so anyone with a credit card can be a mountain biker. If we were still riding old school then ebikes would not be a problem.
I think of the rise of ebike commuters and shudder. I get accosted regularly by co-workers about the inconsiderate roadies that generate road rage, and think how bad it will become. Then maybe in the future if we have ebikes everywhere we can actually become a cycling culture, where motorists actually pay attention to what they are doing.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

Looks fun but how can you see that video and say they belong on the same trails


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

dv8zen said:


> Videos like this aren't making the case for trail advocacy any easier. People have diff mtb riding styles. One style might be described as go fast and lock-up the rear wheel in turns hooliganism... (ex. 5:58 and at least 2 more in this vid)


This video 100% illustrates what we're experiencing at CA's Henry W Coe SP with the majority of e-bikers. Young and healthy, having great fun and shredding it. E-biking tends to bring out the skid-kiddie behavior. So far e-bikes are fitting in OK but that could all come crashing down (pun intended) with one collision with another park user.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

I saw a video of a 9000 watt ebike it would be hard not to ride that thing like a jackass for most.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

dv8zen said:


> Videos like this aren't making the case for trail advocacy any easier. People have diff mtb riding styles. One style might be described as go fast and lock-up the rear wheel in turns hooliganism... (ex. 5:58 and at least 2 more in this vid)


FWIW, they're riding on the Rainbow trail, one of the many moto legal singletrack trails we have in Colorado. It's mostly downhill where they were, except for crossing drainages, so I doubt they were riding substantially faster than they do on their normal bikes except in short sections. I'd also chalk up their skidding to being on unfamiliar and likely rental bikes, it didn't look intentional to me. For sure, they had them pegged, which is how I'd ride one too on that trail.

I couldn't help but chuckle at the end when they were talking about if it might be possible to bypass the speed limiter...... Yeah, like that's not going to happen, lol


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

Here is the poster child for why it's touchy


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Yeah, I can see loads of people building that and destroying local trails. <sarcasm>


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

With 514000 view on how to build this someone has to be thinking about it


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I can't think of many better places for an e-bike than the Rainbow trail south of 285. It is pretty not-fun on a normal mountain bike, and very fun on a moto. And totally legal. I'm not sure I can recall ever seeing a hiker on that section of trail.

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Harryman said:


> FWIW, they're riding on the Rainbow trail, one of the many moto legal singletrack trails we have in Colorado. It's mostly downhill where they were, except for crossing drainages, so I doubt they were riding substantially faster than they do on their normal bikes except in short sections. I'd also chalk up their skidding to being on unfamiliar and likely rental bikes, it didn't look intentional to me. For sure, they had them pegged, which is how I'd ride one too on that trail.


Yeah, that didn't look any different than how I'd expect a couple decent mountain bikers would ride that trail. Looked like a hoot to me!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

rockcrusher said:


> Oh totally. However our desire to colonize other planets is probably seated in the knowledge that we will eventually screw it all up anyway and at least we could start over somewhere else and probably make the same mistakes again. We are not very good a learning from our mistakes.


let's pray the human race never escapes from Earth to spread its inequity elsewhere.

C.S. Lewis


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

It’s funny listening to everyone’s opinions/solutions to ebikes as to where they belong. And as your discussing the topic it seems like new ebikes are showing up by the minute from practically every manufacturer. It’s so apparent as to what is happening. I think they’re coming and coming fast wether any of us like it or not. It won’t be long before they are the majority either. That day is quickly closing in. The discussion one day will be “what do we do with non ebikes?” Where should we give them access? Very interesting times on the way.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> It's funny listening to everyone's opinions/solutions to ebikes as to where they belong. And as your discussing the topic it seems like new ebikes are showing up by the minute from practically every manufacturer. It's so apparent as to what is happening. I think they're coming and coming fast wether any of us like it or not. It won't be long before they are the majority either. That day is quickly closing in. The discussion one day will be "what do we do with non ebikes?" Where should we give them access? Very interesting times on the way.


Motorized bikes have been around for a long time yet lots of us choose to ride actual bicycles. Yes, I know ebikes are very low powered motors and class 1 requires the rider to pedal. But plenty of us will still choose to ride actual bicycles because we're not looking for an "assisted" experience.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> It's so apparent as to what is happening. I think they're coming and coming fast wether any of us like it or not. It won't be long before they are the majority either. That day is quickly closing in. .


Sure, just like Segways.

As far as real bikes being banned because e-bikes get popular - you don't have any actual experience with access and advocacy issues do you?


----------



## hobbit (Apr 23, 2007)

Even though I ride a Levo, I can't see ebikes becoming the norm as they will always be heavier and more expensive, ( albeit less so over time) and will never be first choice for a sport that for many focuses on fitness and often an element of competition.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Since we are weighing in on our crystal ball, I’m going to predict 2:1 mtb to emtb within the next 5 years, providing more trails open up to emtbs!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Since we are weighing in on our crystal ball, I'm going to predict 2:1 mtb to emtb within the next 5 years, providing more trails open up to emtbs!


2:1 sales I'm assuming you mean (there's no way in the world we're ever going to end up with that ratio out on the trails)? So if mtb sales figures remain roughly flat (I know - assumption) you're thinking ~16,000,000 e-mtbs sold in the US in 2022? Seems pretty high to me, any idea how many units they're moving now?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

hobbit said:


> Even though I ride a Levo, I can't see ebikes becoming the norm as they will always be heavier and more expensive, ( albeit less so over time) and will never be first choice for a sport that for many focuses on fitness and often an element of competition.


More expensive? 5k for an ebike. About the same for a carbon trail bike. Heavier? For now. But not forever. Elon Musk says he has a battery that will last 3x longer than what's available today and weighs as much a full water bottle. I don't have a dog in the ebike fight as many here do, I'm just observing what's happening, I also have a few friends in the industry and my conclusion is that e bikes are the future. The next generation of riders/consumers will have the final say anyways.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> More expensive? 5k for an ebike. About the same for a carbon trail bike. Heavier? For now. But not forever. Elon Musk says he has a battery that will last 3x longer than what's available today and weighs as much a full water bottle. I don't have a dog in the ebike fight as many here do, I'm just observing what's happening, I also have a few friends in the industry and my conclusion is that e bikes are the future. The next generation of riders/consumers will have the final say anyways.


 Guess you're still riding your moped to go to the betamax store? Yes, technology does change, however motorized access for all trails? Hardly. Seems the land managers/ land ownwers and rule makers will have the final say.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> More expensive? 5k for an ebike. About the same for a carbon trail bike. Heavier? For now. But not forever. Elon Musk says he has a battery that will last 3x longer than what's available today and weighs as much a full water bottle. I don't have a dog in the ebike fight as many here do, I'm just observing what's happening, I also have a few friends in the industry and my conclusion is that e bikes are the future. The next generation of riders/consumers will have the final say anyways.


No, as always, the land managers and general public (99% of whom do not ride mountain bikes) will have the final say. No matter how rad you think e-bikes are, the question of access isn't determined by radness, or by popularity either. It's determined by whether land managers think the vehicle belongs on the trail with other users.

And to be fair, it's going to be VERY hard to overturn a lot of the existing bans.

-Walt


----------



## DL723 (Sep 25, 2017)

USA E-Bike Market Doubles in Units and Value

Growth is there but who knows how long it will be sustained. But it does seem like one of the faster growing segments for bikes so naturally companies are going to hit that segment hard for the near future. Kind of like how camera companies went all in on mirrorless when dslr sales started to stall


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> 2:1 sales I'm assuming you mean (there's no way in the world we're ever going to end up with that ratio out on the trails)? So if mtb sales figures remain roughly flat (I know - assumption) you're thinking ~16,000,000 e-mtbs sold in the US in 2022? Seems pretty high to me, any idea how many units they're moving now?


I have no idea the numbers. ? What I was thinking is on the trail, where emtb's are legal, 5 years from now every 3rd bike is electric. I don't think that's too crazy. Maybe?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> More expensive? 5k for an ebike. About the same for a carbon trail bike.


$5000 carbon trail bikes are not 'the norm' in real life.


----------



## DL723 (Sep 25, 2017)

I think the emphasis is hard vs impossible. Not saying I think it’s a great idea but I’ve already heard from different park services, including the National Park service, that they are assessing how ebikes fit in. Considering these park services already consider them motorized vehicles and ban them, doesn’t seem like it’s a closed book. 

All it takes is a few federal entities to modify their rules and others will slowly follow. Or it completely blows up in their faces and more people ban. It can go both ways.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I have no idea the numbers. 樂 What I was thinking is on the trail, where emtb's are legal, 5 years from now every 3rd bike is electric. I don't think that's too crazy. Maybe?


Yeah, pretty crazy. You'd not only have to be selling 1/3 as many new emtbs as mtbs (many many millions), on top of that, you'd also have to be moving enough of them to replace 1/3 of all the older bikes people still take to the trail on, and those quantities dwarf new unit numbers. So yeah...maybe if they start selling 25 to 30 million a year starting next year AND they're given nationwide blanket access you could be somewhere in the ballpark.

Looks like there were only ~150,000 ebikes of all types sold in the US in 2016, and emtbs are small slice of that number. Even generously pretending that half of the ebikes sold were mtb-style, you'd have to see sales increase by something like what, 60,000% almost immediately? No way.

I'm thinking emtbs are going to remain a permanent small niche segment, at least in the US.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> Yeah, pretty crazy. You'd not only have to be selling 1/3 as many new emtbs as mtbs (many many millions), on top of that, you'd also have to be moving enough of them to replace 1/3 of all the older bikes people still take to the trail on, and those quantities dwarf new unit numbers. So yeah...maybe if they start selling 25 to 30 million a year starting next year AND they're given nationwide blanket access you could be somewhere in the ballpark. I'm saying neither of those things have a chance in hell of happening though and emtbs are going to remain a permanent small niche segment, at least in the US.


I beg to differ. Why is every manufacturer producing them and why are they the largest growing sector? Even without trail access. What happens when more trails open up to them? I know if they were legal and light, it would be my main squeeze! And I'd give two shits less what anyone thought.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I beg to differ. Why is every manufacturer producing them and why are they the largest growing sector?


Just putting down the best numbers I could find without going crazy about it.
Feel free to share your estimates or correct mine if you think they're way off.

The reason they're the 'largest growing sector' is due to simple math and the way percentages work, right?

If you sold 10 units one year and 50 units the next year, your increased your sales by 500%. Wow - that sounds like incredible growth! But wait...! You still only sold 50 units. Meanwhile, say you sold 100 million units one year, then the next year you sold 110 million units. Oh no, only increased sales by 10%.  So sad!

Point being, it really doesn't take a lot of sales to show a lot of 'growth' when you're starting from basically zero.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Understood, but why all the R&D monies invested for such a small niche in the future?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

If my Evil Following MB was 5-7lbs heavier and had a 250w motor, trail access, it would definitely be my sole ride.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Gutch said:


> Since we are weighing in on our crystal ball, I'm going to predict 2:1 mtb to emtb within the next 5 years, providing more trails open up to emtbs!


I'm not sure how the emtb market is going to react when people realize they can only ride their $8000 motorized "mountain bike" on pavement and OHV roads only.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I’m not sure how you’re going to react when you see emtbs on your MUT’s!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Understood, but why all the R&D monies invested for such a small niche in the future?


Product managers needing something to put on the table to justify their salaries while completely missing the mark maybe? Once again, see 'Segway'.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Guess you're still riding your moped to go to the betamax store? Yes, technology does change, however motorized access for all trails? Hardly. Seems the land managers/ land ownwers and rule makers will have the final say.


And when those land managers/land owners start buying e bikes for themselves and their wife, their children then what? It won't be long.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> Understood, but why all the R&D monies invested for such a small niche in the future?


While it's not exactly analogous, on one level emtbs are just the next greatest thing in a long line of next greatest things. I remember when fat bikes were going to save the industry and every company was scrambling to catch the wave before they were left out. 5 years later and there were few in anyone's catalog, it was down to the niche companies who were in it for the long haul. I'm sure emtbs will be more persistent than that, especially since they are widely accepted in the EU, but there is a not insignificant chance they'll fizzle here because of the difference in legislation and the resulting access issues.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> And when those land managers/land owners start buying e bikes for themselves and their wife, their children then what? It won't be long.


I know land managers buying ebikes and they are of the opinion that no way for their trails, but they're awesome for transportation. So, there's that.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

^ Harryman makes total sense. When people can't find enough places to ride emtbs, they won't be sold on them. The legal and access issues are what's holding back the market. I see that Bosch knows this and they're actively driving emtb advocacy in markets where it's a problem.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

Gutch said:


> I beg to differ. Why is every manufacturer producing them and why are they the largest growing sector? Even without trail access. What happens when more trails open up to them? I know if they were legal and light, it would be my main squeeze! And I'd give two shits less what anyone thought.


A few years ago Fat Bikes were the next craze..:.once Special Ed and Trek jumped in, everybody thought we'd all give up our normal bikes for fat tire bikes....it's hard to find them in shops around here any more.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Never underestimate the power of the dark side... 😂


----------



## hobbit (Apr 23, 2007)

My guess is manufacturers are not necessarily producing ebikes with the US market as their focus at the moment. I'm guessing that the US market for mtbs is probably the same as the rest of the world combined. But I'd guess that for emtbs the world market is probably 10x the US market until/if/when access rights are sorted for emtbs, possibly more. I see another Levo everytime I go out now and my local shop is selling nearly as many emtbs as normal mtbs.
I think the Euro and US markets will be significantly different in 5 years time.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

There will always be opposition at first... As more road Ebikes become more popular and everybody gets behind them, it will bleed into emtbs and electric assist bicycles will not be a big deal.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> And when those land managers/land owners start buying e bikes for themselves and their wife, their children then what? It won't be long.


 The rangers will still be driving their atvs around on the dirt roads? No motorized vehicles on multiuse off road trails, rules apply to all. Same goes for conservation areas too.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

I guess one of the reasons I got away from riding moto's and more heavily into riding MTB's is that in my part of Calif. there are for more dirt trails where I can ride a MTB than I can ride a moto. In a way eMTB's extends the amount of "moto" trails but in general the dirt moto trail miles continues to shrink (especially on a per-capita basis).


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> I know land managers buying ebikes and they are of the opinion that no way for their trails, but they're awesome for transportation. So, there's that.


I've ridden pedal assist. If I were a land manager I'd have no issues with allowing them from the perspective of trail damage etc. pedal assist bikes don't leave a foot print any different than a pedal bike. Riding like a dick has nothing to do with the bike.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ALimon said:


> I've ridden pedal assist. If I were a land manager I'd have no issues with allowing them from the perspective of trail damage etc. pedal assist bikes don't leave a foot print any different than a pedal bike. Riding like a dick has nothing to do with the bike.


My experience is somewhat different; I don't want to say that e-bikes turn riders into dicks but at the 87,000 acre (300 miles of trails) CA State Park I spend a lot of my time at e-bikers are definitely skid kiddies and definitely tear up the trails more than regular bikes. And a somewhat overlooked matter is that the casual MTBer will ride twice as far on an ebike than they would have on a regular biker. Simply 2X the wear and tear from mileage alone. This is tolerable up to some point but as of yet we see no effort of organized e-bikers coming out to help mend the trails. Being in denial that they could be having more affect on the trails is not going to get them anywhere.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Moe Ped said:


> My experience is somewhat different; I don't want to say that e-bikes turn riders into dicks but at the 87,000 acre (300 miles of trails) CA State Park I spend a lot of my time at e-bikers are definitely skid kiddies and definitely tear up the trails more than regular bikes. And a somewhat overlooked matter is that the casual MTBer will ride twice as far on an ebike than they would have on a regular biker. Simply 2X the wear and tear from mileage alone. This is tolerable up to some point but as of yet we see no effort of organized e-bikers coming out to help mend the trails. Being in denial that they could be having more affect on the trails is not going to get them anywhere.


Maybe the ebikers are also mtbrs and do trail work with their chapter. Possibility, no?


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

I call BS on the skid kiddies. Ebikers are people. Try self policing if you don't like what you see. Like, "hey dude, try not to skid on the trails...thanks". 

Where I live I never see ebikes. The skid kiddies that I see are always shuttle monkeys bombing trails on DJ bikes. The DJ bikes never have tires with large lugs and the people riding them are thrill seekers. They not only skid, they go out of their way to throw dirt on the corners like they are posing for a picture on the latest bike mag. Should we ban DJ bikes?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Gutch said:


> Maybe the ebikers are also mtbrs and do trail work with their chapter. Possibility, no?


For sure, however, for the same reason I don't help maintain trails in Wilderness areas. I'm not allowed to ride there so why am I going to help maintain another user groups trails.
So, catch 22. One of the reasons I don't tell ebikers they can't ride our trails because they don't work on them. I do however say they should advocate for their own access and possibly build their own trails.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Giant Warp said:


> Try self policing if you don't like what you see. Like, "hey dude, try not to skid on the trails...thanks".


Absolutely!!!

I get so tired of hearing people complain about what they experienced out on the trails but they failed to do anything about it in person.

Hate to break it to everyone but this is NOT a live and let live world. We all share space and a resource that is not ours alone and can be taken from us at any time.

If we don't step up and hold others accountable, someone else will do it for us. If that happens, I guarantee we will not like the results.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Silentfoe said:


> For sure, however, for the same reason I don't help maintain trails in Wilderness areas. I'm not allowed to ride there so why am I going to help maintain another user groups trails.
> So, catch 22. One of the reasons I don't tell ebikers they can't ride our trails because they don't work on them. I do however say they should advocate for their own access and possibly build their own trails.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Why should ebikers build their own trails? As tax payers we have as much right to access public lands as does anyone else. Here is a similar comparison. Electric cars. They don't pay fuel taxes. Not only are they free to drive on the highway but the purchase of their cars was subsidized by the tax payers who do not own electric cars. Public perception and the right people in charge of policy can do wonders. The agent of change on the ebikes will be the old people. I guarantee it. I know the mtbr naysayers are always talking about the boogie man on his franken bike but the real world agents of change will be mom and pop with their gear motor hubs. Also, the ebike mountain bike doesn't need a delicately maintained trail so trail work is not nearly as important. The trail maintainers in Utah pull the rocks out of the trail. I won't have any part of that.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Giant Warp said:


> Why should ebikers build their own trails? As tax payers we have as much right to access public lands as does anyone else. Here is a similar comparison. Electric cars. They don't pay fuel taxes. Not only are they free to drive on the highway but the purchase of their cars was subsidized by the tax payers who do not own electric cars. Public perception and the right people in charge of policy can do wonders. The agent of change on the ebikes will be the old people. I guarantee it. I know the mtbr naysayers are always talking about the boogie man on his franken bike but the real world agents of change will be mom and pop with their gear motor hubs. Also, the ebike mountain bike doesn't need a delicately maintained trail so trail work is not nearly as important. The trail maintainers in Utah pull the rocks out of the trail. I won't have any part of that.


Now you're way off base. Unfortunately paying taxes does not give you access. Sorry. So many examples of that, I don't even know where to begin. Many, many holes in your argument.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I've ridden pedal assist. If I were a land manager I'd have no issues with allowing them from the perspective of trail damage etc. pedal assist bikes don't leave a foot print any different than a pedal bike. Riding like a dick has nothing to do with the bike.


Land managers have a expectation of bad behavior from the public in general.

The simple fact that emtbs go faster and farther is enough to not make them enthused proponents. Both of those things make their jobs harder.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Giant Warp said:


> I call BS on the skid kiddies. Ebikers are people. Try self policing if you don't like what you see. Like, "hey dude, try not to skid on the trails...thanks".
> 
> Where I live I never see ebikes. The skid kiddies that I see are always shuttle monkeys bombing trails on DJ bikes. The DJ bikes never have tires with large lugs and the people riding them are thrill seekers. They not only skid, they go out of their way to throw dirt on the corners like they are posing for a picture on the latest bike mag. Should we ban DJ bikes?


Where I live I never see ebikes, DJ bikes or skid kiddies. I call BS on them all because obviously my singular experience is the correct one.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Harryman said:


> Land managers have a expectation of bad behavior from the public in general.
> 
> The simple fact that emtbs go faster and farther is enough to not make them enthused proponents. Both of those things make their jobs harder.


Let's be honest here. Class I bikes are only faster uphill and not by much. They are not faster on flat land or on the downhill. Please explain how riding farther is a detriment to anything.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Giant Warp said:


> Let's be honest here. Class I bikes are only faster uphill and not by much. They are not faster on flat land or on the downhill. Please explain how riding farther is a detriment to anything.[/QUOTE
> 
> Riding farther is a horrible argument. I'm a fit rider and ride much further than most. So am I a detriment because my fitness allows me to ride further? Is that really where this is going?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Giant Warp said:


> I call BS on the skid kiddies. Ebikers are people. Try self policing if you don't like what you see. Like, "hey dude, try not to skid on the trails...thanks".
> 
> Where I live I never see ebikes. The skid kiddies that I see are always shuttle monkeys bombing trails on DJ bikes. The DJ bikes never have tires with large lugs and the people riding them are thrill seekers. They not only skid, they go out of their way to throw dirt on the corners like they are posing for a picture on the latest bike mag. Should we ban DJ bikes?


I call BS too! As a trail builder I've seen about every type of knucklehead skid and rip up ours trails... and they weren't on e bikes either. Like I've said before, don't hate the bike. hate the rider. Regardless of what you ride, don't ride like a dick. Respect the trails!


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ALimon said:


> Riding farther is a horrible argument. I'm a fit rider and ride much further than most. So am I a detriment because my fitness allows me to ride further? Is that really where this is going?


Good for you being fit and all that. You're what? Top 10%???

It's the unfit e-rider being able to ride as far as you. All of them. A simple increase in magnitude of trail wear and tear. More traffic and heavier traffic. Seen it with my own eyes.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Giant Warp said:


> Where I live I never see ebikes.


How can you form opinions about them then?

Would you feel different if every other bike was an e-bike and half of them are skid kiddies? True story.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Giant Warp said:


> Let's be honest here. Class I bikes are only faster uphill and not by much. They are not faster on flat land or on the downhill. Please explain how riding farther is a detriment to anything.


From the land of Levo's I can point out that they are on average 1.6 times faster uphill than regular MTBs on a 3.2 mile, 8% av. grade segment. Stat's courtesy Strava; sample size 900 regular bike rides and 54 e-bike rides.

If 1.6 times as fast doesn't sound like much then consider the kinetic energy equation; in this situation the average e-bike and rider has 2.6 times the energy in motion and this is significant where the rubber meets the dirt. Or the biker runs over the hiker. (2.9 X if considering the added weight of an e-bike)


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Moe Ped said:


> From the land of Levo's I can point out that they are on average 1.6 times faster uphill than regular MTBs on a 3.2 mile, 8% av. grade segment. Stat's courtesy Strava; sample size 900 regular bike rides and 54 e-bike rides.


Except Strava is baissed to people trying to ride faster.. or record faster times ... Or often just appear to.
Most mtb riders (and by far the majority) don't give a hoot ... they don't even bother uploading times if they use Strava at all.

Some of us stop for lunch, take photos or just admire the view. Far more ebike buyers are going to fall in the majority who never bother with a time in Strava ...
The ebike just lets them get out there



> If 1.6 times as fast doesn't sound like much then consider the kinetic energy equation; in this situation the average e-bike and rider has 2.6 times the energy in motion and this is significant where the rubber meets the dirt. Or the biker runs over the hiker. (2.9 X if considering the added weight of an e-bike)


Except they don't because they are going uphill and half the speed most people descend.

They aren't braking hard into bends or have 10' of air to land on a hiker when cycling uphill


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

It’s all gonna boil down to a case by case basis or location basis. I say legalize Class 1, and must be over 50 years old. If you’re not mature by then, never gonna happen.


----------



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

Giant Warp said:


> Please explain how riding farther is a detriment to anything.


Let's say there's a 7 mile loop and a riders would normally ride 1 lap in about an hour and go home. If the same riders can get in 2 laps with assist in the same time then the trail is effectively 2x as crowded. A hiker would have 2x more ebikes passing them than if they were bicycles.

I used 2x for simplicity, the real number might be closer to 1.5-1.8x faster/farrther depending on the trail.

No one is going to buy an expensive ebike that isn't any faster than their bicycle.


----------



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

ALimon said:


> Riding farther is a horrible argument.


Riding farther in the same amount of time = more crowed trails.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Giant Warp said:


> Why should ebikers build their own trails? As tax payers we have as much right to access public lands as does anyone else. Here is a similar comparison. Electric cars. They don't pay fuel taxes. Not only are they free to drive on the highway but the purchase of their cars was subsidized by the tax payers who do not own electric cars. Public perception and the right people in charge of policy can do wonders. The agent of change on the ebikes will be the old people. I guarantee it. I know the mtbr naysayers are always talking about the boogie man on his franken bike but the real world agents of change will be mom and pop with their gear motor hubs. Also, the ebike mountain bike doesn't need a delicately maintained trail so trail work is not nearly as important. The trail maintainers in Utah pull the rocks out of the trail. I won't have any part of that.


 Sure, public right to public trails. Great. See also, motorized vehicles rules and regulations. Already in place. Don't like the rules? Change them.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

J.B. Weld said:


> Riding farther in the same amount of time = more crowed trails.


Definitely.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Maybe they shouldn’t be allowed where there’s short congested loops? There’s a place for everything. I wouldn’t take my Levo to a 6-7 mile loop. Not worth it.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Moe Ped said:


> Good for you being fit and all that. You're what? Top 10%???
> 
> It's the unfit e-rider being able to ride as far as you. All of them. A simple increase in magnitude of trail wear and tear. More traffic and heavier traffic. Seen it with my own eyes.


Yep. When the majority of emtb riders are riding as fast and as far as the very small percentage of top mtb riders it begins to matter, have an effect on the trails and other user groups experience. Which would be managable if the emtb industry and community would simply acknowledge and be proactive about it. More wear and tear? Get organized, offer to help and become your local rangers new best friend. Or, ignore it and lose access.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Strava is more of a detriment to trails than an e bike ever will.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

Moe Ped said:


> Good for you being fit and all that. You're what? Top 10%???
> 
> It's the unfit e-rider being able to ride as far as you. All of them. A simple increase in magnitude of trail wear and tear. More traffic and heavier traffic. Seen it with my own eyes.


Yup....talking with one of the local OC Park Rangers, this was in issue he brought up.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

DL723 said:


> USA E-Bike Market Doubles in Units and Value
> 
> Growth is there but who knows how long it will be sustained. But it does seem like one of the faster growing segments for bikes so naturally companies are going to hit that segment hard for the near future. Kind of like how camera companies went all in on mirrorless when dslr sales started to stall


It would be really nice if articles like that showed actual sales numbers for the kinds of eBikes being sold. is all the growth in Commuter eBikes, Beach Cruiser eBikes, eRoadies or in eMTB's. They are not all the same. If the percentage is 70% Commuters, 25% Beach Cruisers, 4% eRoadies and 1% eMTB's, then no, the "growth" in the only category that matters in this forum is not worth considering.
If the percentage is 70% eMTB, then it becomes relevant.



DL723 said:


> I think the emphasis is hard vs impossible. Not saying I think it's a great idea but I've already heard from different park services, including the National Park service, that they are assessing how ebikes fit in. Considering these park services already consider them motorized vehicles and ban them, doesn't seem like it's a closed book.
> 
> All it takes is a few federal entities to modify their rules and others will slowly follow. Or it completely blows up in their faces and more people ban. It can go both ways.


Just a reminder, the National Park Service does not allow any bicycles on trails, trails in National Parks are foot traffic only.

Bike Paths are a different story, and if the National Parks System allows eBikes on paved Bike Paths, that has nothing to do with Trail access on dirt.



Giant Warp said:


> Let's be honest here. Class I bikes are only faster uphill and not by much. They are not faster on flat land or on the downhill. Please explain how riding farther is a detriment to anything.


Please provide some numbers to back that up. I have seen a guy on an eMTB pass me on a climb where I average 4mph, he was going more than double my speed from what I could see. I cannot agree with anyone who says double the speed is "not that much faster"....



ALimon said:


> Strava is more of a detriment to trails than an e bike ever will.


Disagree.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Strava is more of a detriment to trails than an e bike ever will.


 Didn't know you could pedal a strava, does it have a motor?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Klurejr said:


> It would be really nice if articles like that showed actual sales numbers for the kinds of eBikes being sold. is all the growth in Commuter eBikes, Beach Cruiser eBikes, eRoadies or in eMTB's. They are not all the same. If the percentage is 70% Commuters, 25% Beach Cruisers, 4% eRoadies and 1% eMTB's, then no, the "growth" in the only category that matters in this forum is not worth considering.


Be interesting to me where the hell the writers learned math. 
Or maybe I'm off the mark here?

From the article:

"According to the BPSA report, the e-bike category has nearly doubled its growth in value from USD 16.7 million (€ 13.95m) in the first half of 2016 to USD 31.8 million (€ 26.57m) through the first six months of 2017. The number of units shipped have also nearly doubled, from 8,213 in the first half of 2016 to 15,930 through the first half of this year."

Okay, first half of 2016, 8213 units ship for a value of 16.7 million.
So value per unit averages out to $20,333.62.

Someone wanna splain me?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Someone needs to send these folks with $20k to spend on a bike my way...

Seriously, something has to be wrong there. If I had to guess, I'd say the average (commuter, which has to be 90%+ of the total) e-bike runs something like $3-4k, not $20k. 

I'm actually a little shocked how few are being sold (or imported, at least). Based on the explosion of Pedego townies around here, I figured it would be hundreds of thousands of units being moved per year at least. 

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Maybe it's government math?
Like when they spend $300k to create a $50k/yr job, and somehow consider that a success.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> Maybe it's government math?
> Like when they spend $300k to create a $50k/yr job, and somehow consider that a success.


I guess if the job lasts for more than 6 years, it's a win?

Who knows. BRAIN isn't exactly high end journalism but even by their standards that's pretty odd. Someone misplaced a decimal point and it was 10x the number of units, average price around $2k (seems too low?)

-Walt


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Didn't know you could pedal a strava, does it have a motor?


Strava doesn't need pedals to trash trails for those in search of internet glory.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Maybe they shouldn't be allowed where there's short congested loops? There's a place for everything. I wouldn't take my Levo to a 6-7 mile loop. Not worth it.


This!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Klurejr said:


> Just a reminder, the National Park Service does not allow any bicycles on trails, trails in National Parks are foot traffic only.
> 
> Bike Paths are a different story, and if the National Parks System allows eBikes on paved Bike Paths, that has nothing to do with Trail access on dirt.


My Sorba chapter maintains multiuse trails that are NPS:

















I'm very fortunate that this is 2 miles from my house!


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

chazpat said:


> My Sorba chapter maintains multiuse trails that are NPS:
> 
> View attachment 1173183
> 
> ...


What National Park is that in?

I have been to Zion, Yosemite and Yellowstone National Parks and know there is no bikes allowed off the paved roads and bike paths in those National Parks.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Klurejr said:


> Please provide some numbers to back that up. I have seen a guy on an eMTB pass me on a climb where I average 4mph, he was going more than double my speed from what I could see. I cannot agree with anyone who says double the speed is "not that much faster"....
> 
> Disagree.


So someone passed you going uphill. Was that the first time that had ever happened? Have you ever passed anyone going uphill?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Walt said:


> Someone needs to send these folks with $20k to spend on a bike my way...
> 
> Seriously, something has to be wrong there. If I had to guess, I'd say the average (commuter, which has to be 90%+ of the total) e-bike runs something like $3-4k, not $20k.
> 
> ...


Ok, what's your "waltage" haha! I need 5k, singlespeed and a 104 tooth sprocket.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Klurejr said:


> What National Park is that in?
> 
> I have been to Zion, Yosemite and Yellowstone National Parks and know there is no bikes allowed off the paved roads and bike paths in those National Parks.


It is an NRA (National Recreation Area) which is part of the National Park System.

Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area

https://www.nps.gov/chat/index.htm


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

slapheadmofo said:


> Be interesting to me where the hell the writers learned math.
> Or maybe I'm off the mark here?
> 
> From the article:
> ...


Double check YOUR math ever?

$16,700,000.00/8213 = $2,033.36 per unit.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

There's one trail system that I regularly ride where I've seen ebikers on a fairly frequent basis. The ebikers are not fast at all. In fact, we give them a very healthy headstart if we are on the same trail. I am going to make ebike strava segments and then challenge my fast XC racer friends to challenge them on regular bikes. xD


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Moe Ped said:


> Double check YOUR math ever?
> 
> $16,700,000.00/8213 = $2,033.36 per unit.


HAHAHAHAH!!!!

I guess that splains it perfectly!

As a great man once said, "Pay attention stupid"!

:blush:

:lol:


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

slapheadmofo said:


> HAHAHAHAH!!!!
> 
> I guess that splains it perfectly!
> 
> ...


That's OK; as a hobby I look for fake news---that looked like a whopper to me!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Riding farther in the same amount of time = more crowed trails.


Not wearing a condom = more crowded trails.... Not riding further LOL


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

J.B. Weld said:


> Let's say there's a 7 mile loop and a riders would normally ride 1 lap in about an hour and go home. If the same riders can get in 2 laps with assist in the same time then the trail is effectively 2x as crowded. A hiker would have 2x more ebikes passing them than if they were bicycles.
> 
> I used 2x for simplicity, the real number might be closer to 1.5-1.8x faster/farrther depending on the trail.
> 
> No one is going to buy an expensive ebike that isn't any faster than their bicycle.


Firstly lots of people are going to buy an e-bike for reasons other than speed. Probably most people because they don't give a hoot about Strava KOM's .. they just want to be able to access

My (younger) brother is one .. when we sometimes ride together with my 8yr old he just about keeps up on the uphills ... whilst conserving enough battery but he just doesn't go that fast on downhills... We do the 25 mile loop.. he misses every black and takes a fire road and we wait for him and then we get back to the parking and he'll go and have a coffee and food whilst we do another hour or so on the gnarliest trails

He's just an average Joe who wouldn't usually get so much riding - just the sort of people mainly buying e-MTB's ... he pays for parking... the money goes back to maintain the trails... and we get more trails to ride so it isn't more over crowded

He's got some medical issues (not uncommon at our ages) and assisted riding helps him out... he gets further from the car park than he'd dare unassisted...

On my local trails I see WAY more casual e-MTB riders than the occasional do-it-faster or more loops. and to be fair I have no idea if the do-it-faster people do it every time...

Based on myself I do a blast on my unassisted bike a couple of times a year.. I don't even upload times... it's just every so often I'll do the local loop on the XC bike for a workout.. then the other times I'm spending more time enjoying the ride than I worry about how fast or far.

I don't see how an e-bike is different EXCEPT I wouldn't bother trying to do it faster on an e-bike... the XC bike feels like cheating anyway... and on our local loop is much faster than a FS trail bike.

In the last 3-4 years the trails have expanded the trails by at least 25% ... just because more people are using them. I doubt that's much due to e-bikes s yet... but as MTB's become more popular more people want access and more access happens (at least here where we lost our wilderness 2000 years ago)


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Klurejr said:


> Please provide some numbers to back that up. I have seen a guy on an eMTB pass me on a climb where I average 4mph, he was going more than double my speed from what I could see. I cannot agree with anyone who says double the speed is "not that much faster"....
> 
> Disagree.


I pass loads of people on DH bikes on my XC or trail bike on climbs ...so I don't really see how it's relevant.

Except I sorta do.... when I've been passed by a e-bike on climbs in a way that makes me feel I should get off and just walk my first reaction is irritation ...

Then I rationalise it... I get passed by XC bikes on my trail bike... I pass others either because they have less pedal able bikes and/or are less fit but I don't have some human right that say's I can do this because I put in more effort or have a better bike and they shouldn't be allowed.

When I take my XC bike out I get stupid people riding trail bikes slowing me down on climbs and when I take my trail bike I get stupid people riding XC bids slowing me down on technical sections....

Except I'm BOTH of those.... it's just which bike I take out.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Steve-XtC said:


> Firstly lots of people are going to buy an e-bike for reasons other than speed. Probably most people because they don't give a hoot about Strava KOM's .. they just want to be able to access
> 
> My (younger) brother is one .. when we sometimes ride together with my 8yr old he just about keeps up on the uphills ... whilst conserving enough battery but he just doesn't go that fast on downhills... We do the 25 mile loop.. he misses every black and takes a fire road and we wait for him and then we get back to the parking and he'll go and have a coffee and food whilst we do another hour or so on the gnarliest trails
> 
> ...


No.

Even in your own example, your brother bought his ebike for speed.

Otherwise he'd just ride a normal mountain bike but he wouldn't be able to keep up. Or you'd have to tailor your ride to stay with him.

It's always about speed. Maybe not for blistering speed but speed nonetheless.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## TNTall (Nov 7, 2016)

slapheadmofo said:


> I don't care how fast e-bikes go.
> I don't care how much power e-bikes are allowed or not allowed to have.
> I don't care if someone doesn't have to exercise as hard as they might on a mountain bike.
> I don't care how much trail wear they may or may not do.
> ...


This says it all for now. Either it's a motorcycle or a bicycle. "e-bike" and "eMTB" are just PC terms. If electric motorcycles are allowed on MTB trails, we can stand for it or against it in a civil manner, but call it what it is.


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Silentfoe said:


> No.
> 
> Even in your own example, your brother bought his ebike for speed.
> 
> ...


Nope he's mainly lazy .. . He didn't buy it to keep up with us but because he lives right a the bottom of some huge hills with loads of MTB access. He's 3-4 hours drive away at best... often 6-8 at weekends or vacation times... so riding with his Bro and Nephew is a fairly minor thing.

He's got a nicer/lighter unassisted bike than I do if WAY over specced for his needs... but by the time he sticks it in the car and drives to the trails he wasn't using it.

He can go out on the E-MTB whenever he wants and just ride the trails that go from his house. Being brutally honest I'd think twice about riding them just for fun ... it's a brutal hill then either a really technical descent (he wouldn't even try and better on a long travel) or a fairly boring one with loads of fire trails....stops at gates etc.

I've only ever ridden it off road once and that was the one day I borrowed his e-MTB (and I actually rode to the official trails then back) 
I've been up the same hill by road on a road bike plenty of times... but it's not worth the effort compared to driving to the real official trails. It's not even that its just steep and relentless it's got gates across etc. where you have to stop and then get your rhythm back... and that was (the only time I rode the e-MTB) one of the huge benefits for me... you can be stopped on a 30-45 degree hill and set off and get back up to speed.

Anyway... for him the E-Bike lets him go out way more often and yes when we visit it does help him keep up but he's still not going faster than a 8yr old... and as another plus he can walk the next day.

Likewise, where I live I am faster on a loop on my XC bike than my trail bike on the trials I ride most often.

If it was all about speed I'd never have bought the trail bike.... it's faster downhill obviously but overall its slower. I bought it to have more fun... not to go faster but at 50 it also means my joints suffer a lot less.

I'd say I use the XC bike <10% of the time.... I should really sell it but what's the value of a carbon 27.5 XC hard tail ???


----------



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

New ad from Specialized-

_"Get out and enjoy the trails again on the new 2018 Levo, only 25 lbs heavier than a standard bicycle and *just as fast!* only $8,999!"_


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Steve-XtC said:


> blah blah blah


Save yourself some time writing a book.

Yes, it's ALL ABOUT SPEED. You keep saying it yourself. He's lazy. He can't keep up.

So he rides an ebike to keep up and get some riding in. Equals speed.

He may not be going fast but he's going faster on an ebike.

He could still be riding his actual bicycle and getting the same amount of ride time, he just wouldn't be going as fast.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## PurpleMtnSlayer (Jun 11, 2015)

Unsubscribed


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

I'm still waiting to hear a valid reason e bikes are a detriment.


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Silentfoe said:


> Save yourself some time writing a book.
> 
> Yes, it's ALL ABOUT SPEED. You keep saying it yourself. He's lazy. He can't keep up.
> 
> ...


You seem somewhat obsessed with speed. 
That is fine ... it's as valid as anything else but you don't seem to realise most people don't care about speed as long as they aren't going too fast.

I don't know about bike sales in your specific area but here trail bikes outsell faster on the flat/up XC bikes and faster on the downhill DH bikes by a huge margin. People buy fat bikes, adventure bikes with panniers ...folding commuter bikes with dinky 20" wheels...

For most people with bikes it is more a leisure activity than a performance sport. Speed isn't important so much as the leisure experience.



> So he rides an ebike to keep up *and get some riding in*. Equals speed.


If he just wanted to get some riding and speed in he could ride his road bike along the valley roads. His e-bike does 15mph... even he can go faster on a slight downhill on his road bike.

Just like many people don't strap tents to their bike to go faster ... or buy fat bikes or any other number of things that don't make them go faster yet people but these slower bikes and have fun.

I'm more on the speed side of experience than most people.... but I don't see the point of e-bike speed... (other than getting me somewhere faster) ....


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Steve-XtC said:


> You seem somewhat obsessed with speed.
> That is fine ... it's as valid as anything else but you don't seem to realise most people don't care about speed as long as they aren't going too fast.
> 
> I don't know about bike sales in your specific area but here trail bikes outsell faster on the flat/up XC bikes and faster on the downhill DH bikes by a huge margin. People buy fat bikes, adventure bikes with panniers ...folding commuter bikes with dinky 20" wheels...
> ...


I'm not obsessed, just pointing out the fallacy that people don't buy them for speed. They all do, otherwise they'd buy a normal bike, handicapped people notwithstanding.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Steve-XtC said:


> You seem somewhat obsessed with speed.
> That is fine ... it's as valid as anything else but you don't seem to realise most people don't care about speed as long as they aren't going too fast.
> 
> I don't know about bike sales in your specific area but here trail bikes outsell faster on the flat/up XC bikes and faster on the downhill DH bikes by a huge margin. People buy fat bikes, adventure bikes with panniers ...folding commuter bikes with dinky 20" wheels...
> ...


No need to explain why your brother enjoys his emtb. If he's legal, more power to him.


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Silentfoe said:


> I'm not obsessed, just pointing out the fallacy that people don't buy them for speed. They all do, otherwise they'd buy a normal bike, handicapped people notwithstanding.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


So why do many people buy fat bikes or adventure bikes with panniers or just the average trail bike or a single speed or a folding bike or a hybrid etc. etc.?

Non of these are "fast" - yet they are all popular and people buy them for lots of diverse reasons.



> I'm not obsessed


Whatever the reason you seem to think that speed is the only reason to buy an e-bike. (handicapped aside) ... but there is nothing wrong in being obcessed with cycling quickly... given your race number in the photo you race so it's a good thing to be obsessed with....

It's just that for many people speed is unimportant. It might just be easier... it might be about taking more time to look at nature around them or simply that their daily commute is more pleasant not sweating buckets and they can go the same speed on a e-bike without.

My brothers reason was nothing to do with speed... it was that he hates the huge hill between his house and off road trails... He wants a more leisurely and easier ride up then he can wander round the top and ride home instead of getting halfway up and finding he's not enjoying it, he's worn out and going home. He doesn't even go fast when its downhill... he likes taking his time.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Steve-XtC said:


> So why do many people buy fat bikes or adventure bikes with panniers or just the average trail bike or a single speed or a folding bike or a hybrid etc. etc.?
> 
> Non of these are "fast" - yet they are all popular and people buy them for lots of diverse reasons.
> 
> ...


Keep telling yourself that.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Gutch said:


> No need to explain why your brother enjoys his emtb. If he's legal, more power to him.


True ... but he's just an example of the average e-bike buyer. 
Without it he'd either take the car or just cycle along the roads but he enjoys going slowly and taking his time.

I find this frustrating, especially if I'm out with Jnr and he's training for racing. I've asked him to switch the damned boost on if he can't keep up. He just says he's perfectly happy at this speed ....


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Steve-XtC said:


> So why do many people buy fat bikes or adventure bikes with panniers or just the average trail bike or a single speed or a folding bike or a hybrid etc. etc.?
> 
> Non of these are "fast" - yet they are all popular and people buy them for lots of diverse reasons.
> 
> ...


So it sounds like your brother isn't really looking for a bicycling experience, but more of a motorized experience. Just saying.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

For the deniers that e-bikes are about speed consider the original term for bicycle; "velocipede".

The root words mean _swift_ and_ foot_.

The original invention of the bicycle was heralded because it was faster than walking (or less effort for the same speed).

The original invention of the motorized bicycle was heralded because it was faster than bicycling (or less effort for the same speed).

Another corollary is that time + speed = distance. Another touted benefit of e-bikes. _"I'm handicapped/old/weak/lazy and my e-bike lets me go further"._ Speed is part of this equation too.

However practical e-bikes may be; they will always be resented by slower travelers. Relativistically speaking.


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

chazpat said:


> So it sounds like your brother isn't really looking for a bicycling experience, but more of a motorized experience. Just saying.


Yep but not really he has a motorbike (and lots of other vehicles) he just wants to potter about and get some mild exercise and fresh air without having to drive somewhere.

He's the same skiing .... he says he enjoys it his gentler and slower way but it's not what floats my boat ...but he still goes and ambles round the slopes

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Steve-XtC said:


> You seem somewhat obsessed with speed.


Don't take the bait.



Silentfoe said:


> Save yourself some time writing a book.
> 
> Yes, it's ALL ABOUT SPEED. You keep saying it yourself. He's lazy. He can't keep up.
> 
> ...


Hikers could use the same argument against regular bikes.

30 miles? Hike it, Mr. Speed Demon.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> So someone passed you going uphill. Was that the first time that had ever happened? Have you ever passed anyone going uphill?


I might have passed someone going uphill once or twice, but it was someone in my group and I was passing at a very slow differential speed. Also, combined we were both going about 3-4mph uphill. The anecdote I shared showed that a user was going twice my speed, that was the point. It has been discussed before, but i will clarify for you. When trail users are used to encountering climbing parties at 3-4mph and then suddenly that changes and becomes 8-10mph, the experience changes. Perhaps on some trails that are wide and have great visibility the increased closing traffic with downhill traffic is not a big deal and the increased closing speed with pedestrians is not a big deal. But on some trails that are tighter and have less visibility it changes things. This is a discussion of passing and closing speeds. This has nothing to do with Ego. Increased closing and passing speeds will be an issue on some trails. *That is what land managers will be considering when they make decisions about access.*, that is why I brought it up.



chazpat said:


> It is an NRA (National Recreation Area) which is part of the National Park System.
> 
> Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area
> 
> https://www.nps.gov/chat/index.htm


oh, very interesting, never heard of such a place.



Steve-XtC said:


> I pass loads of people on DH bikes on my XC or trail bike on climbs ...so I don't really see how it's relevant.


I don't think that example you just presented is relevant at all. Are you going 10mph uphill against 20mph downhill traffic? Refer to my reply to honk above ^


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Moe Ped said:


> However practical e-bikes may be; they will always be resented by slower travelers.


Well said. This sums up the entire e-bike controversy in a single sentence.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I'm still waiting to hear a valid reason e bikes are a detriment.


 Motorized vehicle? Here in MA, not many places allow them. As in not legal. Just following the rules.


----------



## Phantastic79 (Apr 5, 2017)

I'm just replying to this thread to see if we can get past 2k post but he end of the year.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

EricTheDood said:


> Moe Ped said:
> 
> 
> > However practical e-bikes may be; they will always be resented by slower travelers.
> ...


No it doesn't. It's just pointing at society's struggle with evil. In this case, one of the 7 deadly sins is notably being blamed, pride.

- Wrath can be blamed for people actively being a hater, seeking some sort of vengeance, perhaps spreading misinformation. ex. not wanting extra attention on unsanctioned trails and acting against new user groups. Some are petty enough to act vengefully from simply being ignored.

- Sloth can be blamed when someone doesn't want to be bothered to become better informed before sharing their opinion

- Pretty sure you can find many examples of greed, lust, gluttony, envy... people just not willing to share with "outsiders", the desire for wilderness being opened to bikes, etc.

The fix is self-control. That brings up another problem--how do you make others aware of their evil in a tactful manner, in order to apply such a fix? Haters seem to think that e-bike riders lose self-control due to the machine...


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

What about not wanting, say, RZR side-by-sides on my local trails? Am I still a slothful lusty envious glutton?

I'm just asking. Because there are some legitimate concerns about putting motorized vehicles on non-motorized trails (though my personal opinion is that 250w bikes are fine). 

Accusing people of a variety of the 7 deadly sins and calling them "evil" to their faces is.... not a good way to persuade them. YMMV, but I've spent *days* standing at hiking-only trailheads with my "REPENT AND ALLOW MOUNTAIN BIKES YE HELLBOUND SINNERS" signs and they *still* haven't changed the rules. 

-Walt


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

The 7 Deadly Sins (much appreciated by us pagans!) were something invented by Pope Gregory in 600 AD to scare practicing Catholics into tithing more. BTW I'm pretty sure e-bikes would fall under the "sloth" category of sinning.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Walt said:


> What about not wanting, say, RZR side-by-sides on my local trails? Am I still a slothful lusty envious glutton?
> 
> I'm just asking. Because there are some legitimate concerns about putting motorized vehicles on non-motorized trails (though my personal opinion is that 250w bikes are fine).
> 
> ...


Glad you agree with me. xD

Let me guess, you fear that the "RZR side-by-side" riders won't have a sufficient level of self-control to ride responsibly, nor have a sufficient level of judgment to determine if that trail is suitable for their vehicle (or vice versa), so you want a rule that just permanently bans such a vehicle. Perhaps you want the ban to go so far to lump them in with an existing category that already has a structure of "bans" that closely matches what _you judge_ to be fitting for them.

Replace "RZR side-by-side" with mtb, emtb, horse, etc. and assume that you are part of a user group that feels like they are morally superior to the one that is being judged. Keywords: fear, self-control, responsibility, judgment, categorization...


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

dv8zen said:


> Let me guess, you fear that the "RZR side-by-side" riders won't have a sufficient level of self-control to ride responsibility, nor have a sufficient level of judgment to determine if that trail is suitable for their vehicle (or vice versa), so you want a rule that just outright bans.


Indeed, this is usually the reason any vehicle/device is banned from anywhere. Because, unfortunately, there are a lot of people who will operate said vehicles irresponsibly. The consequences of a hiker behaving irresponsibly aren't so bad. An ATV run amok, on the other hand, could wreck a big chunk of a trail for a long time. You bring more power and speed, you gotta expect more restrictions on how/where you can operate, because your actions have bigger consequences . That's why bikes (without motors) aren't allowed on a lot of trails, in fact.

I suppose we can just allow everything everywhere (why make rules about staying on the trail? Let people exercise their judgement...) and see what happens. Is that what you're proposing as the, um, Christian (?) solution here?

I've seen first hand what happens to places where everyone is allowed to do whatever they want. I bet you have too. Those places turn into shell-casing covered trashpits with a thousand different rutted fall line trails going up and down every hill.

-Walt


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

ALimon said:


> I'm still waiting to hear a valid reason e bikes are a detriment.


Because they have batteries. Same goes for Di2, smart phones, anything with a "i" in their name and of course automobiles. In general battery's were invented by Krampus and should not be used. I use a desktop without batteries, FYI


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

What's Christian about self-control? It's employed by all orderly groups of people, also known as discipline, usually along with cultivation of the mind. Though, I disagree with the Christians' form of cultivation of the mind. xD

*shrug* talk about sins and evil, and people react funny. Moe Ped was the one saying slower travelers were resentful. I generalized such as pointing out that people have pride issues. I implied that not everyone gets triggered, thanks to a practice called self-control. How do you get someone else to even practice self control? It's a problem in itself to point out that others need such a fix. It's not only pride that needs self-control...

I believe training/education is the best fix. That includes self-control. Keep emotions/instincts in check, gain knowledge to be more understanding. When I got my first mtn bike, I was given some docs, which included IMBA rules of the trail. That was quite influential, now that I think back. Wonder how many didn't get such, and just started using the trails however they liked...


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

dv8zen said:


> *shrug* talk about sins and evil, and people react funny.


Really? You think so?

That sort of talk doesn't vaguely belong on a forum dedicated to meaningless recreation/exercise/entertainment, but even out in the real world if you start calling people evil, they tend not to like it.

Every time I think the e-bike proponents here can't find a worse way to express themselves, they manage it. Why on earth would you bring religion/sin/evil into a discussion of mountain bikes? You come off as unhinged! I *want* my elderly neighbors to be able to go ride with me on our local trails on e-bikes someday, and stuff like this (on a public forum, where it'll live forever) really, really doesn't help.

-Walt


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Walt said:


> Indeed, this is usually the reason any vehicle/device is banned from anywhere. Because, unfortunately, there are a lot of people who will operate said vehicles irresponsibly. The consequences of a hiker behaving irresponsibly aren't so bad.
> 
> -Walt


The Gobblin Topplers were hikers. That so called artist who was spray painting crap art in national parks was a hiker. We're just riding bikes.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Walt said:


> Really? You think so?
> 
> That sort of talk doesn't vaguely belong on a forum dedicated to meaningless recreation/exercise/entertainment, but even out in the real world if you start calling people evil, they tend not to like it.
> 
> ...


Forum purist detected. xD I don't know what a forum purist is exactly, but it sounded good in my head.

You're the one who brought up religion, btw. xD Evil and sin (and list of 7 "deadly" sins) are pop culture themes now. I don't see how labeling instinctual human behavior factors into being seen as "unhinged*!" *mentally unbalanced; deranged

Why so judgmental and categorizing (ex. proponents, religious, elderly)? Wrathful? Is fear of loss and insecurity related to jealousy? Envious that laws are more to your liking in parts of Europe?

BTW, I know you were generalizing, but since you quoted me, I just wanted to make clear that I'm not an ebike proponent (not anti ebike either). I'm just here to ponder and discuss the topic question. Trying to be neutral. I've made points for and against, and tried to be unbiased.

If emtb grows big, and get displaced from other trails, I wouldn't be surprised if emtb-specific trails pop up. Would be amusing to see what builders do to put emtbs at the top of the social hierarchy there.


----------



## TNTall (Nov 7, 2016)

Oh good grief. I'm unsubscribing now. 

I'm just going to be bringing to the attention of each trail management that motorcycles disguised as mountain bikes are being ridden on the trails. Whether that is allowed will probably have to be dealt with on an individual trail system basis.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

dv8zen said:


> Glad you agree with me. xD
> 
> Let me guess, you fear that the "RZR side-by-side" riders won't have a sufficient level of self-control to ride responsibly, nor have a sufficient level of judgment to determine if that trail is suitable for their vehicle (or vice versa), so you want a rule that just permanently bans such a vehicle. Perhaps you want the ban to go so far to lump them in with an existing category that already has a structure of "bans" that closely matches what _you judge_ to be fitting for them.
> 
> Replace "RZR side-by-side" with mtb, emtb, horse, etc. and assume that you are part of a user group that feels like they are morally superior to the one that is being judged. Keywords: fear, self-control, responsibility, judgment, categorization...


 Yikes, bit of a stretch, eh? Rules in place dictating where motorize vehicles are allowed. Nothing moral of otherwise about it. Just what the land manager or power that be say so. Lots of places have a human power only, so there's that.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

TNTall said:


> I'm just going to be bringing to the attention of each trail management that motorcycles disguised as mountain bikes are being ridden on the trails.


Well if you word it that way, it will ensure that they won't take you seriously.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Rules in place dictating where motorize vehicles are allowed. Nothing moral of otherwise about it.


Here in California, there are posted speed limits. 10mph in OC Parks. 15mph in the Midpeninsula Open Space District.

That leaves MTB purists in a serious bind with regards to self-policing.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

rlee said:


> Because they have batteries. Same goes for Di2, smart phones, anything with a "i" in their name and of course automobiles. In general battery's were invented by Krampus and should not be used. I use a desktop without batteries, FYI


Do you live in a cave? Dang! Anti-battery? Solar panels on your car?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

dv8zen said:


> Replace "RZR side-by-side" with mtb, emtb, horse, etc. and assume that you are part of a user group that feels like they are morally superior to the one that is being judged. Keywords: fear, self-control, responsibility, judgment, categorization...


Back to reality now.

In real world discussions when it comes to deciding vehicular access to trails, anybody talking about 'evil' or any variation thereof is immediately out of the conversation.

Things that LMs are actually considering:

"multiple modes of travelers in a finite space with minimal traffic control"

"use-related, environmental, and managerial factors on soil loss"

"resistant routes"

"Variable Cross-Sectional Area method for assessing soil loss on trails"

"natural and recreational integrity of the trail system infrastructure."

" highrunoff, high-sediment producing strips on a low runoff, low-sediment producing landscape. "

"needs and conﬂicting expectations "

And so on...


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

EricTheDood said:


> Here in California, there are posted speed limits. 10mph in OC Parks. 15mph in the Midpeninsula Open Space District.
> 
> That leaves MTB purists in a serious bind with regards to self-policing.


I am not following your reasoning here. Why do speed limits on trails put MTB purists in a serious bind?

*I am no purist*, but I have a hard time pedaling above the 15mph speed limit on my local trail systems, something that is very possible if I had a motor to assist me.

Seems like speed limits are more of a setback for eBikers not the purists....


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> I am not following your reasoning here. Why do speed limits on trails put MTB purists in a serious bind?
> 
> *I am no purist*, but I have a hard time pedaling above the 15mph speed limit on my local trail systems, something that is very possible if I had a motor to assist me.
> 
> Seems like speed limits are more of a setback for eBikers not the purists....


It's a blanket speed limit across the entire park system. Even the slowest riders break the limit on the downhills.

Very hard for someone to say, "hey rules are rules", while breaking the speed limit, without losing credibility.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

ALimon said:


> I'm still waiting to hear a valid reason e bikes are a detriment.


+10
I've been checking my ebike times with Strava users. Those purist dudes are extremely fast. Much faster than my Levo. Then when you look at the downhill times I get like 200th pace. LOL. I'm not going to lie, I have some KOMs but those are on extremely step sections. Like average speed is 4mph.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> Here in California, there are posted speed limits. 10mph in OC Parks. 15mph in the Midpeninsula Open Space District.
> 
> That leaves MTB purists in a serious bind with regards to self-policing.


 CA? That's awesome, Fires, ( very serious this year, no malice intended) crowds, sucky hiways, mudslides and speed limits on your trails. Tell me why again CA is where everyone wants to go? Not a purist, just a realist. I'm sure you have not motorized vehicle areas too. Oh, ya, forgot earthquakes. Yikes.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> It's a blanket speed limit across the entire park system. Even the slowest riders break the limit on the downhills.
> 
> Very hard for someone to say, "hey rules are rules", while breaking the speed limit, without losing credibility.


 I always drive above the speed limit on the hiway. Downhills? I read about that once. MA has more trails, ridges and small hills with tecky chunk. Those are the speed limiters here. So don't break the speed limit and rest easy, cheers.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> Back to reality now.
> 
> In real world discussions when it comes to deciding vehicular access to trails, anybody talking about 'evil' or any variation thereof is immediately out of the conversation.
> 
> ...


Exactly.

Even if you just look at what posters here relate anecdotally, which is mirrored on every other ebike forum I visit and in every ebike mag, people who own an ebike ride farther/more than they did before, and almost always at a higher average speed.

"I stopped mtbing years ago, because (X), and now I'm riding  miles a month".

"I bought an ebike, instead of killing myself to ride my local steep hills and only getting (X) miles and (Y) vertical feet, I'm now getting (Z)."

"My (wife/SO/friend/family member), who used to hate mtbing, now rides with me all the time and I don't have to wait any longer"

"I use it for recovery on days I probably wouldn't have ridden on before."

"I love it because it lets me explore areas I couldn't normally reach"

"I can session downhills that I could only ride once before"

While it is true that any single emtb rider makes no difference in the overall impact onto trail, if 25%-50% of mtbs riders switch, the impact would be significant. Not unmanagable if everyone is on 250w emtbs, but also not able to be dismissed with a wave of the hand as so many do here. IME land managers are only looking to see how an activity impacts the trail surface, which they are responsible for maintaining, and the compatibility with other user groups. There are four main issues that will retard emtb access.

1 - Our legislation and non existent enforcement resources will allow higher powered emtbs on the trails than we see in the EU, the only place with a population land managers can look to for data. It's difficult for them to set policy to manage future vehicles that don't yet exist.

2 - More emtbs = more rides = more miles per ride = more trail impact. There isn't additional funding for more maintenance in most places, and there hasn't been any plans floated by the industry or user groups, like OHV tags for example. There isn't an emtb community to step up and take on any additional load and I haven't seen any mtb orgs willing to do so either.

3 - Higher speed in places that traditionally don't see it. Currently, a bikers speed is limited by a combination of their fitness, their skills and the trail itself. In some places, especially where fitness is the main limiting factor, adding motor power allows you to go faster, primarily climbs and some flat/rolling sections. Just like with ebikes on the street and drivers, an ebikes higher closing speeds can present problems with other users expecations of how fast a bike will be traveling. Higher closing climbing speeds can lead to more close calls with DH traffic, being able to ride up trails that were defacto DH only previously because of the grade will introduce more risks. Will people start dying left and right, no, of course not. Will there be more close calls and user conflicts? Probably, to some degree anyway. Faster riding will always freak out and annoy a certain segment of the hiking population (Thanks Strava!), and fast guys with a motor will only get faster.

4 - While emtbs are no longer legally motor vehicles, they are in some places still considered motorized. If a land manager has trails with legal barriers to motorized, often tied to previous funding or easments, allowing emtbs would entail legal hoops to jump through.

All of those things place an additional burden on land mangers without any benefit. All of those things are also solveable for the most part, if there was the support to do it. I see emtb access in the same place as mtb access, you have to be good neighbors, and you have to help land managers solve more problems than you cause. The industry has little history showing they are very proactive about mtb access, and they certainly are taking the wrong approach with emtbs IMO, so it's really up to local emtb riders to pony up and make it happen. Simply believing you're entitled to it, or expecting no one to care, only works in the short term. As mtbers, our own history proves that.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> CA? That's awesome, Fires, ( very serious this year, no malice intended) crowds, sucky hiways, mudslides and speed limits on your trails. Tell me why again CA is where everyone wants to go? Not a purist, just a realist. I'm sure you have not motorized vehicle areas too. Oh, ya, forgot earthquakes. Yikes.


Ummm because it's going to be 75 degrees on Christmas NOT freezing balls like MA. LOL I'm in San Diego, life is good here. We have everything and plenty of sunshine to go with it. I can snowboard at the resorts or ride the bike park and still be home in time to surf an evening session year round. My 100 mile circumference is an amazing playground from the beaches to the deserts to the mountains. We live and play in a t shirt and flip flops year round. Girls in bikini's on the beach year round. We live in a place most of the country vacations to. Yeah we get a little shaker from time to time. I'd rather deal with shaker than live in a tornado alley. I just loaded the bike and board. MTB ride, quick surf session, and then fish tacos. Pretty much a typical winter day in So Cal.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

San Diego and MA are both awesome places to do all sorts of awesome things. Shall we leave it at that? And agree not to be jerks about where we all live/play?

-Walt


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Harryman and slapheadmofo... now those are the kind of posts that I like to see. Everything else seems so petty in comparison to objective reasoning.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Ummm because it's going to be 75 degrees on Christmas NOT freezing balls like MA. LOL I'm in San Diego, life is good here. We have everything and plenty of sunshine to go with it. I can snowboard at the resorts or ride the bike park and still be home in time to surf an evening session year round. My 100 mile circumference is an amazing playground from the beaches to the deserts to the mountains. We live and play in a t shirt and flip flops year round. Girls in bikini's on the beach year round. We live in a place most of the country vacations to. Yeah we get a little shaker from time to time. I'd rather deal with shaker than live in a tornado alley. I just loaded the bike and board. MTB ride, quick surf session, and then fish tacos. Pretty much a typical winter day in So Cal.


 Yum, fish tacos. Tell me you've done all three in the same day? Board, bike, surf? Cheers.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Yum, fish tacos. Tell me you've done all three in the same day? Board, bike, surf? Cheers.


I wish!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Walt said:


> San Diego and MA are both awesome places to do all sorts of awesome things. Shall we leave it at that? And agree not to be jerks about where we all live/play?
> 
> -Walt


We're just having fun Walt.... I didn't take his comment on Cali as being jerkish, nor do I think he did mine. He asked why anyone would go to Ca... I answered.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

dv8zen said:


> Harryman and slapheadmofo... now those are the kind of posts that I like to see. Everything else seems so petty in comparison to objective reasoning.


I've spent a little time going through the trail permitting processes, and Harry's spent a lot. Definitely gives you a better perspective of what the real considerations are.


----------



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

ALimon said:


> I'm still waiting to hear a valid reason e bikes are a detriment.





Giant Warp said:


> +10


You just haven't heard one you agree with and never will because your mind's are made up. Plenty of valid reasons have been mentioned.


----------



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

Giant Warp said:


> +10
> I've been checking my ebike times with Strava users. Those purist dudes are extremely fast. Much faster than my Levo. Then when you look at the downhill times I get like 200th pace. LOL. I'm not going to lie, I have some KOMs but those are on extremely step sections. Like average speed is 4mph.


You got some KOM's or you have some KOM's? If you were riding your electric bike when you got them and didn't delete them that's a seriously dickish move.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

leeboh said:


> CA? That's awesome, Fires, ( very serious this year, no malice intended) crowds, sucky hiways, mudslides and speed limits on your trails. Tell me why again CA is where everyone wants to go? Not a purist, just a realist. I'm sure you have not motorized vehicle areas too. Oh, ya, forgot earthquakes. Yikes.





leeboh said:


> I always drive above the speed limit on the hiway. Downhills? I read about that once. MA has more trails, ridges and small hills with tecky chunk. Those are the speed limiters here. So don't break the speed limit and rest easy, cheers.


This video sums it up for me:


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Gee.... shhhhhhhh on pine valley. That's my back yard.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> I'm still waiting to hear a valid reason e bikes are a detriment.


Because you don't listen


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Harryman said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Even if you just look at what posters here relate anecdotally, which is mirrored on every other ebike forum I visit and in every ebike mag, people who own an ebike ride farther/more than they did before, and almost always at a higher average speed.
> 
> ...


Apart from the last one (which might be a different matter) all of these are just more MTB miles.... (when you boil it own). It's no different from just having more people MTB or more fitter people.

The "E" bit seems irrelevant except to the people using them. Would it matter if it was double the people on conventional (normal) MTB's?

On the last one... then Modern Enduro/Trail Bikes also give far greater access to DH's but putting that away for now.

The issue I have (as a non-e-bike) owner is it all smacks of restricting access based on some puritanical view. 
To extend this (and being a bit ridiculous to make the point) they could make fitness tests compulsory and make it illegal to sell a bike to anyone can't meet olympian standards... That would hugely cut down the number of miles being done and make access restricted to a few.

You can play with variations but these then come down to restricting access to an elite.



> There are four main issues that will retard emtb access.
> 
> 1 - Our legislation and non existent enforcement resources will allow higher powered emtbs on the trails than we see in the EU, the only place with a population land managers can look to for data. It's difficult for them to set policy to manage future vehicles that don't yet exist.


I'm of an opinion it's your legislation that went wrong a long time ago. 
Hence why this is such an issue in the US but not elsewhere.

Just a simple example... if I had a modified MTB and got caught riding it on public land I'd lose my driving license not just the bike. That's a fairly big deterrent.



> 2 - More emtbs = more rides = more miles per ride = more trail impact. There isn't additional funding for more maintenance in most places, and there hasn't been any plans floated by the industry or user groups, like OHV tags for example. There isn't an emtb community to step up and take on any additional load and I haven't seen any mtb orgs willing to do so either.


Again a bit of freedom vs freedom ....
Most of the places I ride I pay for parking or access.
The land is administrated and the car parks are what collects revenue... 
Mostly the charge is pretty reasonable... you could avoid it easily but most people are happy to pay a small amount for the convenience and because it goes into trail maintenance and facilities.

Some of the places are unmanned... your plate is scanned then you pay .. and if you are a member of the local trail builders it's refunded... and if you are a member of the club then a higher % goes to the bike specific trails vs hiker facilities
Many places combine this with a eating facility and/or bike hire/maintenance etc.



> All of those things place an additional burden on land mangers without any benefit. All of those things are also solveable for the most part, if there was the support to do it. I see emtb access in the same place as mtb access, you have to be good neighbors, and you have to help land managers solve more problems than you cause. The industry has little history showing they are very proactive about mtb access, and they certainly are taking the wrong approach with emtbs IMO, so it's really up to local emtb riders to pony up and make it happen. Simply believing you're entitled to it, or expecting no one to care, only works in the short term. As mtbers, our own history proves that.


Completely agree but I think your legislation just took a turn a long time ago. 
At that point it wasn't the right or wrong turn... it's just one that everything else has been built on and is with 20/20 hindsight not the best path today (e-MTB's aside)


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

Steve-XtC said:


> Again a bit of freedom vs freedom ....
> Most of the places I ride I pay for parking or access.
> The land is administrated and the car parks are what collects revenue...
> Mostly the charge is pretty reasonable... you could avoid it easily but most people are happy to pay a small amount for the convenience and because it goes into trail maintenance and facilities.
> ...


This whole concept is the fundamental basis for resistance to considering ebikes as MTBs- confining MTBs to a designated area and losing broader access to public lands at large.


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

evasive said:


> This whole concept is the fundamental basis for resistance to considering ebikes as MTBs- confining MTBs to a designated area and losing broader access to public lands at large.


But isn't the (whole) point of public lands is public access ?? 
The more people want to use it for a purpose the more access is (ultimately) given?

My parking is <$5 for say for hours and <$6 for all day ... so I don't begrudge a fee that then goes towards maintaining trails.

I'll take or leave the cafe's etc. but it's down to what the public want... not some elite that say "no food places it's not in the spirit people should be forced to carry food/water to prove they are dedicated"


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Because you don't listen


By not agreeing with others views does not mean I'm not listening.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ALimon said:


> By not agreeing with others views does not mean I'm not listening.


You at least need to acknowledge that others may have a different perspective based on location/experience; your statement _"I'm still waiting to hear a valid reason e bikes are a detriment"_ is very dismissive and suggests that you're prejudiced.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Moe Ped said:


> You at least need to acknowledge that others may have a different perspective based on location/experience; your statement _"I'm still waiting to hear a valid reason e bikes are a detriment"_ is very dismissive and suggests that you're prejudiced.


Not prejudiced at all. I've ridden a pedal assist bike. There is absolutely no harmful impacts from doing so. It's a mountain bike that you have to pedal, it will assist you if needed, end of story. The argument that it is motorized might be true in the context that when the laws were written they were referring to motorcycles, which clearly it is not. As e bikes gain in popularity the laws will have to be revised. Pedal assists bikes will soon be classified under a new category, I can guarantee you that, it's already happening in CA. And when that happens e bikes will gain more access by the minute. The ranger at Zion National Park told me they have been experimenting with pedal assists bikes and can see them being allowed in the near future. If Zion becomes the first domino to fall, the e revolution and laws permitting them will be set in motion.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ALimon said:


> Moe Ped said:
> 
> 
> > You at least need to acknowledge that others may have a different perspective based on location/experience; your statement _"I'm still waiting to hear a valid reason e bikes are a detriment"_ is very dismissive and suggests that you're prejudiced.
> ...


Uh-huh. You are definitely prejudiced and in denial. May I assume you've ridden a 250 watt pedelec and nothing else? Perhaps your personal e-bike riding is harmless; but what about the guy on a 750 watt pedalec who doesn't give a ****? Or the 3kW unit masquerading as a lower power machine? (that would be me)

What about the many-fold increase in bike traffic if this revolution you talk about comes? You don't think this will be an over-all detriment to all 2-wheeled traffic?

Yeah, it's already happening in Calif. and that's where I live. Not all is goodness.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> The ranger at Zion National Park told me they have been experimenting with pedal assists bikes and can see them being allowed in the near future. If Zion becomes the first domino to fall, the e revolution and laws permitting them will be set in motion.


Bicycles are currently only allowed on paved roads in Zion.

I am not sure how allowing a eBike to also ride on a paved road will have any impact on land managers evaluating if they want to allow eBikes access to dirt multi-use trails.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

ALimon said:


> Not prejudiced at all. I've ridden a pedal assist bike. There is absolutely no harmful impacts from doing so. It's a mountain bike that you have to pedal, it will assist you if needed, end of story. The argument that it is motorized might be true in the context that when the laws were written they were referring to motorcycles, which clearly it is not. As e bikes gain in popularity the laws will have to be revised. Pedal assists bikes will soon be classified under a new category, I can guarantee you that, it's already happening in CA. And when that happens e bikes will gain more access by the minute. The ranger at Zion National Park told me they have been experimenting with pedal assists bikes and can see them being allowed in the near future. If Zion becomes the first domino to fall, the e revolution and laws permitting them will be set in motion.


Yeah. Riding them on the road up to the Narrows, in and out of the canyon. Never touching dirt.

But, great example!

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> The ranger at Zion National Park told me they have been experimenting with pedal assists bikes and can see them being allowed in the near future. If Zion becomes the first domino to fall, the e revolution and laws permitting them will be set in motion.


This is comedy gold.

As a local to Zion and as someone who rides their bike up the roads frequently, I can say you are full of B.S.

You can't even take an ebike up the left fork to the Temple of Sinewava, or on the paved bike paths.

Yep, that may change. It's not going to open a single door for emtbs.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

They will be allowed in certain areas. There is no denying that. And not just OHV. Govern them to 250w and let the self policing begin. Everybody getting a little touchy, no need.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Gutch said:


> They will be allowed in certain areas. There is no denying that. And not just OHV. Govern them to 250w and let the self policing begin. Everybody getting a little touchy, no need.


Are you talking about Zion NP?

If normal MTBs aren't allowed on any unpaved surfaces in Zion, why would they allow eMTBs?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Moe Ped said:


> Uh-huh. You are definitely prejudiced and in denial. May I assume you've ridden a 250 watt pedelec and nothing else? Perhaps your personal e-bike riding is harmless; but what about the guy on a 750 watt pedalec who doesn't give a ****? Or the 3kW unit masquerading as a lower power machine? (that would be me)
> 
> What about the many-fold increase in bike traffic if this revolution you talk about comes? You don't think this will be an over-all detriment to all 2-wheeled traffic?
> 
> Yeah, it's already happening in Calif. and that's where I live. Not all is goodness.


I rode a specialized levo. So I can't speak for any other bike. The levo is harmless. Bikes like the Levo will be approved in time no doubt about it. You may not like it, but it's going to happen. I don't ride an e bike btw, Nor do I have any issues with anyone riding one on my trails. I think anyone out riding is good for the sport, and the bike industry in general.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> Bicycles are currently only allowed on paved roads in Zion.
> 
> I am not sure how allowing a eBike to also ride on a paved road will have any impact on land managers evaluating if they want to allow eBikes access to dirt multi-use trails.


This is true. They have the pa'rus trail that connects to the 6 mile scenic road. As of now, no ebikes in the park, but people visiting the park have asked about riding them. Well that may change soon. Gotta start somewhere.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Nor do I have any issues with anyone riding one on my trails.


And so you think your experience on YOUR trails gives you enough insight to decide what policy should be on ALL trails?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Le Duke said:


> Are you talking about Zion NP?
> 
> If normal MTBs aren't allowed on any unpaved surfaces in Zion, why would they allow eMTBs?
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


 No, not Zion. I'm talking in general.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> Bikes like the Levo will be approved in time no doubt about it. You may not like it, but it's going to happen.


Nope. For reasons explained many times. From people who are on the inside and actually help make those decisions.

They are actually losing more access than gaining it.

Places that once allowed ebikes on a conditional basis have now shut them down. Park City for example.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ALimon said:


> I rode a specialized levo. So I can't speak for any other bike. The levo is harmless. Bikes like the Levo will be approved in time no doubt about it. You may not like it, but it's going to happen. I don't ride an e bike btw, Nor do I have any issues with anyone riding one on my trails. I think anyone out riding is good for the sport, and the bike industry in general.


Totally agree, in time and not everywhere...


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Silentfoe said:


> Nope. For reasons explained many times. From people who are on the inside and actually help make those decisions.
> 
> They are actually losing more access than gaining it.
> 
> ...


Park City doesn't allow ebikes because it is a tourist destination and they don't want fast bicycles cruising up and down the streets in an already heavily congested area. Since it is also a tourist area with high numbers of rentals they didn't want people blasting around the resorts hitting hikers. People like Walt helped convince them that the boogie man was coming. The trails were not closed because the bikes are a detriment to the trails. They also were not closed because they had a problem with ebikes. They were banned proactively based on unproven ideas. so Park City is not an example of "loosing access" because they never really had it in the first place. Park City has a fairly good number of old mountain bikers who can afford bikes like the Levo. They will be everywhere soon, regardless of trail signs. I've already run into old guys on ebikes that rode from Park City to the Mormon Pioneer trail and Great Western trail. When you see a 70 year old guy on an e*mountainbike it makes you feel good inside. Nobody is going to tell him he can't ride and if you did I can just imagine colorful, yet informative, exchange that you might have. LOL


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> And so you think your experience on YOUR trails gives you enough insight to decide what policy should be on ALL trails?


As a matter of fact yes! I'm assuming you have ridden a pedal assist bike at some point before you formed your anti e bike stance? I could be wrong, but for some reason I feel as though many of the anti e bike establishment here has never ridden an bike like the Levo.
I formed my opinion of the Levo by riding one, I put 500 miles on it, and as I've said I don't own one. And IMO the bike is harmless. I can't imagine anyone with an open mind and unbiased opinion riding a Levo and saying that bike is a detriment to our trails.

My opinion is just my opinion. There is no scientific research behind it... Just common sense.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> As a matter of fact yes! I'm assuming you have ridden a pedal assist bike at some point before you formed your anti e bike stance? I could be wrong, but for some reason I feel as though many of the anti e bike establishment here has never ridden an bike like the Levo.
> I formed my opinion of the Levo by riding one, I put 500 miles on it, and as I've said I don't own one. And IMO the bike is harmless. I can't imagine anyone with an open mind and unbiased opinion riding a Levo and saying that bike is a detriment to our trails.
> 
> My opinion is just my opinion. There is no scientific research behind it... Just common sense.


First of all, I'm not anti-ebike, just like a lot of the other posters on here, I think they are great on the road and used for commuting, basic transportation, etc. And I think they will be fine on some trails. But unless you are familiar with the situation on all trails, how can you say ebikes would be fine on all trails? I also think some trails should be hike only; I'm not going to go around saying that mountain bikes are harmless so they should be allowed on all trails.

Have I ridden one? No, I haven't. I have no desire to. Tell me if I am wrong, but I imagine they are a lot like riding a regular mountain bike except it is a bit easier to ride up hills, takes less effort. Am I way off? Are they something completely different? Please enlighten me.

I have the feeling you have not gone back and read through all the previous threads on ebikes. If you did, you'd find actual reasons why a number of us don't think they should just automatically be allowed wherever mtbs are allowed. No one is giving you reasons because we are all tired of repeating them over and over every time some noob comes in and starts blasting away without bothering to read through the threads. If you would bother to do so, you'd see most of use are not claiming that a 250W ebike will physically damage a trail.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> First of all, I'm not anti-ebike, just like a lot of the other posters on here, I think they are great on the road and used for commuting, basic transportation, etc. And I think they will be fine on some trails. But unless you are familiar with the situation on all trails, how can you say ebikes would be fine on all trails? I also think some trails should be hike only; I'm not going to go around saying that mountain bikes are harmless so they should be allowed on all trails.
> 
> Have I ridden one? No, I haven't. I have no desire to. Tell me if I am wrong, but I imagine they are a lot like riding a regular mountain bike except it is a bit easier to ride up hills, takes less effort. Am I way off? Are they something completely different? Please enlighten me.
> 
> I have the feeling you have not gone back and read through all the previous threads on ebikes. If you did, you'd find actual reasons why a number of us don't think they should just automatically be allowed wherever mtbs are allowed. No one is giving you reasons because we are all tired of repeating them over and over every time some noob comes in and starts blasting away without bothering to read through the threads. If you would bother to do so, you'd see most of use are not claiming that a 250W ebike will physically damage a trail.


I'm not saying they are fine on all trails, I do believe they are equivalent to a pedal bike and in most instances should be allowed access where any other Mtb are allowed. Hike trails most definitely not.

If you get a chance to demo a Levo you should. Yes, they are just like a mtb, they can make the uphill climbs easier, but what I loved about the Levo was the choices in settings. You run the assist at a low level and the bike would make you work for it. 10 settings available, so every rider can choose just how much assist they want. I rode one while rehabbing a knee injury. I was able to ride and push the knee from an endurance stand point, when the knee said that's enough mileage I added assist and headed home. 
At that moment I thought thank god for this technology, one day my knees and joints will say uncle, and this might be the only way to continue riding and enjoying my passion and the outdoors. Specialized did the right thing when designing this bike. Very well thought out.

Most of the arguments from the previous threads always fall back on it has a motor along with other invalid reasons Imo. I may be a newb here, but I'm hardly a newb to the sport, raced a big chunk of my life professionally, mostly in Europe. I've been around the sport forever. From my experiences is where I draw my opinions. Again, it's just my opinion. We all have them and it's ok not to agree.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Giant Warp said:


> Park City doesn't allow ebikes because it is a tourist destination and they don't want fast bicycles cruising up and down the streets in an already heavily congested area. Since it is also a tourist area with high numbers of rentals they didn't want people blasting around the resorts hitting hikers. People like Walt helped convince them that the boogie man was coming. The trails were not closed because the bikes are a detriment to the trails. They also were not closed because they had a problem with ebikes. They were banned proactively based on unproven ideas. so Park City is not an example of "loosing access" because they never really had it in the first place. Park City has a fairly good number of old mountain bikers who can afford bikes like the Levo. They will be everywhere soon, regardless of trail signs. I've already run into old guys on ebikes that rode from Park City to the Mormon Pioneer trail and Great Western trail. When you see a 70 year old guy on an e*mountainbike it makes you feel good inside. Nobody is going to tell him he can't ride and if you did I can just imagine colorful, yet informative, exchange that you might have. LOL


So much incorrect info here.

Park City allows ebikes to cruise up and down the streets. There are several places in town you can rent them and do just that.

If you are going to try to quote me and then write "loosing" access, you fail. I at least spelled it correctly.

Park City trails WERE closed to ebikes because they were a detriment to access and because 1 or 2 in particular were causing a problem.

Walt has done more for trail access than most ever will. You do him and every other trail advocate a disservice. Solely because you don't like what he's advocating for.

"they will be everywhere soon, regardless of trail signs..."

So you're saying ebikers will continue to poach trails no matter what the rules are or how land managers feel about them. Do you seriously wonder why almost every trail advocate and land manager hates ebikes? Let me point you back to your own quote. You summed up the hate nicely.

Oh, and I've told a couple of 70+ ebikers that they couldn't ride where they were. Age is not an excuse to not knowing better. One guy said he was going to return the ebike since his shop had lied to him as to where he could ride it.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Yes, you will see ebikers poach. It happens now and will continue to happen in greater numbers. I personally don’t approve of it.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Gutch said:


> Yes, you will see ebikers poach. It happens now and will continue to happen in greater numbers. I personally don't approve of it.


Most of the poaching taking place today isn't by ebikes. As ebikes gain more access the poaching will be less prevelant.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ALimon said:


> Most of the poaching taking place today isn't by ebikes. As ebikes gain more access the poaching will be less prevelant.


It is in areas that don't allow them. I'm seeing more and more where I ride. If they are 250w Levo like emtb, I just ride on. I have yet to see a 5000w Frankenbike. This is also where the riding is not congested.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Gutch said:


> It is in areas that don't allow them. I'm seeing more and more where I ride. If they are 250w Levo like emtb, I just ride on. I have yet to see a 5000w Frankenbike. This is also where the riding is not congested.


Interesting. Haibike, Treks and the Levo are the only e bikes I've seen. Most of the riders on them were around 50. Very respectful and blending in nicely with all of the trail users.


----------



## newfydog (May 8, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> You got some KOM's or you have some KOM's? If you were riding your electric bike when you got them and didn't delete them that's a seriously dickish move.


That's a great thing to do on Strava. Make the damn thing irrelevant and maybe we'll have fewer Strava-heads and more sane humans on the trails.

Between Strava heads and shuttle monkeys screaming downhill on our famous bike trails, I already do much of my mountain biking on the technical double tracks and renegade dirt bike trails in the area. Fortunately, there miles of that sort of riding here, easy to map on google earth.


----------



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

newfydog said:


> That's a great thing to do on Strava. Make the damn thing irrelevant and maybe we'll have fewer Strava-heads and more sane humans on the trails.


I guess I can understand that sentiment, thankfully there's room for everyone to have their version of fun where I live.

Yes, electric bikes too. Miles and miles of smiles.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Giant Warp said:


> Park City doesn't allow ebikes because it is a tourist destination and they don't want fast bicycles cruising up and down the streets in an already heavily congested area. Since it is also a tourist area with high numbers of rentals they didn't want people blasting around the resorts hitting hikers. People like Walt helped convince them that the boogie man was coming. The trails were not closed because the bikes are a detriment to the trails. They also were not closed because they had a problem with ebikes. They were banned proactively based on unproven ideas. so Park City is not an example of "loosing access" because they never really had it in the first place. Park City has a fairly good number of old mountain bikers who can afford bikes like the Levo. They will be everywhere soon, regardless of trail signs. I've already run into old guys on ebikes that rode from Park City to the Mormon Pioneer trail and Great Western trail. When you see a 70 year old guy on an e*mountainbike it makes you feel good inside. Nobody is going to tell him he can't ride and if you did I can just imagine colorful, yet informative, exchange that you might have. LOL


Just to clarify - e-bikes are allowed on all paved trails, and all dirt trails wider than 6 feet (in other words, all of the commuter routes/paths) here in Park City. There are a TON of them being ridden around (in the summer).

We had a dude with a who-knows-how-many-watts DIY bike (you could hear it from 500 feet away) ripping around on singletrack that upset some people, and the general preference of a lot of the trail users is just no-motors no matter what. For better or worse Park City is a granola/athlete town, so there's not a lot of inherent sympathy for folks who don't want to earn their turns (full disclosure: I think that attitude is pretty silly).

I was not one of the people who made the decision, though my opinion was solicited - and my response was basically that allowing e-bikes would be opening a can of worms, for negligible benefit to the folks who use the trails now. I stand by that - I don't see more riders as beneficial (we have a lot of riders as it is) and we've already experienced the e-moto DIY problem to some extent.

Park City also has quite a few trails that are on conservation or recreation easements granted by other landowners. Most of those easements specify passive/nonmotorized recreation and while it's unclear to me whether that would end up being an actual problem, there's understandable concern that allowing e-bikes would open the county/city up to those easements being challenged by people who don't want a trail passing through their property anymore.

-Walt


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> I'm not saying they are fine on all trails, I do believe they are equivalent to a pedal bike and in most instances should be allowed access where any other Mtb are allowed. Hike trails most definitely not.
> 
> If you get a chance to demo a Levo you should. Yes, they are just like a mtb, they can make the uphill climbs easier, but what I loved about the Levo was the choices in settings. You run the assist at a low level and the bike would make you work for it. 10 settings available, so every rider can choose just how much assist they want. I rode one while rehabbing a knee injury. I was able to ride and push the knee from an endurance stand point, when the knee said that's enough mileage I added assist and headed home.
> At that moment I thought thank god for this technology, one day my knees and joints will say uncle, and this might be the only way to continue riding and enjoying my passion and the outdoors. Specialized did the right thing when designing this bike. Very well thought out.
> ...


You can't even read the post you are replying to. He asked how you can say ebikes are ok on all mountain bike trails. You cant seem to answer that one.

Having a motor is absolutely a valid reason to keep them off trails. There is no reason that you could not rehab your knee on a regular bike, I did. I just took easy rides and for a couple months didn't go to the top of the mountain.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

newfydog said:


> That's a great thing to do on Strava. Make the damn thing irrelevant and maybe we'll have fewer Strava-heads and more sane humans on the trails.
> 
> Between Strava heads and shuttle monkeys screaming downhill on our famous bike trails, I already do much of my mountain biking on the technical double tracks and renegade dirt bike trails in the area. Fortunately, there miles of that sort of riding here, easy to map on google earth.


KOM's for climbs on Pedal bikes is NOT the problem when it comes to Stava Freaks.

KOM's on downhills that are MUT's is the problem.

Using a motor assisted bike to beat a pedal only bikes time on a climb is not cool at all.


----------



## sparrow (Dec 30, 2003)

Strava has an eBike class/category


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

sparrow said:


> Strava has an eBike class/category


yes it does, but I routinely see users post on this site about how they are not using it and purposely using a motorized bike to beat the KOM's of regular bikes on climbs.

The leader boards for rides registered as eBike are totally separate from the main leaderboards.


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

I think there will be more and more ebikes as times are changing. I worked in a small collage last week and kids were riding those electric skate boards and those hover things around. This new generation is all about the easy way to get around. I remember many years back my grandmother had multiple bypass surgery, they nearly sawed her in half right down the rib cage. A week later picking her up for mother's day she refused to walk with a walker as she refused to look helpless. But unfortunately in my opinion people like that are becoming extinct. It's just happening weather some of us like it or not.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

leeboh said:


> Sure, public right to public trails. Great. See also, motorized vehicles rules and regulations. Already in place. Don't like the rules? Change them.


In more progressive states and countries, the "rules" allow them.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Riding farther in the same amount of time = more crowed trails.


You're apparently bad at math (and network theory). Trail density in this context is a function of # of trail users over a given amount of time. If I ride 20 miles on my 2 hour ride and you ride 16 miles, there is ZERO difference in trail density or "crowding". Just another flawed argument. In fact, in an extensive trail system, "effective density" (which is what you sense when riding) can actually be lower, since clots and clusters are less likely to form.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Those people (I'm one of them) are just trolling, because most Stravassholes are very easy to get riled up. I've never once taken a KOM on my eBike. That would be a dick move. But every time some self righteous douche declares eBikes unholy, the temptation gets stronger and stronger.


Perhaps take the high ground from here on out and not purposely troll other users?


----------



## STAGER1 (Sep 23, 2017)

Because some one believes differently than you they are a douche? Disagreement in opinions is not personal.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> You can't even read the post you are replying to. He asked how you can say ebikes are ok on all mountain bike trails. You cant seem to answer that one.
> 
> Having a motor is absolutely a valid reason to keep them off trails. There is no reason that you could not rehab your knee on a regular bike, I did. I just took easy rides and for a couple months didn't go to the top of the mountain.


I am ok with pedal assist bikes on all mtb trails. I read it perfectly fine. Having a motor is absolutely not a valid reason IMO. A bike like the Levo is more than acceptable. You seem to deduct reputation points from me regularly because you don't seem to agree with my opinion. It's an opinion, nothing more. If you don't agree, bring a valid argument and keep in mind your opinion is not the final word. We're all here openly discussing our opinions, no one is right or wrong, it's just how we feel.

So now you're telling me how to rehab my knee? You know nothing about my injury? I chose the Levo for my rehab from a coach who works as a physio for the Olympic cycling team. Great recommendation btw.... the Levo was a great tool in my recovery.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

RickBullottaPA said:


> You're apparently bad at math (and network theory). Trail density in this context is a function of # of trail users over a given amount of time. If I ride 20 miles on my 2 hour ride and you ride 16 miles, there is ZERO difference in trail density or "crowding". Just another flawed argument. In fact, in an extensive trail system, "effective density" (which is what you sense when riding) can actually be lower, since clots and clusters are less likely to form.


I'll help you out. Let's say both riders are on a 4 mile loop. Ebiker does 5 laps, mtber does 4 laps. So effectively, ebiker has increased the trail density. Once again, all trails are not the same.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Trail density is a by product of magazines, videos, advertising, bike shops, or any other literature that brings exposure to the sport of mountain biking. Not e bikes. If you want to grow the sport then expect more trail density.


----------



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

RickBullottaPA said:


> You're apparently bad at math (and network theory).........


I was mostly referring to riders who report getting more laps or downhill runs in then they do on bicycles, which does make trails more crowded. Riding faster/further without multiple loops may not make trails more crowded but it does shrink wilderness.



RickBullottaPA said:


> Because the arguments again Class 1 e-Bikes are invalid, elitist/exclusionary, and in general, chock full of douchery.


Douchery? Ebike proponents who mock other trail users considerations are elitist/exclusionary. Also hypocritical.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Trail density is a by product of magazines, videos, advertising, bike shops, or any other literature that brings exposure to the sport of mountain biking. Not e bikes. If you want to grow the sport then expect more trail density.


Actually, I'm not interested in growing the sport. And I think making a fun but physically challenging activity easier will attract more people. And before anyone goes off on that, I think people should do what we did, start on easier trails and build up to more difficult trails and/or longer distances. That's how endurance sports work.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Trail density is a by product of magazines, videos, advertising, bike shops, or any other literature that brings exposure to the sport of mountain biking. Not e bikes. If you want to grow the sport then expect more trail density.


I experienced first hand what happened to surfing. NO interest in growing the sport here, thanks. And I sell bikes for a living (well, ok, I'm mostly retired now, but still)!

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Trail density is a by product of magazines, videos, advertising, bike shops, or any other literature that brings exposure to the sport of mountain biking. Not e bikes. If you want to grow the sport then expect more trail density.


Yep, no interest in growing the sport either, I've been riding mtbs from when even seeing another one on a car was a rare sighting. There is a minimum trail user density you need to keep trails ridable, and we're waaaay past that where I live. Does anyone really want to see more riders on their favorite trails? Do you want to get stuck behind other people or have them stuck behind you? Be surprised by someone coming around a blind corner? I'm pretty much a fan of empty trails myself.

I spend much of my free time working to get more riding areas opened up to spread people out. The only people I know who want more riders or are worried about the state of the cycling industry are those who directly make money off of it.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Steve-XtC said:


> Apart from the last one (which might be a different matter) all of these are just more MTB miles.... (when you boil it own). It's no different from just having more people MTB or more fitter people.
> 
> The "E" bit seems irrelevant except to the people using them. Would it matter if it was double the people on conventional (normal) MTB's?


To the people who actually have to maintain the trails, increasing the effective usage does matter. Like here: BikePark Wales charging extra £7 to take e-bikes on the trails - MBR

I could be wrong, and interest in riding mtbs could tank in the future, but my assumption is that use will continue to grow, but at an incremental pace. Sticking a chunk of the exisiting riding population on emtbs over the span of a couple of years will result in an unplanned spike in usage. As I said earlier, it's managable, but no one who has a vested interest in promoting emtbs will acknowledge it. I'm not against sharing the trails with emtbs personnally, I've already done it in the EU, I just want it done right.



Steve-XtC said:


> On the last one... then Modern Enduro/Trail Bikes also give far greater access to DH's but putting that away for now.


Enduro bikes are far more capable on DH's than previous bikes, for sure, but the amount of laps and how fast you're climbing is still limited to your human engine.



Steve-XtC said:


> The issue I have (as a non-e-bike) owner is it all smacks of restricting access based on some puritanical view.
> To extend this (and being a bit ridiculous to make the point) they could make fitness tests compulsory and make it illegal to sell a bike to anyone can't meet olympian standards... That would hugely cut down the number of miles being done and make access restricted to a few.
> 
> You can play with variations but these then come down to restricting access to an elite.


The fact is that riding a mtb and even more so an emtb is restricted to the elite, they're expensive hobbies. I enjoy other outdoor sports and I don't understand how the relationship between getting fitter in your sport and that expanding your capabilities in it are somehow seen as elitist. If you're a trail runner, how far you can run is limited by how fit you are, that doesn't mean that someone who normally runs 3 miles is somehow being discriminated against by someone who runs 9. Aren't they both enjoying it? Sometimes I'm fit, often I am not, I don't feel that a motorized bike is a necessary entitlement to someone who wants to ride a mtb. Go out and ride what you're capable of riding on a mtb, just like I do every spring, it's still fun. If you do it often, you'll find you get in better shape, it's pretty simple.



Steve-XtC said:


> I'm of an opinion it's your legislation that went wrong a long time ago.
> Hence why this is such an issue in the US but not elsewhere.
> 
> Just a simple example... if I had a modified MTB and got caught riding it on public land I'd lose my driving license not just the bike. That's a fairly big deterrent.


Yep, our legislation leaves a lot of room for abuse. There's no deterrents.



Steve-XtC said:


> Again a bit of freedom vs freedom ....
> Most of the places I ride I pay for parking or access.
> The land is administrated and the car parks are what collects revenue...
> Mostly the charge is pretty reasonable... you could avoid it easily but most people are happy to pay a small amount for the convenience and because it goes into trail maintenance and facilities.
> ...


We have the opposite here and in much of the US. We have massive chunks of connected public land with a myriad of trailheads, many of them just a trail heading off into the woods. There's no one central car park or gate with an enclosed area that you pay to access. You're free to go where you want and essentially do whatever since there's no supervision. Trail maintenance is paid for via taxes in a small way, in volunteer hours/donations in a larger way. OHV's have to buy an annual sticker, which goes directly to trails, and I'd back that idea for mtbs and emtbs, but you'd have people grabbing pitchforks and lighting torches over it.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Walt said:


> I experienced first hand what happened to surfing. NO interest in growing the sport here, thanks. And I sell bikes for a living (well, ok, I'm mostly retired now, but still)!
> 
> -Walt


I know what you mean regarding surfing. But as an avid surfer, it's not the crowds that are the problem. It's the attitudes in the water. I can always paddle around the crowds and get my wave, it's the attitude that that surfers have, they think their break belongs to them. It's kind of the same thing in mountain biking. Traditional riders think they own the trail network and get to decide what and who get to ride it. Long boarders vs short, skiers vs snowboarders and on an on. There's always one group that believes they were there first and and therefor traditions will remain and change is not welcome.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

It’s funny how no one wants the sport to grow now that The sport is established and has more rights than ever before. Without that growth riding as you know it today wouldn’t exist. Without more growth riding as you know it may actually retract. Be careful what you wish for...


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> It's funny how no one wants the sport to grow now that The sport is established and has more rights than ever before. Without that growth riding as you know it today wouldn't exist. Without more growth riding as you know it may actually retract. Be careful what you wish for...


I don't need huge networks of buffed out flow trails. Best mountain biking I ever did was in the 80s and 90s on old hiking trails with no other bikes around. A contraction in the sport would be just fine with me.

Look, I have no problem with more riders as long as the problems (more crowding, more conflict) are addressed. Another reason e-bike folks should be bringing money/energy to the table for more trails.

-Walt


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> I know what you mean regarding surfing. But as an avid surfer, it's not the crowds that are the problem. It's the attitudes in the water. I can always paddle around the crowds and get my wave, it's the attitude that that surfers have, they think their break belongs to them. It's kind of the same thing in mountain biking. Traditional riders think they own the trail network and get to decide what and who get to ride it. Long boarders vs short, skiers vs snowboarders and on an on. There's always one group that believes they were there first and and therefor traditions will remain and change is not welcome.


To be fair, it's much worse with surfing, where waves are a VERY finite resource (though there have been some recent effort to create surf breaks with artificial reefs). There's a LOT of land to build trails on.

The problem tends to be that the land available is really far away from where the people are, so even if you build more trails, there will be crowding problems on any trail near a population center.

I'm lucky enough to be able to live anywhere I want, so if trails get super overcrowded here, I'll just move to NM or something. But as Harry said, once there are enough riders (or hikers) to keep the trails packed down/in existence, there's no benefit to me from more users.

-Walt


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

Harryman said:


> To the people who actually have to maintain the trails, increasing the effective usage does matter. Like here: BikePark Wales charging extra Â£7 to take e-bikes on the trails - MBR


BPW loses uplift fees to e-MTBs ..



> I could be wrong, and interest in riding mtbs could tank in the future, but my assumption is that use will continue to grow, but at an incremental pace. Sticking a chunk of the exisiting riding population on emtbs over the span of a couple of years will result in an unplanned spike in usage. As I said earlier, it's managable, but no one who has a vested interest in promoting emtbs will acknowledge it. I'm not against sharing the trails with emtbs personnally, I've already done it in the EU, I just want it done right.


I dunno ... I can see a lot sold perhaps but that's not the same as regularly ridden..



> Enduro bikes are far more capable on DH's than previous bikes, for sure, but the amount of laps and how fast you're climbing is still limited to your human engine.


What I was meaning is Enduro bikes provide access to many DH trails in the first place. Only a dedicated few are going to push a DH bike 5 or 10 miles each way so those out of the way runs have been made accessible to more people. At the same time the closer ones will get less use.

I took my trail bike out today to some dirt jumps... only about 10 miles but I regretted the big and soft tyres I have on... about 1/2 tarmac and half semi trails to get there and not really a pleasant ride. I should probably have driven.. but I guess if I had a e bike that might be an option.



> The fact is that riding a mtb and even more so an emtb is restricted to the elite, they're expensive hobbies.


Fair point !



> I enjoy other outdoor sports and I don't understand how the relationship between getting fitter in your sport and that expanding your capabilities in it are somehow seen as elitist.


But that is viewing cycling it like it's an endurance sport.
For you it is but for many it's a leisure activity that at least involves more exercise than changing channel.



> If you're a trail runner, how far you can run is limited by how fit you are, that doesn't mean that someone who normally runs 3 miles is somehow being discriminated against by someone who runs 9. Aren't they both enjoying it? Sometimes I'm fit, often I am not, I don't feel that a motorized bike is a necessary entitlement to someone who wants to ride a mtb.


Again what of the person lives x miles from the trails...
(Bike or runner)
Compare that with saying only people that can run or hike from their home should be allowed to run on trails...
I used to do fell running decades ago and I would walk or run to events and training sometimes 1-2 days to get there... all well and good but then I was a student and time rich and money poor. Now I drive to most places I ride. (Today being an exception)



> Go out and ride what you're capable of riding on a mtb, just like I do every spring, it's still fun. If you do it often, you'll find you get in better shape, it's pretty simple.


In the context of the above I just don't want to.
My ride to the nearest decent trails is about 25 miles ... that's half a day in a road bike. I'd be too tired to enjoy the trails when I arrived and I'd not enjoy the tarmac on a bike I'd enjoy the trails on..unless it had an assist ....



> Yep, our legislation leaves a lot of room for abuse. There's no deterrents.


I don't think it's just lack of deterrents ... it just seems that the whole access to public land or wilderness is just way different to other Western countries. (Like Canada)



> We have the opposite here and in much of the US. We have massive chunks of connected public land with a myriad of trailheads, many of them just a trail heading off into the woods. There's no one central car park or gate with an enclosed area that you pay to access. You're free to go where you want and essentially do whatever since there's no supervision.


We have that too. Of my 2 local trails one is a trail centre shared with other activities with signs and stuff. 
The other is just open access ... neither is fenced off you can just wander in but the car parks provide some facilities and charges are less than most people using them paid for fuel to get there <$3 half day or <$5 all day so they are used.



> Trail maintenance is paid for via taxes in a small way, in volunteer hours/donations in a larger way.


I don't know of any trails paid from taxes here.(which isn't to say there aren't any).. one set is strictly volunteers and donations with material and when really needed heavy equipment sometimes borrowed from tax (then repaid)
The other is council administrated but pays for itself. There is a cafe and bike shop/hire shop for example that pays... but the hire/bike shop also pays a percent for trail maintenance and it's pretty useful being able to buy a chain or brake pads or such.. and a bike wash etc.



> OHV's have to buy an annual sticker, which goes directly to trails, and I'd back that idea for mtbs and emtbs, but you'd have people grabbing pitchforks and lighting torches over it.


Weirdly that seems to have gone out of favour... controlled capitalism seems to work... obviously the shops and such have commercial arrangements but the trail membership was done away with in favour of parking and letting out the shop space.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> It's funny how no one wants the sport to grow now that The sport is established and has more rights than ever before. Without that growth riding as you know it today wouldn't exist. Without more growth riding as you know it may actually retract. Be careful what you wish for...


I've only been interested in riding my bike, over the last 30 years, I've never given any thought about how to grow the sport, only where to build more trails. I'd be happy if the number of riders died back to where it was 20 years ago, ironically, the bike manufacturers were far more profitable then than now. I could care less if the greater population chooses to sit on the couch instead of going for a hike or riding a bike, enticing people to exercise more is not part of my personal mission statement.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Steve-XtC said:


> snip.....


I'm not sure, but it seems you're talking about being able to ride emtbs to trails that are too far to ride a bike to, that you wouldn't just drive to? I'm not talking about how you get to the trailhead, or assuming you'd need to run from your house to the trail for some reason. I ride for fun, the more I ride, the farther I can ride as I get in shape, which is pretty much the same if you're a runner, hiker or weekend football player. I don't think that is elitest, or makes any sport elitest, it's really common sense since it's a _sport_.

The closest thing we have to Ride Centres would be bike parks and those on ski areas I suppose, but they're private enterprises on leased public land, mostly targeted to the DJ and DH crowd, there's so much free trail riding elsewhere, there's not much of a market for paid riding in most places.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Harryman said:


> I've only been interested in riding my bike, over the last 30 years, I've never given any thought about how to grow the sport, only where to build more trails. I'd be happy if the number of riders died back to where it was 20 years ago, ironically, the bike manufacturers were far more profitable then than now. I could care less if the greater population chooses to sit on the couch instead of going for a hike or riding a bike, enticing people to exercise more is not part of my personal mission statement.


 Yes when MTB was a fringe sport we had a competitive race series, camaraderie and bike company's making money. Remember Cannondale and Gt with the semi trucks and the big rider salaries. 
The bike company's are trying to get a new cash cow going by driving the Emtb segment to the next best thing. And middle age people that are too afraid to ride a motorcycle are trying to justify to their spouses about how it is "just" a bicycle.
I will buy a emtb when their power levels are high enough to satisfy the adrenaline junkie that I am. But lets be real, they are not a bicycle. If they were nobody would pay a upcharge for them.


----------



## Mt.Biker E (Mar 25, 2006)

__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=750161948524527



this is just the beginning and why many of us take a hard line stance in the usa. Remember we have half the population that doesn't believe in science while living in a modern wonderland of technology


----------



## MTB9488 (Jun 18, 2012)

A pedal assist ebike can be used as a normal bike without power. A motorcycle or other motorized vehicles cannot move unless power is used (you can push). Some of the trails i ride are flat, and don’t need Power (pedal assist) yes an ebike is heavy at 45lb, but so was mountain bikes many years ago. So how do you band something from a trail if they can’t determine if it was on or off at the time. Obviously only Rangers and police can do something if caught, but even then if it’s powered off (or you say it is).


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I ride my e-road bike, 50# as a normal bike on the bike path, great work out. Interesting, I wonder what would happen if your bike was “off.” I think if there is “ No Ebike” signage you shouldn’t be there.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Walt said:


> To be fair, it's much worse with surfing, where waves are a VERY finite resource (though there have been some recent effort to create surf breaks with artificial reefs). There's a LOT of land to build trails on.
> 
> The problem tends to be that the land available is really far away from where the people are, so even if you build more trails, there will be crowding problems on any trail near a population center.
> 
> ...


Here in crowded So Cal I've never seen a crowded trail. Nothing close to it. Most rides I don't see anyone. Other than in the bike park I've never seen a crowded trail anywhere and I ride up and down this state from San Diego to Whistler.

Hey Walt, I checked out your website, I didn't know you were a frame builder. Looks like biz is good too! Congrats!


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Here in crowded So Cal I've never seen a crowded trail. Nothing close to it. Most rides I don't see anyone. Other than in the bike park I've never seen a crowded trail anywhere and I ride up and down this state from San Diego to Whistler.


Probably depends on what trails you are on, what day and time it is and what your specific definition of crowded is.

I live in San Diego, I primarily ride the Calavera Preserve midweek from 5-7pm.

During this time of the year if my group crosses paths with another trail users it is a rare event because it is cold (for SoCal) and dark.

Once the time changes there will be groups of 20-30 guys stopped and chatting at "staging areas" at the top of some of the main downhill trails. The main trails around the lake will have anywhere from 10-25 different people hiking on the same trails with kids n dogs.

I tend to avoid the area on the weekends because the trails get much busier.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

ALimon said:


> Here in crowded So Cal I've never seen a crowded trail. Nothing close to it. Most rides I don't see anyone. Other than in the bike park I've never seen a crowded trail anywhere and I ride up and down this state from San Diego to Whistler.


Do you avoid going out on weekends?


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

dv8zen said:


> Do you avoid going out on weekends?


Exactly....go into any OC Park, and you will find overcrowded. Thus, OCParks has banned E-bikes of all types.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

MTB9488 said:


> A pedal assist ebike can be used as a normal bike without power. A motorcycle or other motorized vehicles cannot move unless power is used (you can push). Some of the trails i ride are flat, and don't need Power (pedal assist) yes an ebike is heavy at 45lb, but so was mountain bikes many years ago. So how do you band something from a trail if they can't determine if it was on or off at the time. Obviously only Rangers and police can do something if caught, but even then if it's powered off (or you say it is).


If you're pushing a dirtbike down a MUT here with the motor off, you'll still get a ticket, since it's motorized and the trail is for non motorized. So, I'd assume the same would happen with an emtb on a prohibited trail regardless of if the motor was on or off.


----------



## MTB9488 (Jun 18, 2012)

Harryman said:


> If you're pushing a dirtbike down a MUT here with the motor off, you'll still get a ticket, since it's motorized and the trail is for non motorized. So, I'd assume the same would happen with an emtb on a prohibited trail regardless of if the motor was on or off.


On The FOCUS Raven² Pro The battery can be completely taken off the bike (doesn't need battery for structure) and be completely used as a normal bike. This is the difference it's a dual purpose, a motorcycle does not have a dual purpose. If you can take the motor or battery out of an E bike and be used as a normal bike it's never winning argument.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> Probably depends on what trails you are on, what day and time it is and what your specific definition of crowded is.
> 
> I live in San Diego, I primarily ride the Calavera Preserve midweek from 5-7pm.
> 
> ...


I ride all days including the weekends. I too have found Calaveras the busiest by far on the weekends and summer evenings, but never thought it was too crowded. I usually ride out there in the morning or mid day both weekdays and weekends, I ride Noble Canyon, La Costa, Sycamore, San Clemente a lot and have never seen it crowded. San Juan trail is about the only trail I try to avoid on weekends due to more guys riding up it.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mtnbikej said:


> Exactly....go into any OC Park, and you will find overcrowded. Thus, OCParks has banned E-bikes of all types.


The OC is another animal. Lol.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

MTB9488 said:


> A pedal assist ebike can be used as a normal bike without power. A motorcycle or other motorized vehicles cannot move unless power is used (you can push). Some of the trails i ride are flat, and don't need Power (pedal assist) yes an ebike is heavy at 45lb, but so was mountain bikes many years ago. So how do you band something from a trail if they can't determine if it was on or off at the time. Obviously only Rangers and police can do something if caught, but even then if it's powered off (or you say it is).


It's still pretty simple. Does it have a motor? Yes? Doesn't matter if you are using it or not. It really doesn't.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## MTB9488 (Jun 18, 2012)

Silentfoe said:


> It's still pretty simple. Does it have a motor? Yes? Doesn't matter if you are using it or not. It really doesn't.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


How does that work with focus raven, and five other bikes for 2019 doing the same, battery and engine can completely be removed, and can be used as 100% normal bike?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

MTB9488 said:


> How does that work with focus raven, and five other bikes for 2019 doing the same, battery and engine can completely be removed, and can be used as 100% normal bike? ..snip..


With ebikes with the Fazua system, or any other removable motor system, of which there are many, if you remove the motor, it's no longer motorized, it is pretty simple. If you remove the battery, or any other fuel source, but leave the motor, it's still motorized, that's how the people who enforce the law see it around here.

How many miles you've ridden an ebike doesn't have any bearing on it.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

MTB9488 said:


> ...snip...


I don't have to ride an ebike to have an opinion. Yeah, my wife rode one....once. I know how fast/strong she is on her real bike. I also know what her pacing is. On the Levo she dropped me like I was tied to a tree....and that is not the case normally. On this 6 mile climb my PR is :51 her's is 1:01 She was easily pedaling up the climb in the highest gear she had, while talking and not breathing hard.

So I don't have to throw a leg over one to judge them.....first hand experience makes no difference.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

MTB9488 said:


> How does that work with focus raven, and five other bikes for 2019 doing the same, battery and engine can completely be removed, and can be used as 100% normal bike? If you have never tried an ebike for more than 25 miles offroad your opinion has no value...


Nice try genius. I own an ebike.

Like I said. It's simple.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> Nice try genius. I own an ebike.
> 
> Like I said. It's simple.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


It's not that simple. A lot grey area with bikes like the Levo.


----------



## 274898 (Nov 29, 2005)

I have been riding since the 80s. Started on fully rigid bikes. Bikes have come a long way through crappy suspension to great suspension nowadays. 

I don't have a problem with ebikes. There are a lot of benefits to ebikes. When you get older, you can have nagging injuries that prevent you from riding. Or, if you have had an injury that prevents you from riding is where ebikes would help. Currently, I have a nagging knee injury that has been going on for years and may go to a ebike in a few years. 

I have seen several ebikes on the trails and don't think affect the trails anymore than a regular mountain bike. I do think that if you are strong and able a regular mountain bike is better for fitness and strength.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Harryman said:


> With ebikes with the Fazua system, or any other removable motor system, of which there are many, if you remove the motor, it's no longer motorized, it is pretty simple. If you remove the battery, or any other fuel source, but leave the motor, it's still motorized, that's how the people who enforce the law see it around here.
> 
> How many miles you've ridden an ebike doesn't have any bearing on it.


Harsh fact. Black and white text here: https://www.blm.gov/policy/ib-2015-060 (bike with integrated motor, treated as motorized vehicle on BLM and USFS land)

Includes destination trails like Palm Canyon Epic. Have a regular bike ready for such rides.

I'd be willing to support anyone that wants to be some sort of "martyr" and take things to court, if you make a statement by riding without a battery (and not having access to any battery nearby), and happen to be harassed by land managers for having a motor on what can only be used as a regular bike in such a state.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

mtnbikej said:


> She was easily pedaling up the climb in the highest gear she had, while talking and not breathing hard.


Really? I know they have various levels of assist so I am assuming this was with maximum assist. But really?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

mtnbikej said:


> I don't have to ride an ebike to have an opinion. Yeah, my wife rode one....once. I know how fast/strong she is on her real bike. I also know what her pacing is. On the Levo she dropped me like I was tied to a tree....and that is not the case normally. On this 6 mile climb my PR is :51 her's is 1:01 She was easily pedaling up the climb in the highest gear she had, while talking and not breathing hard.
> 
> So I don't have to throw a leg over one to judge them.....first hand experience makes no difference.


So, what's the issue? You form an opinion because your wife went faster uphill? Big deal. How fast was your PR going down? Did she break hers on the Levo? Strava is WAY worse than a Levo based ebike. On a Levo, who cares about times?


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

chazpat said:


> Really? I know they have various levels of assist so I am assuming this was with maximum assist. But really?


 Really? You haven't ridden one yet have you. The bs about how they don't go fast is just that bs. The first time I rode one I thought."Now this is going to be a problem".
I totally see how addictive they are and why users want bicycle classification and access everywhere.
What I don't understand is how cyclists complain about the rising cost of our sport and the will pay a significant upcharge for a motor?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I wish my Levo could do 20mph up those long boring fireroad climbs, and that’s no BS. Personally not worried about speed. Every guy bombing down is speeding.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

mtnbikej said:


> On the Levo she dropped me like I was tied to a tree....and that is not the case normally. On this 6 mile climb my PR is :51 her's is 1:01.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> It's not that simple. A lot grey area with bikes like the Levo.


Actually there isn't.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Take the motor off yeah sure it's no longer an e-bike. (Try doing that on a Levo!)

Taking the battery out of an e-bike is like taking the clip out of a Glock and proclaiming it's no longer a firearm. Try sticking that in your carry-on luggage.

Why LEOs won't go for the "no battery" story is that e-bikers will see rangers waiting for them in the parking lot and ditch their batteries in the bushes to reclaim them later.

Good luck.


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

You personally not caring about speed matters none, when the reality is faster ascending riders. Whether that faster is as fast as a fast fit cyclist is another red herring, because the majority that tries an ebike will ascend faster than they do on a pedal bike. That creates potential user conflict on MUTs. 

Downhill speeds are again a red herring as all users are aware of the potential speed differentials that exist and should be riding in control to mitigate conflict. 

The worry here is ebikes are disruptive and are changing the dynamics of ascending speeds, before other impacted users are aware of the paradigm shift and unaware that ascending speeds have increased. Putting all of the onus on the ebiker to be the good steward, as many of you point out looks just like a pedal bike, since most others users will wrongly intuit the ascending speed of an ebike to be that of a pedal bike the likelyhood of conflict increases. 

Which I feel demonstrates clearly the "Touchy" nature of ebikes and the worry that mtbs will be dragged into in conflict since they are nearly indistinguishable to the layman.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

This thread should be called "Why e-MTB's are a touchy subject on forums" since, as anyone who has actually ridden one will tell you, they're not a problem with real riders. Been doing this for three years and have never met anyone on the trail who wasn't friendly and, when needed, helpful, or who I assisted. I'm sure there's going to be some hatred and vitriol spewed by the couple of individuals who specialize in it, but how many actual dissenters are there? Just a few who keep saying the same old, same old. Who gives a crap? Stop arguing and go ride.


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

Good idea, continue to berate and insult the people willing to have a discussion on why ebikes are touchy..

Engaging dissent is a required skill and lacking the ability to understand that does not bode well in ebikers longterm ablility to communicate effectively with managing agencies to gain the access you desire..

Beyond the technical conflict issues, I find the desire of ebikers to stifle discussion and ignore policy and fact one of the major driving forces for the continued touchy nature of ebikes.

Sadly entertaining in the end.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> This thread should be called "Why e-MTB's are a touchy subject on forums" since, as anyone who has actually ridden one will tell you, they're not a problem with real riders. Been doing this for three years and have never met anyone on the trail who wasn't friendly and, when needed, helpful, or who I assisted. I'm sure there's going to be some hatred and vitriol spewed by the couple of individuals who specialize in it, but how many actual dissenters are there? Just a few who keep saying the same old, same old. Who gives a crap? Stop arguing and go ride.


What do you think the percentage of bicycles to e-bikes on your trails are? Electric bikes are in their infancy here and a couple of them on the trail isn't a representation of what the future might bring, and for sure one rider's experience is only anecdotal.

Keep in mind that the "vitriol and hatred" spewed by some is merely them voicing their concern for the future.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

Gutch said:


> So, what's the issue? You form an opinion because your wife went faster uphill? Big deal. How fast was your PR going down? Did she break hers on the Levo? Strava is WAY worse than a Levo based ebike. On a Levo, who cares about times?


I replied to the other user who said if you haven't ridden one, you can't have an opinion. So I just relayed my experience with it.

We were also on a fire road in the mountains, it wasn't an access issue, a safety issue or a speed issue.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> Actually there isn't.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


And you're respectfully entitled to your opinion...... even though it's wrong lol.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

EricTheDood said:


> View attachment 1174815


It's ok.....she is quick enough on her own.....even she admitted, she doesn't want one. :thumbsup:

Then again....I'm lucky enough to have a spouse who rides all the time. MTN and CX. :thumbsup:


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> And you're respectfully entitled to your opinion...... even though it's wrong lol.


I'm not wrong at all. There is zero gray area. You wish there was so you can justify your riding. There are laws and regulations in place. They are straightforward. The Levo isn't special. It's a class 1 ebike and that only matters in states that have decided to regulate the 3 classes of ebikes. Otherwise they are motorized vehicles on all federal lands. Again, no gray area.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mtnbikej said:


> I don't have to ride an ebike to have an opinion. Yeah, my wife rode one....once. I know how fast/strong she is on her real bike. I also know what her pacing is. On the Levo she dropped me like I was tied to a tree....and that is not the case normally. On this 6 mile climb my PR is :51 her's is 1:01 She was easily pedaling up the climb in the highest gear she had, while talking and not breathing hard.
> 
> So I don't have to throw a leg over one to judge them.....first hand experience makes no difference.


"First hand experience makes no difference?????" There's not a single word of truth to that. It's impossible to to speak about anything accurately without experiencing what your talking about.

That's like saying I don't like fish tacos because my wife ate one and she said they don't taste very good. LOL. You gotta eat a fish taco to be qualified to talk about a fish taco.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> I'm not wrong at all. There is zero gray area. You wish there was so you can justify your riding. There are laws and regulations in place. They are straightforward. The Levo isn't special. It's a class 1 ebike and that only matters in states that have decided to regulate the 3 classes of ebikes. Otherwise they are motorized vehicles on all federal lands. Again, no gray area.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


According to your argument. You're betting on the fact that laws that were created to basically keep dirt bikes off federal lands will remain as we move forward into an ebike future. That's a bad bet. Times are changing, a new era is beginning, e-cars, ebikes e everything is on the way. Those laws will be revised as e bikes become more popular. Current law is black and white, because they didn't have to account for e technology bikes, only motorcycles. The grey area Levo will no doubt legally gain access in the very near future.

I was in mammoth and Lake Tahoe area last summer, every bike shop had 20 or 30 emountain bikes for rent. I asked them if they even rent pedal bikes? Very seldom was the answer. It's happening..... and you may not like it..... but it's still happening ?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> According to your argument. You're betting on the fact that laws that were created to basically keep dirt bikes off federal lands will remain as we move forward into an ebike future. That's a bad bet. Times are changing, a new era is beginning, e-cars, ebikes e everything is on the way. Those laws will be revised as e bikes become more popular. Current law is black and white, because they didn't have to account for e technology bikes, only motorcycles. The grey area Levo will no doubt legally gain access in the very near future.
> 
> I was in mammoth and Lake Tahoe area last summer, every bike shop had 20 or 30 emountain bikes for rent. I asked them if they even rent pedal bikes? Very seldom was the answer. It's happening..... and you may not like it..... but it's still happening


So there it is. Black and white. No gray area. Everything else is wishful thinking on your part. As someone who works with the BLM, I can tell you you're dead wrong on future federal access. Unless ebikers unite in force and advocate for access, you'll never get it. Saying that increased sales will equal future access is naive.

Once again. No gray area.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I’m going to go out on a limb here and put my stock in these guys versus the 10 or so doomsday preppers on this forum who “look” into the deep future and see many issues...

Specialized
Pivot
Commencal
Scott
Trek
Giant
Rocky Mountain
Lapierre
Cannondale
Felt
Kona
Orbea
Diamondback
Cube
Focus
Raleigh
Nicolai
Bianchi
Fuji
Mondraker
BMC
Haibike
Surface 604
Bulls
Norco
Moustache
Haro
Merida
Devinnci
Motobecane
Orange
Pinarello 

These companies “may have” some inside on a 250w allowed access. Just saying...


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> "First hand experience makes no difference?????" There's not a single word of truth to that. It's impossible to to speak about anything accurately without experiencing what your talking about.
> 
> That's like saying I don't like fish tacos because my wife ate one and she said they don't taste very good. LOL. You gotta eat a fish taco to be qualified to talk about a fish taco.


I have no first hand experience using Cocaine or Heroine, but I 100% support not every trying them or allowing others to try them.

No, I am not comparing eBikes to Hard Drugs, I am debunking your statement that first hand experience is required to know about a subject.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Silentfoe said:


> So there it is. Black and white. No gray area. Everything else is wishful thinking on your part. As someone who works with the BLM, I can tell you you're dead wrong on future federal access. Unless ebikers unite in force and advocate for access, you'll never get it. Saying that increased sales will equal future access is naive.
> 
> Once again. No gray area.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


I'm naive... Laws can and will change. Maybe not everywhere, but certainly more areas. To think otherwise is also naive.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Gutch said:


> I'm naive... Laws can and will change. Maybe not everywhere, but certainly more areas. To think otherwise is also naive.


And...you missed the point. Again.

Popularity of a product does not equal laws changing.

Ebikers DO NOT advocate for new trails, work with land managers or maintain the few trails they have access to.

Laws don't randomly change. As evidenced by this forum, you have a LONG uphill battle. This forum may be a small sample size but there are many land access advocates on here who have influence.

Keep blowing smoke. It may get you somewhere.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

MONEY MAKES **** HAPPEN, IF YOU DONT BELIEVE THAT, YOUR NOT MAKING THINGS HAPPEN! Give ebikers time and I guarantee you’ll see us advocating everywhere. Power in numbers. I’ll blow that smoke up my rear all day.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> I'm naive... Laws can and will change. Maybe not everywhere, but certainly more areas. To think otherwise is also naive.


This part of the discussion started with this:



MTB9488 said:


> A pedal assist ebike can be used as a normal bike without power. A motorcycle or other motorized vehicles cannot move unless power is used (you can push). Some of the trails i ride are flat, and don't need Power (pedal assist) yes an ebike is heavy at 45lb, but so was mountain bikes many years ago. So how do you band something from a trail if they can't determine if it was on or off at the time. Obviously only Rangers and police can do something if caught, but even then if it's powered off (or you say it is).


We have been referring to the fact that if your banned motorized vehicle is on a trail where it shouldn't be, it won't matter if it was powered off, or there isn't even a battery present. If it has a motor attached, it's still got a motor.

Future emtb access is mostly armwaving at this point unless you have inside info, which some of us do in our local areas. It might expand in some areas, it could shrink in others.


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

Or they are simply companies wanting growth and acting accordingly, nothing you have prognosticated is even close to true, to wit in 2016 there were approximately 540,000 EVs on US roads, or 0.22% of the total vehicles, that same year the US produced 17.5 million vehicles of which 134,000 or 0.77% were electric. In what world do you live that EVs are taking over? At best its wishful thinking looking at exponential early growth common to many new products and not looking at the total picture.

I am fully aware that you could be right, but do you fail to see how easily you could be wrong? 

All those manufacturers can keep churrning out ebikes and it may end up being being a great boon to their european bottom line, while the US market fizzles with a meh as users fail to organize for trail advocacy and alienate their potential allies in the process.

Good luck, I think you will need it as you seem to be your own worst enemy.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> MONEY MAKES **** HAPPEN, IF YOU DONT BELIEVE THAT, YOUR NOT MAKING THINGS HAPPEN! Give ebikers time and I guarantee you'll see us advocating everywhere. Power in numbers. I'll blow that smoke up my rear all day.


Check out how many trails in the Northeast US allow motorized vehicles, then check out how many are sold in the same region and follow up by finding some forums where for decades ORV riders have been losing their minds and demanding that someone give them access and build and maintain the trails for them.

Sales mean nothing. Bike manufacturers do NOT determine access, nor do they build or maintain trails in any sort of remotely impactful measures. Putting one's hope in The Industry to take care of everything is a lost cause. E-bikes stand a very good chance of gaining more access the sport follows in the footsteps of mountain biking, but pretty much no chance if they use the motorized vehicle model (at least in this region).


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I’m not relying on the industry. The industry in the US is relying on access for future sales. 
Again, money talks and will gain access is more places than current. The Northeast is so far behind on crap like this it ain’t ever happening. Hell it took us 10 years to allow a Walmart in our town in Upstate NY. But you know what? It happened and we sold them the land.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> I have no first hand experience using Cocaine or Heroine, but I 100% support not every trying them or allowing others to try them.
> 
> No, I am not comparing eBikes to Hard Drugs, I am debunking your statement that first hand experience is required to know about a subject.


You're not debunking my statement. One who has never experienced what they're talking about will never have the insight as to those who have. That's a fact!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I'm not relying on the industry. The industry in the US is relying on access for future sales.
> Again, money talks and will gain access is more places than current. The Northeast is so far behind on crap like this it ain't ever happening. Hell it took us 10 years to allow a Walmart in our town in Upstate NY. But you know what? It happened and we sold them the land.


If not rushing to install a Walmart on every corner is something that's considered 'behind' by folks of a certain mindset, I'm more than happy to live in the land of lag.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Gutch said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here and put my stock in these guys versus the 10 or so doomsday preppers on this forum who "look" into the deep future and see many issues...
> 
> Specialized
> Pivot
> ...


Exactly right! Big money is about to change hands.... we all know know what happens when lots of dollars come into play ?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!! Specialized CEO Mike Sinyard was just seen having dinner with BLM land managers.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> You're not debunking my statement. One who has never experienced what they're talking about will never have the insight as to those who have. That's a fact!


Seriously? That's your argument? You been doing a little early holiday drinking today maybe? 

Ever illegally kill anyone on purpose?
Then you have no right to have an opinion regarding murder, as you obviously lack the insight to form any sort of opinion on the subject.

Uh...yeah...


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Exactly right! Big money is about to change hands.... we all know know what happens when lots of dollars come into play 😀


Yup - Segways everywhere!

Oh, wait...


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

Glad we got all that big money into mtbing in the 90s, all that paid off in spades. Look at all the expanded access and increase in trail density from the glory days of Mammoth and Big Bear all over California.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Seriously? That's your argument? You been doing a little early holiday drinking today maybe?
> 
> Ever illegally kill anyone on purpose?
> Then you have no right to have an opinion regarding murder, as you obviously lack the insight to form any sort of opinion on the subject.
> ...


I'm a pilot, go ahead and read about flying until you think you know everything. Then I'll send you up and watch your lack of experience unfold lol.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Meanwhile, in the Northeast, there's basically zero corporate or government involvement to speak of at all, and we're building MTB trails like crazy and have been for a good long time now. The motorized users groups put their faith in 'The Industry' and the state to give them trails, while we picked up our shovels, opened our own wallets, and became the trusted experts and go-to group for making things happen. That's exactly what would work for e-bikes up here also; nothing stopping folks from doing it besides themselves.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I'm a pilot, go ahead and read about flying until you think you know everything. Then I'll send you up and watch your lack of experience unfold lol.


So does that mean I can't come up with a reasonable opinion regarding the appropriateness of landing a helicopter in the middle of a highway?

Seriously, enough with the weird and wacky conjecturing and semantic BS.
Let's take this thread back to where it at least somewhat relates to the topic, or even any topic that isn't just flat out ridiculous. People can form well-reasoned opinions about a lot of things without having to be intimately familiar with every aspect of them.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Here in so cal many of our trails that we ride today we’re built by motocrossers of the 60’s and 70’s. It’s funny how motorized bikes built so many trails. Then along came mtb’s and they have claimed then as their own. How ironic.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Here in so cal many of our trails that we ride today we're built by motocrossers of the 60's and 70's. It's funny how motorized bikes built so many trails. Then along came mtb's and they have claimed then as their own. How ironic.


Here, moto guys lost access mainly due to the advent of ATVs and the impossible task of keeping up with the huge escalation in trail wear that came along with them, as well as what seems to be a fundamental difference in philosophy and action with regard giving back to the trails. The MX groups would likely still have tons of places to ride if they weren't painted with the same broad brush as ATVers through guilt by association. While the MX groups were organized, much lower impact, and willing to clean up their own messes, ATVers were much more likely to go with the old "I pay taxes, you owe me trails!" attitude. It worked out as would be expected.

Many very obvious parallels to be drawn there when considering mountain bikes and e-bikes.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> If not rushing to install a Walmart on every corner is something that's considered 'behind' by folks of a certain mindset, I'm more than happy to live in the land of lag.


No doubt, you can't pay me to walk into Wallyworld. I'd rather drink the crap before a colonoscopy, but if you're the one selling the land, meh?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ALimon said:


> BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!! Specialized CEO Mike Sinyard was just seen having dinner with BLM land managers.


Was it with anyone on here?😂😂😂


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I'm a pilot, go ahead and read about flying until you think you know everything. Then I'll send you up and watch your lack of experience unfold lol.


Okay, I will bite.

The reference you are making is that unless one has ridden an eBike they have no experience with one and thus cannot form an opinion or make any suggestions as to how they should be managed.

Lets take your pilot statement and apply it to eBikes:

"I am an eBike rider, go ahead and read about eBiking until you think you know everything. Then I'll send you out on the trails and watch your lack of experience unfold."

Lets also take your pilot example and apply it to the actual topic on hand.

"You cannot make arguments about where airplanes can and cannot fly, takeoff or land because you have never flown one yourself, your lack of experience means you have no business deciding where planes fly, land and take off from."

Do you see how that line of reasoning breaks down when it comes to this topic. Someone certainly CAN read about eBikes and make an informed decision about access without needing to ride one. Just like someone can read about Air Travel and make an informed decision without needing to have a pilots license.

Also assuming that just because someone has a different opinion about how eBikes should or should not be allowed to access existing trails has never ridden an eBike is a bad assumption.

You are new to this forum, so users are going easy on you, sorta, but you gotta understand much of this has been beaten to death already. The argument that "they are coming, get used to it" has been debunked over and over again.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Well Dilly Dilly gentlemen. We can disagree on aspects of Ebikes, but we can all agree mtb’s are da bomb!


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Klurejr said:


> I have no first hand experience using Cocaine or Heroine, but I 100% support not every trying them or allowing others to try them.
> 
> No, I am not comparing eBikes to Hard Drugs, I am debunking your statement that first hand experience is required to know about a subject.


I could be wrong and am frequently, and have the utmost respect for you, but it seems (to me) that you compared e-bikes to drugs, then said you didn't. The same applies to murder, bank robbery, kidnapping and a slew of other things. IMO, you're comparing something heinous to something benign (except to a poster or two on this forum).


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Harryman said:


> This part of the discussion started with this:
> 
> We have been referring to the fact that if your banned motorized vehicle is on a trail where it shouldn't be, it won't matter if it was powered off, or there isn't even a battery present. If it has a motor attached, it's still got a motor.
> 
> Future emtb access is mostly armwaving at this point unless you have inside info, which some of us do in our local areas. It might expand in some areas, it could shrink in others.


Harry, this is interesting and if I were younger there's something that would be fun. There are some all downhill trails where I ride (obviously all uphill the other way). I'd like to take an ICE motorcycle, remove the motor, transmission and fuel tank, then use it to descend shuttling to the top (where I reside some individuals are able to take a bus from very near the bottom of a run back up). Unfortunately that train has left the station.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Klurejr said:


> Do you see how that line of reasoning breaks down when it comes to this topic. Someone certainly CAN read about eBikes and make an informed decision about access without needing to ride one. Just like someone can read about Air Travel and make an informed decision without needing to have a pilots license.


And of course, to logically carry the examples along in a way that very much relates here, unless someone has the same depth of experience when it comes to matters of trail access, advocacy and creation that guys like Walt, Harry and Silentfoe do, they shouldn't feel qualified to voice any contradictory opinion regarding those subjects.

I don't know whether or not that would apply to you ALimon; you may well have many, many years of experience and expertise in this regard. But if you don't, by your own logic, you would be unqualified to comment any further on the subject, as would quite a few others here. So let's just go ahead and put that mindset out to pasture, shall we?


----------



## Velocipedist (Sep 3, 2005)

Hmm, so it seems we are in consensus then that the current state of affairs is amenable as ebikes are fully legal on all current federal lands as OHVs, as are Mtbs, hope to see you on some sweet epics in the Rockies, e.g. Monarch Crest, while your advocacy efforts hopefully open up more opportunity in the future.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Everyone will use an analogy to favor their view. The point I’m trying to make is maybe those of you who have a negative view of bikes like the Levo should actually go demo one. Your opinion of a pedal assist bike may or may not change. But at least you will Have a more thorough understanding of what they are all about compared to not riding one at all.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Everyone will use an analogy to favor their view. The point I'm trying to make is maybe those of you who have a negative view of bikes like the Levo should actually go demo one. Your opinion of a pedal assist bike may or may not change. But at least you will Have a more thorough understanding of what they are all about compared to not riding one at all.


I would love to demo a Levo, they look super fun. The only eBike I have ridden was a DIY kit on a Kona Stinky, it was Thumb Throttle and it felt so weird not needing to pedal to go super fast(compared to my pedaling abilities) up a trail.

It would be rad to rip around my local riding area with a motor to boost me along.

I still won't purchase one for myself because I MTB for the personal challenge and exercise. I have 2 hours a week to ride in, and I ride with a group of friends that all pedal w/o assist. Having a motor would be pointless in that circumstance. Also they are way to expensive. At that price I would rather get another Dirt Bike.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Everyone will use an analogy to favor their view. .


Except I didn't do that - I simply applied your clearly stated sentiment that people who have little or no experience with something can't form valid opinions about it to trail access and advocacy issues. There's no analogy in that equation whatsoever. If you don't have experience with these things, how can you argue with those who do?
(This is based on your stated opinions, not mine.)

You see how that argument magically falls apart now that the tables have turned?
Not to mention, I believe those same guys all own e-bikes. I've ridden a couple myself and they seemed like fun, but I personally would also buy something with a lot more braap to it if I were to buy yet another motorized toy.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Are there some "expectations vs reality" (perception vs fact) or "what people think I do" memes for ebikes?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

slapheadmofo said:


> If not rushing to install a Walmart on every corner is something that's considered 'behind' by folks of a certain mindset, I'm more than happy to live in the land of lag.


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


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

chazpat said:


> And so you think your experience on YOUR trails gives you enough insight to decide what policy should be on ALL trails?





ALimon said:


> As a matter of fact yes! (snip)





ALimon said:


> You're not debunking my statement. One who has never experienced what they're talking about will never have the insight as to those who have. That's a fact!


:skep:


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

ALimon said:


> Everyone will use an analogy to favor their view. The point I'm trying to make is maybe those of you who have a negative view of bikes like the Levo should actually go demo one. Your opinion of a pedal assist bike may or may not change. But at least you will Have a more thorough understanding of what they are all about compared to not riding one at all.


Again, I don't feel the need. I watched and rode with someone who I know like the back of my hand....saw how it effected their riding on a trail we ride all the time. How much faster it allowed them to ride uphill. If anything...If I did ride one....I'd probably be even more against them, because I would be one of those guys riding one for the speed....not the need.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Klurejr said:


> I would love to demo a Levo, they look super fun. The only eBike I have ridden was a DIY kit on a Kona Stinky, it was Thumb Throttle and it felt so weird not needing to pedal to go super fast(compared to my pedaling abilities) up a trail.
> 
> It would be rad to rip around my local riding area with a motor to boost me along.


You're welcome to try my Levo if you want to meet up some time. It's a medium frame. You're in SD, I'm in OC. So maybe we can meet up at San Juan Trail or something like that.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Fresh from the meme factory.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

AGarcia said:


> You're welcome to try my Levo if you want to meet up some time. It's a medium frame. You're in SD, I'm in OC. So maybe we can meet up at San Juan Trail or something like that.


Except San Juan Trail is on Forestry Land....thus they are not allowed.

I know....you are going to come up with some lawyer speak, some loop hole, some semantic as to why you can.

Wanna ride it out on Main Divide....knock yourself out.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> Here, moto guys lost access mainly due to the advent of ATVs and the impossible task of keeping up with the huge escalation in trail wear that came along with them, as well as what seems to be a fundamental difference in philosophy and action with regard giving back to the trails. The MX groups would likely still have tons of places to ride if they weren't painted with the same broad brush as ATVers through guilt by association. While the MX groups were organized, much lower impact, and willing to clean up their own messes, ATVers were much more likely to go with the old "I pay taxes, you owe me trails!" attitude. It worked out as would be expected.
> 
> Many very obvious parallels to be drawn there when considering mountain bikes and e-bikes.


ATV's were the last straw for the motos guys around here, for the reasons you've listed. All the old timers have many stories about how as kids they would ride from their house up into the hills and ride all day. Now, they have ONE trail that accesses national forest with about 25 miles of legal singletrack. Otherwise, they have to drive 40 minutes out of town. We've actually talked to them about trying to combine efforts to create new, moto legal singletrack (no atv) trails that would benefit both groups, but they're honestly so shell shocked over how little they have left, that it doesn't even occur to them to try to build more.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

ATV's were the evil stepson because someone with little or no experience could buy one and ride great distance. They had not learnt trail manners or camaraderie. The next wave in the motorized world is the evil side by side. I was talking to some Jeepers in Moab and they are having trail problems with inexperienced people driving SXS using up desert by not staying on trails. 
This is what I fear with ebikes. It is not the seasoned biker that is riding one. To them I have no problem, we can get along. But the new user group that will buy their chops so to speak. Cut corners, travel fast and don't respect other user groups.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

I prove e haters wrong every time I Ride every trail I ride , learn live ride enjoy


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Except I didn't do that - I simply applied your clearly stated sentiment that people who have little or no experience with something can't form valid opinions about it to trail access and advocacy issues. There's no analogy in that equation whatsoever. If you don't have experience with these things, how can you argue with those who do?
> (This is based on your stated opinions, not mine.)
> 
> You see how that argument magically falls apart now that the tables have turned?
> Not to mention, I believe those same guys all own e-bikes. I've ridden a couple myself and they seemed like fun, but I personally would also buy something with a lot more braap to it if I were to buy yet another motorized toy.


LMAO What magically fell apart? What tables have turned? I stand by my opinion. First hand experience holds weight. Maybe I should write bike reviews for mtbr, the kicker is I've never really seen the bike nor have I ridden it. But from what I was told this is how the bike rides. Would that be a valid review? Or would you find more truth in a review where the tester actually rode the bike?


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

mtnbikej said:


> I know....you are going to come up with some lawyer speak, some loop hole, some semantic as to why you can.


Call it what you will.... In the meantime, I hope your holiday season is cheerful.


----------



## MTB9488 (Jun 18, 2012)

mtnbikej said:


> Again, I don't feel the need. I watched and rode with someone who I know like the back of my hand....saw how it effected their riding on a trail we ride all the time. How much faster it allowed them to ride uphill. If anything...If I did ride one....I'd probably be even more against them, because I would be one of those guys riding one for the speed....not the need.


If you want to go full speed you will "quickly" drain the battery (15-20mins) and be pushing/peddling a 50lb bike back to trailhead. Also Giving on opinion without ever trying it (minimum 25 miles off road not around a parking lot) it's no different than watching a few episodes of law and order and now saying you can be a lawyer.


----------



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

ALimon said:


> The point I'm trying to make is maybe those of you who have a negative view of bikes like the Levo should actually go demo one.


I don't have a negative view of the Levo and for sure I'll ride one when I get the chance but no matter what the result it won't change my opinion about them, even if it's slower than a bicycle I think it should be legally classified differently and gain access independently.

Again, experience or a test ride is completely irrelevant. I don't care what the Levo can do, I'm concerned about precedent.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> LMAO What magically fell apart? What tables have turned? I stand by my opinion. First hand experience holds weight. Maybe I should write bike reviews for mtbr, the kicker is I've never really seen the bike nor have I ridden it. But from what I was told this is how the bike rides. Would that be a valid review? Or would you find more truth in a review where the tester actually rode the bike?


Sure, having the experience riding one gives the rider more knowledge in what it is like to ride one. But as SHMF pointed out, Walt, Harryman, SilentFoe and himself have a lot more experience in trail advocacy and the issues (not just what users physically do to a trail) of maintaining a trail.

With the fish taco sample, sure, the lady eating it has more perspective on the taste, but if her husband saw the restaurant is filthy and failed their health inspection, he has better knowledge of if she should eat the fish tacos there. You can fly a plane but where you can take off and land isn't determined solely by pilots.


----------



## MTB9488 (Jun 18, 2012)

I Never thought I would buy an Ebike. But After 30+ years of abusing myself mountain biking, countless emergency room visits, broken bones, stitches, dislocating multiple joints, and Recently a mini stroke. Now at 50+ I’m feeling The years of abuse. I don’t care about riding fast anymore I just want to ride, and ride longer (hours/miles).


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

fos'l said:


> Harry, this is interesting and if I were younger there's something that would be fun. There are some all downhill trails where I ride (obviously all uphill the other way). I'd like to take an ICE motorcycle, remove the motor, transmission and fuel tank, then use it to descend shuttling to the top (where I reside some individuals are able to take a bus from very near the bottom of a run back up). Unfortunately that train has left the station.


Here's your event!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Sure, having the experience riding one gives the rider more knowledge in what it is like to ride one. But as SHMF pointed out, Walt, Harryman, SilentFoe and himself have a lot more experience in trail advocacy and the issues (not just what users physically do to a trail) of maintaining a trail.
> 
> With the fish taco sample, sure, the lady eating it has more perspective on the taste, but if her husband saw the restaurant is filthy and failed their health inspection, he has better knowledge of if she should eat the fish tacos there. You can fly a plane but where you can take off and land isn't determined solely by pilots.


I don't have any experience in trail advocacy, that's why I haven't commented on the subject. I don't talk about subjects, form opinions or judgements that I know nothing about. To me that's just plain ignorant.

BTW Those were very crafty examples. Speaking of tacos, I remember the first time I saw guacamole, no way in hell I was going to eat it, everything about it looked bad, sure glad I tried it. Experiencing it completely changed my opinion. It's funny how that happens.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

MTB9488 said:


> I Never thought I would buy an Ebike. But After 30+ years of abusing myself mountain biking, countless emergency room visits, broken bones, stitches, dislocating multiple joints, and Recently a mini stroke. Now at 50+ I'm feeling The years of abuse. I don't care about riding fast anymore I just want to ride, and ride longer (hours/miles).


More power to ya! Go rip it, I won't judge a rider. The mtb sport will never be the same purity it once was and that's what most can't stand. But it's reality.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ALimon said:


> I don't have any experience in trail advocacy, that's why I haven't commented on the subject. I don't talk about subjects, form opinions or judgements that I know nothing about. To me that's just plain ignorant.
> 
> BTW Those were very crafty examples. Speaking of tacos, I remember the first time I saw guacamole, no way in hell I was going to eat it, everything about it looked bad, sure glad I tried it. Experiencing it completely changed my opinion. It's funny how that happens.


I agree, they are super fun. Unless, I'm earning a paycheck riding my mtb, I'll ride anything that puts a smile on my face. These Levo's are also fun in like 2-3" of snow. I love beach riding it also, except for the "Hoff" chasing me at 17mph!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> I would love to demo a Levo, they look super fun. The only eBike I have ridden was a DIY kit on a Kona Stinky, it was Thumb Throttle and it felt so weird not needing to pedal to go super fast(compared to my pedaling abilities) up a trail.
> 
> It would be rad to rip around my local riding area with a motor to boost me along.
> 
> I still won't purchase one for myself because I MTB for the personal challenge and exercise. I have 2 hours a week to ride in, and I ride with a group of friends that all pedal w/o assist. Having a motor would be pointless in that circumstance. Also they are way to expensive. At that price I would rather get another Dirt Bike.


I appreciate your open mindedness. At least your willing to ride one. If you only have two hours a week you might be amazed by how much more ground you would cover and really get your 2 hours worth! Trust me, the challenge and exercise are still there.

Btw...Your response was the first truly reasonable response so far.

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead"

Thomas Paine


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I don't have any experience in trail advocacy, that's why I haven't commented on the subject. I don't talk about subjects, form opinions or judgements that I know nothing about. To me that's just plain ignorant.


So you have no opinion whatsoever regarding where e-bikes should be legally allowed?
I don't buy that for a second; I'm sure you do have some thoughts on the subject, and I also think you should share them freely while also being willing to listen and learn from others, particularly those with many years of experience in the access game. 
But if you're not comfortable with that, that's fine too. Doesn't mean everyone else is going to do the same though. 

FWIW, I've ridden both a Levo and a throttled e-bike and thought they were fun, and also think low-power PAS bikes would be fine on many MTB/MUT trails.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Harryman said:


> Here's your event!


Harry, I'm allergic to asphalt.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> So you have no opinion whatsoever regarding where e-bikes should be legally allowed?
> I don't buy that for a second; I'm sure you do have some thoughts on the subject, and I also think you should share them freely while also being willing to listen and learn from others, particularly those with many years of experience in the access game.
> But if you're not comfortable with that, that's fine too. Doesn't mean everyone else is going to do the same though.
> 
> FWIW, I've ridden both a Levo and a throttled e-bike and thought they were fun, and also think low-power PAS bikes would be fine on many MTB/MUT trails.


Of course I have an opinion. Of course I have some thoughts. As I've said I see no issues with the Levo and similar pas bikes having access to existsting mtb trails. I'm totally comfortable listening to those with experience also. I've worked with local mtb avocacy groups, I've built trails with them. But that's the extent of it. I've sat through meetings with land managers and quickly realized that's not for me.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I've sat through meetings with land managers and quickly realized that's not for me.


I hear ya. It's not for anyone, near as I can tell; necessary evil category for sure.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I don't have any experience in trail advocacy, that's why I haven't commented on the subject. I don't talk about subjects, form opinions or judgements that I know nothing about. To me that's just plain ignorant.
> 
> BTW Those were very crafty examples. Speaking of tacos, I remember the first time I saw guacamole, no way in hell I was going to eat it, everything about it looked bad, sure glad I tried it. Experiencing it completely changed my opinion. It's funny how that happens.


I'm not sure what you are arguing. I don't think anyone here is arguing that riding an ebike would not be fun. It's just not what some of us want to do. Most of us are discussing if ebikes should be allowed on mtb trails or not. Hence all the talk about trail advocacy.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> I'm not sure what you are arguing. I don't think anyone here is arguing that riding an ebike would not be fun. It's just not what some of us want to do. Most of us are discussing if ebikes should be allowed on mtb trails or not. Hence all the talk about trail advocacy.


How are you not sure? I've been quite clear that I think the Levo and similar bikes should have access like any other mtb which then led to trail advocacy questions. Pretty straightforward.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> If you only have two hours a week you might be amazed by how much more ground you would cover and really get your 2 hours worth!


This is one reason why land managers are hesitant to allow emtbs here locally, no conjecture, this is what they've told me. If you'd like more access for emtbs, the emtb community will have to bring a solution to the land mangers table.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> How are you not sure? I've been quite clear that I think the Levo and similar bikes should have access like any other mtb which then led to trail advocacy questions. Pretty straightforward.


But you seem convinced that if we all rode one, we'd no longer be concerned about the issues we are concerned about, that we'd all say, "Screw it, this is fun so who cares?" or something similar.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> But you seem convinced that if we all rode one, we'd no longer be concerned about the issues we are concerned about, that we'd all say, "Screw it, this is fun so who cares?" or something similar.


You keep using the word fun. I never once mentioned they were fun, or more fun than a pedal bike. I said they were harmless. What I am convinced of is any reasonable mind that would ride a PAS bike like the Levo would see no reason not to give them access to mtb trails. It's more about common sense than anything else, I get it, it has a motor and that brings concerns for many, but once you ride it those concerns should disappear.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> This is one reason why land managers are hesitant to allow emtbs here locally, no conjecture, this is what they've told me. If you'd like more access for emtbs, the emtb community will have to bring a solution to the land mangers table.


I rode a Levo for 3 months, I could own a Levo but I choose to ride a stump jumper. I chose the stumpy over the Levo because the Levo was slowing me down. If you're an advanced, fit rider the Levo really doesn't serve a major advantage. It would shut off when I wanted more and that just drove me crazy. Put the Levo in a beginner/novice/elder hands or a guy who only has 2 hours a week to ride and they would enjoy the bike immensely. The bike would fill the fitness gap that they lack and that would allow them to ride further and a bit faster than what they're accustomed to.

I see where you were going with this, and I agree. I hope to see some e bike advocacy take place because I am a fan of PAS bikes even though I don't own one right now. But one day I will, and I believe most of us here will as well. The day will come for all of us when a PAS bike may be the only way we continue to ride a bike as we age.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ALimon said:


> You keep using the word fun. I never once mentioned they were fun, or more fun than a pedal bike. I said they were harmless. What I am convinced of is any reasonable mind that would ride a PAS bike like the Levo would see no reason not to give them access to mtb trails. It's more about common sense than anything else, I get it, it has a motor and that brings concerns for many, but once you ride it those concerns should disappear.


I'm the one that keeps saying "fun!" It's the only reason I own one. For me it's what I ride when I explore, easy day, beach, snow, alley cat, just plain goof off day. 4-5 experienced riders on Levo's is a hoot.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> You keep using the word fun. I never once mentioned they were fun, or more fun than a pedal bike. I said they were harmless. What I am convinced of is any reasonable mind that would ride a PAS bike like the Levo would see no reason not to give them access to mtb trails. It's more about common sense than anything else, I get it, it has a motor and that brings concerns for many, but once you ride it those concerns should disappear.


How would this make the concern that other trail users will use "bicycles now have motors so they all need to be banned" disappear? Do you think you are going to convince someone who is already anti-bike to ride an ebike and then they will embrace them on the trails?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> You keep using the word fun. I never once mentioned they were fun, or more fun than a pedal bike. I said they were harmless. What I am convinced of is any reasonable mind that would ride a PAS bike like the Levo would see no reason not to give them access to mtb trails. It's more about common sense than anything else, I get it, it has a motor and that brings concerns for many, but once you ride it those concerns should disappear.


You can make the motor disappear? This I've gotta see.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> How would this make the concern that other trail users will use "bicycles now have motors so they all need to be banned" disappear? Do you think you are going to convince someone who is already anti-bike to ride an ebike and then they will embrace them on the trails?


I can't answer that. That will be for an advocacy group to solve. Convincing anti bike people won't be an easy sell but that doesn't mean it's not possible. A Forrest was built with one acorn, there will be land managers that approve of e bikes, perhaps that's when the e Forrest begins to grow. Time will tell.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Where I reside, e-'s seem to have convinced the decision-makers that e+'s are a bunch of execrable bogeymen out to ruin MTB. Eventually, some areas might allow e-MTB on a limited basis; when the Rangers see we're the same responsible individuals that we (are/were) on MTB, the tide could change.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I can't answer that. That will be for an advocacy group to solve. Convincing anti bike people won't be an easy sell but that doesn't mean it's not possible. A Forrest was built with one acorn, there will be land managers that approve of e bikes, perhaps that's when the e Forrest begins to grow. Time will tell.


 Mt bikes are still just a small% of trail users. Convince the horse folk,
dog walkers and hikers. Start there.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Everyone will use an analogy to favor their view. The point I'm trying to make is maybe those of you who have a negative view of bikes like the Levo should actually go demo one. Your opinion of a pedal assist bike may or may not change. But at least you will Have a more thorough understanding of what they are all about compared to not riding one at all.


 Demo'd two. Not interested, at all. Not legal for the most part here in MA.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> You keep using the word fun. I never once mentioned they were fun, or more fun than a pedal bike. I said they were harmless. What I am convinced of is any reasonable mind that would ride a PAS bike like the Levo would see no reason not to give them access to mtb trails. It's more about common sense than anything else, I get it, it has a motor and that brings concerns for many, but once you ride it those concerns should disappear.


 It's not the mt bikers you have to convince. Ever run into a HOH? ( Hateful old hiker) Dog walkers, horse riders, day hikers with kids. Want change? Not going to come from wishful thinking. Need to change the laws, the land manger policies and such. Lots of place I ride in MA( like conservation land and trustee organizations) have a written policy of no motorized vehicles as their bylaws. Not likely to change. Common sense would keep human powered trail users like mt bikes and hikers in a separate category from motorized vehicles.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I rode a Levo for 3 months, I could own a Levo but I choose to ride a stump jumper. I chose the stumpy over the Levo because the Levo was slowing me down. If you're an advanced, fit rider the Levo really doesn't serve a major advantage. It would shut off when I wanted more and that just drove me crazy. Put the Levo in a beginner/novice/elder hands or a guy who only has 2 hours a week to ride and they would enjoy the bike immensely. The bike would fill the fitness gap that they lack and that would allow them to ride further and a bit faster than what they're accustomed to.
> 
> I see where you were going with this, and I agree. I hope to see some e bike advocacy take place because I am a fan of PAS bikes even though I don't own one right now. But one day I will, and I believe most of us here will as well. The day will come for all of us when a PAS bike may be the only way we continue to ride a bike as we age.


 Guessing you're under 30? 54 here, when I tun 60 I become a coach potato? Ever hear of a masters running age bracket? Bikes don't have motors, e bikes are something else. One still has to pedal the PAS. Piece of ? 2 hours. Is my ride lesser because I rode 8 miles instead of 12 on some awesome tech trail instead for cruiser trails? Or both sucked because a did 26 miles on pave instead? You equate faster and further with more fun? All the time? Not always. Depends on the trails for me.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> It's not the mt bikers you have to convince. Ever run into a HOH? ( Hateful old hiker) Dog walkers, horse riders, day hikers with kids. Want change? Not going to come from wishful thinking. Need to change the laws, the land manger policies and such. Lots of place I ride in MA( like conservation land and trustee organizations) have a written policy of no motorized vehicles as their bylaws. Not likely to change. Common sense would keep human powered trail users like mt bikes and hikers in a separate category from motorized vehicles.


HOH has nothing on the horse folks. Both can be a real pain in the ass, but the horse folks sense of entitlement is outrageous. After a rain, when conditions are soupy, the horse folk seem to think its ok for a horse ride destroying the trails. Common sense would say keep the horses in the stable. So lets not talk about common sense because horse people don't have any. Here in CA we have a governor that is pro e bike. Now how that translates to access in the future is to be seen. So I can see the laws changing here in CA. Common sense does not say PAS bikes need a separate category from trail users, thats just your opinion. Trail users have found a way to co exist to this point, no reason a PAS bike won't be able to either.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I rode a Levo for 3 months, I could own a Levo but I choose to ride a stump jumper. I chose the stumpy over the Levo because the Levo was slowing me down. If you're an advanced, fit rider the Levo really doesn't serve a major advantage.  It would shut off when I wanted more and that just drove me crazy.


The second thing I would do with an ebike after converting it to tubeless would be to derestrict it, having it kick off at 19 mph drove me nuts too. I'm not alone, cruise some of the ebike forums, there's plenty of ways to do it.



ALimon said:


> Put the Levo in a beginner/novice/elder hands or a guy who only has 2 hours a week to ride and they would enjoy the bike immensely. The bike would fill the fitness gap that they lack and that would allow them to ride further and a bit faster than what they're accustomed to.


Land managers really don't care about anyone's fitness gap. I don't either honestly, if I can't ride far, I don't ride far. When I can't effectively ride mtbs anymore, which I can see in the future being 55 and having beat myself up for most of those years, I'll ride road/gravel more, hike more. Who knows, maybe I'll take up golf? I completely understand the allure of riding motorized bikes, be they motos or ebikes, I've done it, it's fun, you go faster, I love to go faster too. I just don't think it's a valid argument that we should change the laws governing non motorized places so people can continue to ride their toys.



ALimon said:


> I see where you were going with this, and I agree. I hope to see some e bike advocacy take place because I am a fan of PAS bikes even though I don't own one right now. But one day I will, and I believe most of us here will as well. The day will come for all of us when a PAS bike may be the only way we continue to ride a bike as we age.


Nah, nowhere to ride them here, I'd rather buy an electric moto or trials bike, now THAT looks like fun. I wouldn't hold my breath for emtb advocacy, the only ebike groups I can find on the interwebs are those that advocate poaching, none that advocate for access outside of P4B.


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Gives minimal assist at 18mph, if you base it off of GPS speed. The circumference of those fat plus tires gets shrunken due to the tire sag, so it overestimates your speed by about 5%.


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

I don't think tire sag makes you cover less ground, if that's what you mean. For one rotation you'll still travel the length of the tread, even if it's deforming at the bottom.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

tfinator said:


> I don't think tire sag makes you cover less ground, if that's what you mean. For one rotation you'll still travel the length of the tread, even if it's deforming at the bottom.
> 
> Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


Doh, you're right. xD


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Harryman said:


> I don't either honestly, if I can't ride far, I don't ride far. When I can't effectively ride mtbs anymore, which I can see in the future being 55 and having beat myself up for most of those years, I'll ride road/gravel more, hike more.


Yep.



Harryman said:


> Who knows, maybe I'll take up golf?


Nope.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

chazpat said:


> Yep.
> 
> Nope.


IDK, Motorcycle, weed, drinking, so many things I haven't done


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> HOH has nothing on the horse folks. Both can be a real pain in the ass, but the horse folks sense of entitlement is outrageous. After a rain, when conditions are soupy, the horse folk seem to think its ok for a horse ride destroying the trails. Common sense would say keep the horses in the stable. So lets not talk about common sense because horse people don't have any. Here in CA we have a governor that is pro e bike. Now how that translates to access in the future is to be seen. So I can see the laws changing here in CA. Common sense does not say PAS bikes need a separate category from trail users, thats just your opinion. Trail users have found a way to co exist to this point, no reason a PAS bike won't be able to either.


 Opinions vary. So many places, state local and fed land areas DO have separate trails and areas that keep the motorized vehicles separate from the other trail users. So there's that. Human powered vs motorized. YRMV.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> HOH has nothing on the horse folks. Both can be a real pain in the ass, but the horse folks sense of entitlement is outrageous. After a rain, when conditions are soupy, the horse folk seem to think its ok for a horse ride destroying the trails. Common sense would say keep the horses in the stable. So lets not talk about common sense because horse people don't have any.


But yet it is the Horseback riders and HOH's that show up at City Council meetings and advocate AGAINST eBikes.

If you think convincing a few MTB'ers on a Mountain Bike Forum that eBikes should be allowed everywhere a pedal bike is allowed is hard or going nowhere.... just try convincing the 2 groups you admit lack much common sense. This is what many of the people posting here are worried about. Those groups lack common sense and those groups in turn have been the biggest enemies to the sport of MTB well before motors were introduced. Just the idea of a "motor" is going to get the HOH and Horse Back Riders very upset. They will jump on this as a way to ban all wheeled access.

Marin is a prime example of one user groups (HOH's) totally dominating the rules of the trails.


----------



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

ALimon said:


> Common sense would say keep the horses in the stable. So lets not talk about common sense because horse people don't have any.





Klurejr said:


> .... just try convincing the 2 groups you admit lack much common sense. This is what many of the people posting here are worried about. Those groups lack common sense and those groups in turn have been the biggest enemies to the sport of MTB well before motors were introduced.


Stereotyping is the enemy IMO. Divisiveness, polarity, and self righteousness seem to be all the rage these days but I find a friendly exchange on the trail overcomes just about any social, political or 'mode of travel' boundaries. I guess I prefer to leave good impressions as an ambassador to myself and other riders they might encounter later, the more friends on the trail the better I figure.

Not all mountain bikers are raging lunatics but some hikers might think that based on a few bad experiences. See how that works?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> The second thing I would do with an ebike after converting it to tubeless would be to derestrict it, having it kick off at 19 mph drove me nuts too. I'm not alone, cruise some of the ebike forums, there's plenty of ways to do it.
> 
> Land managers really don't care about anyone's fitness gap. I don't either honestly, if I can't ride far, I don't ride far. When I can't effectively ride mtbs anymore, which I can see in the future being 55 and having beat myself up for most of those years, I'll ride road/gravel more, hike more. Who knows, maybe I'll take up golf? I completely understand the allure of riding motorized bikes, be they motos or ebikes, I've done it, it's fun, you go faster, I love to go faster too. I just don't think it's a valid argument that we should change the laws governing non motorized places so people can continue to ride their toys.
> 
> Nah, nowhere to ride them here, I'd rather buy an electric moto or trials bike, now THAT looks like fun. I wouldn't hold my breath for emtb advocacy, the only ebike groups I can find on the interwebs are those that advocate poaching, none that advocate for access outside of P4B.





J.B. Weld said:


> Stereotyping is the enemy IMO. Divisiveness, polarity, and self righteousness seem to be all the rage these days but I find a friendly exchange on the trail overcomes just about any social, political or 'mode of travel' boundaries. I guess I prefer to leave good impressions as an ambassador to myself and other riders they might encounter later, the more friends on the trail the better I figure.
> 
> Not all mountain bikers are raging lunatics but some hikers might think that based on a few bad experiences. See how that works?


Its not a stereotype if its true. If the horse folks in my area want to change my opinion perhaps they should change their behavior.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon, getting the point they are trying to make? There are a whole lot of trail users out there beside mt bikers. Looking at the BIG picture? You might want to. Your o so rosy outlook may need some fact checking. Common sense and opinion don't count for much. What counts? Laws already in place that dictate current trail use. Who shows up for trail days and has the land managers/ regulatory agencies ear? Who shows up to voice their concerns during meetings and council sessions? Who sits on the " friends of the forest/ trail stewards" meetings? In my area( MA) its' the hikers and mt bikers to all of those questions. And the mt bikers for a somewhat bigger percentage of trail build activities. Mt bikers have 20-30 year head start on the ebikers on access, best of luck. No hiker or horse rider is going to ride a motorized vehicle and say " this is awesome and I want to share the trails with it" IMHO. YRMV. CA seems to be the test case for the e bikes, see how it shakes out in say the next 3-5 years.


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

While there are a number of things that make discussions on e-bike difficult. One is that e-bikes on single track proponents have not been able to clearly define what they want.

I hear ADA thrown about, but is that the end game? Would e-bike proponents be ok if Class 1 was allowed for ADA qualified individuals? 

Others talk about pedal assist allowing them to keep up with their riding partners as they grow older.

Others talk about all riders being able to ride farther, get in more runs, or have more fun. 

So what is the end game? The advocacy effort to get e bike access for all is a lot harder than for ADA only.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ADA is a separate issue. They already can use them under the " other powered mobility device" For some areas. On some trails with limitations. The ADA has SO many rules and regs, some for federal, some for state issues. Lots of reading. My friends uses an electric off road wheel chair, anywhere it fits. Mostly on MA state trails. No issues. Different I know. Seems that someone who can pedal a PAS bike but not a mt bike would be slim? And would need the balance and cardio to do both? But say on a fire road with a PAS might be of appeal to a broader range of those with an ADA HP.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

indytrekracer said:


> While there are a number of things that make discussions on e-bike difficult. One is that e-bikes on single track proponents have not been able to clearly define what they want.
> 
> I hear ADA thrown about, but is that the end game? Would e-bike proponents be ok if Class 1 was allowed for ADA qualified individuals?
> 
> ...


I agree. Out here in sunny CA (seems about 80 degrees today) the minimum, IMO, would be Class 1 & 2 access for physically challenged riders; this may already be the situation. Long term goal would be limited access on a trial basis. This may take a couple of years to allow the e-MTB numbers to grow, but with more and more dealers carrying them and e-only stores opening, shouldn't take too long.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

E bike only stores are popping up everywhere here in so cal. CA wants to ban all cars that aren't electric in the next couple decades. The state has an aggressive plan for all e transportation which includes bikes. Times are changing. Mindsets are changing. People are changing. No doubt CA will be the first state to allow e bikes on forrest trails. You would have to blind not to see whats coming.


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

ALimon said:


> E bike only stores are popping up everywhere here in so cal. CA wants to ban all cars that aren't electric in the next couple decades. The state has an aggressive plan for all e transportation which includes bikes. Times are changing. Mindsets are changing. People are changing. No doubt CA will be the first state to allow e bikes on forrest trails. You would have to blind not to see whats coming.


CA is pretty aggressively protective of the environment. You think they'll let e bikes on State land? I'm not so sure. But, I guess we'll see. How big of lobby-boots do the e bike companies have? That's what makes the difference.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> E bike only stores are popping up everywhere here in so cal. CA wants to ban all cars that aren't electric in the next couple decades. The state has an aggressive plan for all e transportation which includes bikes. Times are changing. Mindsets are changing. People are changing. No doubt CA will be the first state to allow e bikes on forrest trails. You would have to blind not to see whats coming.


Just because they are pushing them for basic transportation (which is a good thing), doesn't mean they will push them on trails. If ebikes do truly kill the bicycle, it will be very sad. But there have always been plenty of roadies who chose to ride a bicycle rather than a motorcycle so I think the same will be true of emtbs and mtbs. A lot of us want to ride bicycles and are not looking for "assist".


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> E bike only stores are popping up everywhere here in so cal. CA wants to ban all cars that aren't electric in the next couple decades. The state has an aggressive plan for all e transportation which includes bikes. Times are changing. Mindsets are changing. People are changing. No doubt CA will be the first state to allow e bikes on forrest trails. You would have to blind not to see whats coming.


 I think e bikes make great commuters and are great for getting around on paved roads. Not so much for multi purpose off road trails. What CA areas allow e bikes everywhere?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> No doubt CA will be the first state to allow e bikes on forrest trails. You would have to blind not to see whats coming.


Uhhh...not for nothing, but that train has long left the station. There are lots of places already that allow e-bikes on trails. CA will just be the state where the government becomes most over-involved in the whole "issue".


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Even though it may be the best personal transportation mode I really don't think ebikes will make much of a difference in traffic. A state like Cali or Arizona would make sense but we are a long way away from that mindset. What we will see is that a lot of people will buy them then they will end up in the back of a garage or in a landfill.
Think of all the people that you know that don't get or want any exercise. Think they will be okay showing up to work sweaty or with bugs and dirt on them? How about when the realise that they have to wear a hair destructive helmet? Remember we are mostly a "I-something/Kardasian" society now.
If they did become popular how would your state tax them, who would pay for the roads and bike paths?
I is a great thought but I suspect that most of these ebike stores will be gone in a few years just like so many upstart fads.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

rlee said:


> If they did become popular how would your state tax them, who would pay for the roads and bike paths?


Why does the state need to tax them? Are you saying you think there should be some sort of ongoing taxation of bicycles and e-bikes (beyond a simple sales tax if that's something your state does)? Is this also a CA thing? Because I can't believe anyone on the east coast would put up with that sort of crazy talk.

Roads and trails will continue to be paid for the same way that all the roads and trails have been paid for. No need to reinvent the wheel.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

No don't think they need to be taxed. But I don't know how much your state gets from Fuel tax. Here in B.C. I think it is around 30% the cost of fuel is tax. This right now is a very hot topic in the automotive world.
A few years ago it was big news in Washington State that they wanted to put transponders into electric cars so they could calculate the mileage driven and at year end send you a tax notice for your share of the road tax. The government, especially in places like Cali has revenue problems and they aren't going to let this one go.
We are years away from this , but it still is a consideration. If ebikes actually became popular they would be grouped together with auto's.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

tfinator said:


> CA is pretty aggressively protective of the environment. You think they'll let e bikes on State land? I'm not so sure. But, I guess we'll see. How big of lobby-boots do the e bike companies have? That's what makes the difference.
> 
> Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


Colorado already allows Class 1 ebikes on state land.


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

honkinunit said:


> Colorado already allows Class 1 ebikes on state land.


Ha. I guess ALimon may be blind with the rest of us then

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> E bike only stores are popping up everywhere here in so cal. CA wants to ban all cars that aren't electric in the next couple decades. The state has an aggressive plan for all e transportation which includes bikes. Times are changing. Mindsets are changing. People are changing. No doubt CA will be the first state to allow e bikes on forrest trails. You would have to blind not to see whats coming.





tfinator said:


> CA is pretty aggressively protective of the environment. You think they'll let e bikes on State land? I'm not so sure. But, I guess we'll see. How big of lobby-boots do the e bike companies have? That's what makes the difference.





chazpat said:


> Just because they are pushing them for basic transportation (which is a good thing), doesn't mean they will push them on trails. If ebikes do truly kill the bicycle, it will be very sad. But there have always been plenty of roadies who chose to ride a bicycle rather than a motorcycle so I think the same will be true of emtbs and mtbs. A lot of us want to ride bicycles and are not looking for "assist".





leeboh said:


> I think e bikes make great commuters and are great for getting around on paved roads. Not so much for multi purpose off road trails. What CA areas allow e bikes everywhere?


I just want to add that eBikes on Streets and paved paths are not the issue we are discussing, eBikes on dirt Multiu-use Single Track Trails are.

As you can see those who may be against eBikes on Dirt MUT's are not against eBikes for commuting. eBikes for commuting is not a "touchy subject" on MTBR, only on MUT's.

Now that said, perhaps once eBikes are more widely used as basic transportation the mindsets of the land mangers will change. But not one person here can say for certain which way it will go, most of this talk of the future is speculation.

If I lived closer to work I would go out and buy myself an eBike today.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Leeboh just said the key word. "Commuter". Think about it... Joe shmo walks into a bike shop to buy an e bike to commute to work on. What's his next purchase? Maybe another e bike for his wife or kids? Maybe an e mtb? Before you know it he has a garage full of e bikes and that's how quickly things can change. 

Once the mindset changes, and it will over time. E bikes, e mtb will take off... along with access.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

^^^^ Cuz we all know all commuters and roadies are mt bikers? Not. Multi use, off road trails, that is where the issues are.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Well at least Klurejr got my point. 

Btw... Almost everyone I know has a road bike sitting next to their mtb.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> Leeboh just said the key word. "Commuter". Think about it... Joe shmo walks into a bike shop to buy an e bike to commute to work on. What's his next purchase? Maybe another e bike for his wife or kids? Maybe an e mtb? Before you know it he has a garage full of e bikes and that's how quickly things can change.
> 
> Once the mindset changes, and it will over time. E bikes, e mtb will take off... along with access.


Joe Shmo doesn't walk into a bike shop to buy a multi thousand dollar ebike to commute on. The person who buys a high dollar ebike for commuting is someone who is already invested either in cycling or alternative commuting.

He or she may or may not buy more ebikes. Ebikes have been around for commuters for decades. They are the reason ebike sales are up but they are still a novelty and will eventually top out. Weather plays a major part in bicycle commuting as does time and cost. There are only so many places and people who fit the bicycle commuter sweet spot.

Once again. Ebike commuting is not what we are discussing here. More ebike commuters does not equal more ebikes on trails, or even necessarily more ebike advocates.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

*How we roll in Cali*

We ride everything in Cali


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> We ride everything in Cali
> View attachment 1176012


Can i have your KTM?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Well at least Klurejr got my point.
> 
> Btw... Almost everyone I know has a road bike sitting next to their mtb.


And almost everyone I know (actually everyone I know) has a car sitting next to their mtb.

Where I am, commuting is limited as it's not safe to ride a bike nor an ebike on a lot of the roads. And rain, cold, darkness, sweaty, stinky, the need to drive to other locations, etc, will keep people from buying ebikes for commuting. Sure, in the city they make sense, but they aren't going to offer a commuting solution everywhere. And lots of city folk, even if they buy an ebike for commuting, have no interest in going out into the woods.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> And almost everyone I know (actually everyone I know) has a car sitting next to their mtb.
> 
> Where I am, commuting is limited as it's not safe to ride a bike nor an ebike on a lot of the roads. And rain, cold, darkness, sweaty, stinky, the need to drive to other locations, etc, will keep people from buying ebikes for commuting. Sure, in the city they make sense, but they aren't going to offer a commuting solution everywhere. And lots of city folk, even if they buy an ebike for commuting, have no interest in going out into the woods.


I guess it depends where you live and work.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> Can i have your KTM?


With or without the super moto wheels? 😋


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> With or without the super moto wheels? 😋


Without, I have street bikes. ;-)


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Well at least Klurejr got my point.
> 
> Btw... Almost everyone I know has a road bike sitting next to their mtb.


Not me. But we do also have some moto machines. :thumbsup:


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

leeboh said:


> ADA is a separate issue. They already can use them under the " other powered mobility device" For some areas. On some trails with limitations. The ADA has SO many rules and regs, some for federal, some for state issues. Lots of reading. My friends uses an electric off road wheel chair, anywhere it fits. Mostly on MA state trails. No issues. Different I know. Seems that someone who can pedal a PAS bike but not a mt bike would be slim? And would need the balance and cardio to do both? But say on a fire road with a PAS might be of appeal to a broader range of those with an ADA HP.


So then let's state that ADA is a red herring argument with respect to pedal assist bikes. ADA doesn't apply to technical single track trails and even if it did ADA access is not the end game for most e-bike advocates.

Issue #2 is that E-Bike advocates have decided that Class 1 pedal assist bikes fall under the category or mountain bikes and that existing mountain bike advocates therefore must advocate for them. As a mountain bike advocate, my plate was already too full before e-bikes and I have in the past told the land managers I work with that I only advocate for human powered mountain bikes. It would not be easy for me to walk back the human powered part and the extra burden of adding even pedal assist is beyond what I have the band width for.

The reality is that advocacy is hard. And no one does it well unless they are very passionate. I am not passionate about e-bikes. It is a mistake for anyone to want me to advocate for them.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

I've said this before, but to reiterate:
1) It's past time for e+ to realize they shouldn't expect trail access based on paying taxes, metabolizing oxygen, having hair on their balls or whatever.
2) It's past time for e+ to expect MTB assistance even if we've participated in trail building, advocacy or whatever as MTB riders.
3)If e+ riders are interested in trail access where none exists, get out and beat the bushes to attain it. For me, I won't initiate a program (don't need to since I get all the riding I want now), but will be happy to join in the effort when it starts.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

In the short term, e mtb will need some advocacy. In the long term I believe the advocacy will come organically. E bikes are coming. There’s no denying that. Eventually they will be the majority IMO and when that happens, the mindset will change and the acceptance will begin. Pedal bikes as we know them just might become the 26” wheel. I remember when the 650b and 29 showed up. So many said they would never buy a bike with larger wheels. I also remember all the arguments, and there were a million. Very similar to this discussion. 

In 2018 pedal bikes are the trend. In 2028 e bikes may be the trend. Any trend is just a generation away from extinction. Time will tell.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Eventually they will be the majority IMO and when that happens, the mindset will change and the acceptance will begin.


I have serious doubts that they will ever be the Majority.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> Leeboh just said the key word. "Commuter". Think about it... Joe shmo walks into a bike shop to buy an e bike to commute to work on. What's his next purchase? Maybe another e bike for his wife or kids? Maybe an e mtb? Before you know it he has a garage full of e bikes and that's how quickly things can change.
> 
> Once the mindset changes, and it will over time. E bikes, e mtb will take off... along with access.


No one cares if you buy an ebike. Just because I bought a 4x4 doesn't mean I get to drive up fire roads on Tam. Why don't you take that KTM out on some mtb trails, you bought it.


----------



## indytrekracer (Feb 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> In the short term, e mtb will need some advocacy. In the long term I believe the advocacy will come organically. E bikes are coming. There's no denying that. Eventually they will be the majority IMO and when that happens, the mindset will change and the acceptance will begin. Pedal bikes as we know them just might become the 26" wheel. I remember when the 650b and 29 showed up. So many said they would never buy a bike with larger wheels. I also remember all the arguments, and there were a million. Very similar to this discussion.
> 
> In 2018 pedal bikes are the trend. In 2028 e bikes may be the trend. Any trend is just a generation away from extinction. Time will tell.


Or, due to lack of advocacy, single track options will not open up for pedal assist as fast as e-bikes are sold. Sales will drop and the bike industry will focus on road/path commuter bikes.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> I have serious doubts that they will ever be the Majority.


If they ever get the price point sub 3k I believe they will. The only thing holding back more sales is the price. E mtb are new, prices still too high. We saw it with flat panels, you will see it with e mtb. When the day comes you can walk into a shop and buy an e mtb for the same price or less than a pedal bike, it's over.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I have an e-road bike for just riding, no commute. And yes, the more ebike sales the more it will bleed to emtb’s.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> If they ever get the price point sub 3k I believe they will. The only thing holding back more sales is the price. E mtb are new, prices still too high. We saw it with flat panels, you will see it with e mtb. When the day comes you can walk into a shop and buy an e mtb for the same price or less than a pedal bike, it's over.


I don't know, there must be several hundred e-commuter bikes here in Park City at this point. We even have an e-bike only bike share program that is super popular. All of that started happening 2 or 3 years ago, but I have yet to see any significant number of e-bikes on the trail. That's not to say people aren't going to go buy them, but I'm not sure the connection between commuter e-bikes and e-mountain bikes is as strong as you think.

Also, if you think bikes will follow the same price trajectory as mass market new tech like flatscreens... you're going to need a lot more people riding bikes (and replacing them frequently). Like, at least an order of magnitude more. There's a reason a decent bike costs more than a decent used car - they're a niche item. Mountain bikes especially so.

I agree costs will come down. But there will always be a cost premium associated with adding a motor and battery.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Walt said:


> I don't know, there must be several hundred e-commuter bikes here in Park City at this point. We even have an e-bike only bike share program that is super popular. All of that started happening 2 or 3 years ago, but I have yet to see any significant number of e-bikes on the trail. That's not to say people aren't going to go buy them, but I'm not sure the connection between commuter e-bikes and e-mountain bikes is as strong as you think.
> 
> Also, if you think bikes will follow the same price trajectory as mass market new tech like flatscreens... you're going to need a lot more people riding bikes (and replacing them frequently). Like, at least an order of magnitude more. There's a reason a decent bike costs more than a decent used car - they're a niche item. Mountain bikes especially so.
> 
> I agree costs will come down. But there will always be a cost premium associated with adding a motor and battery.


The connection is there. I think we can all agree on e bikes are a blast to ride. They're fast, they're fun and people really enjoy riding them. It seems to make sense the next progression would be buying another type of e bike other than a commuter. Maybe it's a road bike, maybe a mtb or a fat tire bike. Once the price points get close, it will be very interesting to see which way the consumer goes. Pedal bike or e bike for x amount of dollars more? If the price point is remotely close, I'd say e bike.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> The connection is there. I think we can all agree on e bikes are a blast to ride. They're fast, they're fun and people really enjoy riding them. It seems to make sense the next progression would be buying another type of e bike other than a commuter. Maybe it's a road bike, maybe a mtb or a fat tire bike. Once the price points get close, it will be very interesting to see which way the consumer goes. Pedal bike or e bike for x amount of dollars more? If the price point is remotely close, I'd say e bike.


Most people just have one bike, remember. The MTBR crowd isn't normal at *all*. I doubt any of the people I see on e-bikes around here own *any* other bikes unless it's a dusty mountain/hybrid bike with 2 flat tires in the rafters of the garage. Could they conceivably buy another e-bike for recreational use? Sure, but most of these folks just want to ride the bike path in their flip flops or to the farmers market with their grandkids anyway. A "road" ride? The one e-bike they have does that just fine.

I do know a ton of serious cyclists who have e-cargo bikes for either their kids or general errand running (hell, I'll have 2 of them soon!) I don't think a single one of them owns another e-bike of any kind, or has any interest in another one, though I haven't extensively surveyed people to find out. Speaking for myself and the two friends whose motivations I do know well - an e-bike to many is a *car* replacement, not another bike. I use it when I need to haul a bunch of stuff or run errands quickly, not for recreation.

-Walt


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> Most people just have one bike, remember.
> 
> -Walt


Most non-enthusiasts have one bike, but every single person I know who actually rides an MTB on trails has more than one bike. For many it is one MTB and one road bike, but I know plenty of N+1 people as well who have a garage full. In fact, I know people who have abandoned apartment living even though they liked it, because they wanted room for more bikes.

I don't think casual riders are the target market for eMTBs, I think it is N+1 primarily.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

honkinunit said:


> Most non-enthusiasts have one bike, but every single person I know who actually rides an MTB on trails has more than one bike. For many it is one MTB and one road bike, but I know plenty of N+1 people as well who have a garage full. In fact, I know people who have abandoned apartment living even though they liked it, because they wanted room for more bikes.
> 
> I don't think casual riders are the target market for eMTBs, I think it is N+1 primarily.


And that market is miniscule and won't really add to growth.

The market for ebikes is not the active, current cyclist.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

honkinunit said:


> I don't think casual riders are the target market for eMTBs, I think it is N+1 primarily.


Well, they might not be the target, but that's what I see around here. Hundreds of grannies and backwards-helmet (or no helmet, really) newbie folks on e-townies. Plus a few obvious "serious" cyclists on e-cargo units with 50 pounds of groceries.

Really, that's where the money is (and always has been). Folks who want to ride around town. There just aren't enough serious cyclists around to make anyone that much money. The average price (per BRAIN) of a new bicycle in the US in 2015 was around $300, just to put in perspective what kind of bikes most people buy. And I think that actually excludes kids bikes with <20" wheels.

-Walt


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Walt said:


> Well, they might not be the target, but that's what I see around here. Hundreds of grannies and backwards-helmet (or no helmet, really) newbie folks on e-townies. Plus a few obvious "serious" cyclists on e-cargo units with 50 pounds of groceries.
> 
> Really, that's where the money is (and always has been). Folks who want to ride around town. There just aren't enough serious cyclists around to make anyone that much money. The average price (per BRAIN) of a new bicycle in the US in 2015 was around $300, just to put in perspective what kind of bikes most people buy. And I think that actually excludes kids bikes with <20" wheels.
> 
> -Walt


To be fair, @honkinunit did specifically say that eMTBs are targeted toward the N+1 buyer, not e-bikes in general.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

In my area, many trails have places where riders congregate either at the beginning, at a turn around point or wherever. Frequently, there's an individual(s) with e-MTB(s). Some riders try the bike or state that this precipitates an interest, either immediate or down the road, for them to consider one. Whether there will be enough sales activity to maintain sufficient growth remains to be seen. As stated before, I've never encountered anyone on the trail who had a problem with e-MTB's, only on forums.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> And that market is miniscule and won't really add to growth.
> 
> The market for ebikes is not the active, current cyclist.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Of course the market is minuscule. They're just starting to show up. Let's talk again in 5 years. There's a reason practically every manufacturer is producing an e bike or will be shortly. The biggest promoter of e bikes, especially e mtb will be vacation destinations. Every bike shop in mammoth/ Tahoe had 30 e bikes min, mostly e mtb.
When joe shmo rents one, he will most likely buy one when he returns home. they're that good.

Sam pilgrim, pro rider has just signed with Haibike. I was wondering when a pro would make the switch. Well he was the first. That was huge for e bikes. If you don't know who Sam is, he's a legendary slopestyle/mtb rider. Huge following. He makes killer videos. Kids love videos, kids are the next generation rider. The influence has begun.

You say the market for e bikes isn't active..... I totally disagree. It's happening.


----------



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

Silentfoe said:


> The market for ebikes is not the active, current cyclist.


It will be


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

fos'l said:


> In my area, many trails have places where riders congregate either at the beginning, at a turn around point or wherever. Frequently, there's an individual(s) with e-MTB(s). Some riders try the bike or state that this precipitates an interest, either immediate or down the road, for them to consider one. Whether there will be enough sales activity to maintain sufficient growth remains to be seen. As stated before, I've never encountered anyone on the trail who had a problem with e-MTB's, only on forums.


I totally agree. I rode a levo for 3 months and never heard a negative comment on the trails. Let countless riders ride it and they all loved it. Even let a ranger ride it and he went ape **** over it. The only negativity does come from the forums, but even that is minimal, it's Always the same folks putting up a fuss.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> As stated before, I've never encountered anyone on the trail who had a problem with e-MTB's, only on forums.


Keep in mind that people are much more willing to voice their true opinions when they're anonymous, a lot of people you encounter on the trail might think differently than they speak. Also as much as I'm opposed to policy that qualifies them as bicycles I'm not going to lay into anyone riding an e-bike on the trail because they (as individuals) don't have anything to do with it.

I'm also opposed to people riding them illegally but I'd never say anything, I'm not a cop.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Keep in mind that people are much more willing to voice their true opinions when they're anonymous, a lot of people you encounter on the trail might think differently than they speak. Also as much as I'm opposed to policy that qualifies them as bicycles I'm not going to lay into anyone riding an e-bike on the trail because they (as individuals) don't have anything to do with it.
> 
> I'm also opposed to people riding them illegally but I'd never say anything, I'm not a cop.


Very very well said my friend


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

J.B. Weld said:


> I'm also opposed to people riding them illegally but I'd never say anything, I'm not a cop.


And this is a problem. We self police. If we don't, others will do it for us and we won't like the results. This is not a live and let live society. There are rules to follow. If you see something wrong, say something. People do things because they think they can get away with it. The more they get away with it, the more they think it's ok.

Don't need to be a dick about it, most of the time people just need to be called on their BS.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## dv8zen (Nov 30, 2017)

Is anyone worried that damning ebikes also damns mtb, due to certain amounts of overlap?

Mtbers who criticize ebikes mostly only look at the differences between ebike and mtb, but what's keeping non-mtbers from criticizing the many similarities between mtb and ebike? I presume that they'll only use short-sighted rationale when it benefits their agenda. I bet they'll be happy to quote people saying ebike = moto, and relate that to the ebike-mtb comparison.

*shrug* pays to keep things grounded in reality. Can continue to trash talking non-class-1 ebikes, and be proponents of class 1 ebikes, but just jamming it all up as "ebike" in general is probably doing a disservice to cycling in general. Any suggestion to abbreviate "class 1 emtb" and non-class-1? Would help to make things less ambiguous to be more specific. How about E1 (class 1) or E2+ (non-class-1)? E1 bike/mtb?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> It will be


It is now.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> It is now.


I'm a decade away from you.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> I'm a decade away from you.


To each his own, I know many serious cyclists that own emtbs.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> To each his own, I know many serious cyclists that own emtbs.


No disagreement here, check my earlier post. I was slightly exaggerating about the decade but we are a few years behind the current trends here in the backwoods, haven't seen an electric mtb yet.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> No disagreement here, check my earlier post. I was slightly exaggerating about the decade but we are a few years behind the current trends here in the backwoods, haven't seen an electric mtb yet.


Where is the "backwoods?" I wish my area would slow down.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

We had a few e-mtbs here. I haven't seen one in 6 months or so since the ban hammer got dropped and the signage went up at every trailhead. They occasionally pop up for sale for cheap on the local FB gear swap page.

I think there are a ton in CA, and outside of there it's probably really unlikely that you'll see one (either because you never see anyone period and you live in rural ID or something, or because you live somewhere they have no access to trails).

-Walt


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> To each his own, I know many serious cyclists that own emtbs.


I'm surprised South Carolina has so many emtbs. I've only seen one around metro Atlanta.

So I think the existing mtbers who purchase ebikes will likely use lower assist but as total noobs buy emtbs, they will use maximum assist and never change modes. If they do become the majority of trail riders over time, I could then see it evolving to why have power cut-off and pedals at all, though I've seen comments about not liking twist throttles.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> I'm surprised South Carolina has so many emtbs. I've only seen one around metro Atlanta.
> 
> So I think the existing mtbers who purchase ebikes will likely use lower assist but as total noobs buy emtbs, they will use maximum assist and never change modes. If they do become the majority of trail riders over time, I could then see it evolving to why have power cut-off and pedals at all, though I've seen comments about not liking twist throttles.


Yes, they are popping up on trails illegally in most places. I also own land and property in NYS, where the majority that I know personally ride.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Here in Ca we have a plenty of areas where you can legally ride them. We also have a new bike park that allows them. I think Ca will pave the way as the future of e mtb grows.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Oh yay. Now hikers can be ehikers as well.

http://www.gigadgets.com/article/151496714825421

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Silentfoe said:


> Oh yay. Now hikers can be ehikers as well.
> 
> GiGadgets | Honda's robolegs to assist personal mobility
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


That's a great product. I see absolutely zero issues, why would anyone?


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Yes you will see them as rentals, but who would rent them? In Sedona I see people rent them and ride them to the hiking trailhead. I don't think this will turn into sales.
There are a lot of models for this, a good example would be atv rental in places like Moab. Sure some people will be bit by the bug but most don't. And you have to remember that a low powered ebike is still some work, which the average person seems to be allergic to.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Here in Ca we have a plenty of areas where you can legally ride them. We also have a new bike park that allows them. I think Ca will pave the way as the future of e mtb grows.


There's an old saying among New England mountain bikers, coined by Mr Ted Wojcik AFAIK:

"I don't care how they do it in California."


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> There's an old saying among New England mountain bikers, coined by Mr Ted Wojcik AFAIK:
> 
> "I don't care how they do it in California."


Dang, bomb cyclone is hammering on you folks in MA. Might as well get your funk on!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Dang, bomb cyclone is hammering on you folks in MA. Might as well get your funk on!


Yeah, we got pelted pretty good; about a foot of windblown snow. Now we settle in for a deep freeze; supposed to be -12 by Saturday. Time to break out the snowmobiles!

Been hearing 'bomb cyclone' on the news all day, but it strangely morphed into something else that ended up stuck in my head when I was out clearing snow for 3 hours this evening. Still can't get rid of it. :madman:


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

Well I was 4 days off but right about the resolution part. Carry on, and on, and on......meanwhile


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> Yeah, we got pelted pretty good; about a foot of windblown snow. Now we settle in for a deep freeze; supposed to be -12 by Saturday. Time to break out the snowmobiles!
> 
> Been hearing 'bomb cyclone' on the news all day, but it strangely morphed into something else that ended up stuck in my head when I was out clearing snow for 3 hours this evening. Still can't get rid of it. :madman:


Yup, keep good spirits! You just threw that in my head now, dammit. Gonna have to break out the Grandmaster Flash, but thankfully in the mountains it's not snowing, only at the beach. Blame it on El Niño! ?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> Oh yay. Now hikers can be ehikers as well.
> 
> GiGadgets | Honda's robolegs to assist personal mobility
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


You better get ready for e everything! Futurism is about to slap you right upside your head. E cars, e bikes, e motorcyles, e atv's, e dune buggies, e race cars, e boats, e scooters, e skateboards, e hikers lol etc.... If it has wheels it will have a battery. Get used to it.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> There's an old saying among New England mountain bikers, coined by Mr Ted Wojcik AFAIK:
> 
> "I don't care how they do it in California."


We have a saying in Cali, We don't care how New Englanders do bomb cyclones. lol

Today was only 78 and sunny. I couldn't decide wether I should go ride? surf? or sit on the beach? So I did all three


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> You better get ready for e everything! Futurism is about to slap you right upside your head. E cars, e bikes, e motorcyles, e atv's, e dune buggies, e race cars, e boats, e scooters, e skateboards, e hikers lol etc.... If it has wheels it will have a battery. Get used to it.


That's depressing. As if Americans weren't out of shape as it is, now more reasons not to exercise. My experiences in nature will remain unmotorized, not just for the exercise but also for the experience. But I am looking forward to an electric car someday, to replace an already motorized experience.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

ALimon said:


> You better get ready for e everything! Futurism is about to slap you right upside your head. E cars, e bikes, e motorcyles, e atv's, e dune buggies, e race cars, e boats, e scooters, e skateboards, e hikers lol etc.... If it has wheels it will have a battery. Get used to it.


Seriously.

Just wait until our computers get electrified! I don't think my best friend is going to like that one bit!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> We have a saying in Cali, We don't care how New Englanders do bomb cyclones. lol
> 
> Today was only 78 and sunny. I couldn't decide wether I should go ride? surf? or sit on the beach? So I did all three


I actually know a guy who commuted 20+ miles through the storm yesterday, and I can guarantee if I knew more surfers, I'd know somebody that's out catching some waves today since it's sunny (but about 70 degrees cooler than where you are).

Adversity builds character and all that.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> That's depressing. As if Americans weren't out of shape as it is, now more reasons not to exercise. My experiences in nature will remain unmotorized, not just for the exercise but also for the experience. But I am looking forward to an electric car someday, to replace an already motorized experience.


There's only one reason not to exercise and that's because you choose not to. It has nothing to do with anything else.

Maybe it's an e bike that gets the fat kid off the sofa and away from his video games. E bike exercise beats sitting idle and pushing buttons.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> There's only one reason not to exercise and that's because you choose not to. It has nothing to do with anything else.
> 
> Maybe it's an e bike that gets the fat kid off the sofa and away from his video games. E bike exercise beats sitting idle and pushing buttons.


My kid isn't fat, nor do we have anything against gaming as entertainment in my house, but yeah, it's all about motors for him these days. He rides 5-7 days a week on either ATVs, dirt bikes, trail bikes or today, snowmobiles. When he was little, it was mainly pedal bikes, mostly BMX, but these days, he's found a real love for throttles. I wouldn't mind at all if an e-bike was what it took to get him out on the XC trails with me once in awhile. He'll still be in better shape than I am, as well as being a better rider in general.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

SHM, build your son an e-MTB. Worked for me; I built my wife a scorcher 52V, BBS02 and now we ride e-MTB's occasionally instead of our boring, hard-to-pedal MTB's. Bet he'll love bombing down the trails on an ebike and you'll have a "blast" trying to keep up. You're welcome, in advance.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

fos'l said:


> now we ride e-MTB's occasionally instead of our boring, hard-to-pedal MTB's.


I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry at that.

:lol: :cryin: :???:


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

chazpat said:


> I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry at that.
> 
> :lol: :cryin: :???:


Probably both, just not at the same time.


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

1433 posts and still no answer to the original question... is it really that complicated? Or do people struggle to comprehend that contraptions with motors are not bicycles? 

Pretty simple really...


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mileslong said:


> 1433 posts and still no answer to the original question... is it really that complicated? Or do people struggle to comprehend that contraptions with motors are not bicycles?
> 
> Pretty simple really...


It is pretty simple really. By definition. bi-cy-cle, a noun, a vehicle composed of two wheels held in a frame one behind the other, propelled by pedals and steered with handlebars attached to the front wheel.

Now it appears to me a pedal assist bike qualifies by the very definition. It has pedals, not foot pegs. It must be pedaled to gain momentum. It has a frame and by golly it has handlebars without a throttle. That's a bicycle.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

That argument has long been resolved for purposes of discussion here.
An e-bike and a mountain bike aren't the same thing. 
Let's move the conversation forward, or at least sideways. 

Fos - don't tell my wife, but I really think it would be a great way to get the kid to appreciate 'XC' riding more. Knowing him, it'll likely lead to a rekindled interest in bicycles in general.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ALimon said:


> It is pretty simple really. By definition. bi-cy-cle, a noun, a vehicle composed of two wheels held in a frame one behind the other, propelled by pedals and steered with handlebars attached to the front wheel.
> 
> Now it appears to me a pedal assist bike qualifies by the very definition. It has pedals, not foot pegs. It must be pedaled to gain momentum. It has a frame and by golly it has handlebars without a throttle. That's a bicycle.


The throttle is in the drive train either sensing cadence or torque. It has a motor. No longer a bicycle. Properly, an electric bicycle. Or, to some, a motorcycle. Motorcycle with pedals. (moped)


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Let’s not go there again...


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

ALimon said:


> It is pretty simple really. By definition. bi-cy-cle, a noun, a vehicle composed of two wheels held in a frame one behind the other, propelled by pedals and steered with handlebars attached to the front wheel.
> 
> Now it appears to me a pedal assist bike qualifies by the very definition. It has pedals, not foot pegs. It must be pedaled to gain momentum. It has a frame and by golly it has handlebars without a throttle. That's a bicycle.


Interesting that nowhere in your definition does it say that bi-cy-cles have a motor. You do note that bi-cy-cles are propelled by pedals and that it must be pedaled to gain momentum.

I prefer not to have motorized vehicles on my mountain bike trails.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

A moped (/ˈmoʊpɛd/ MOH-ped) is a small motorcycle, generally having a less stringent licensing requirement than motorcycles or automobiles because mopeds typically travel about the same speed as bicycles on public roads. Mopeds by definition are driven by both an engine and bicycle pedals.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> It is pretty simple really. By definition. bi-cy-cle, a noun, a vehicle composed of two wheels held in a frame one behind the other, propelled by pedals and steered with handlebars attached to the front wheel.
> 
> Now it appears to me a pedal assist bike qualifies by the very definition. It has pedals, not foot pegs. It must be pedaled to gain momentum. It has a frame and by golly it has handlebars without a throttle. That's a bicycle.





Gutch said:


> Let's not go there again...


Yeah, we've covered that multiple times. Definitions do not list what is NOT included, i.e. "does not have a motor" would not be part of the definition. By your way of thinking Alimon, an ice moped would be a bicycle as well.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Ironically, this way too old conversation is probably the best answer to the OP’s touchy question! Mtbers don’t want these Ebikes lumped in as bicycles. Call them what you want, but admit they are different. We all understand this, so let’s move on.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Yeah, we've covered that multiple times. Definitions do not list what is NOT included, i.e. "does not have a motor" would not be part of the definition. By your way of thinking Alimon, an ice moped would be a bicycle as well.


I just simply used the definition as it is. I did not try to interpret it in any way. Maybe it's time to revise the definition of bicycle.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I just simply used the definition as it is. I did not try to interpret it in any way. Maybe it's time to revise the definition of bicycle.


No need to do that, just add a definition for ebike, which has already been done, though most dictionaries may not have it yet. Why would we change the definition of a bicycle to be what you want it to be? And why would you even want that? Just makes me think you want to think you are riding a bicycle even if you aren't. Just be satisfied with what you're doing.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> No need to do that, just add a definition for ebike, which has already been done, though most dictionaries may not have it yet. Why would we change the definition of a bicycle to be what you want it to be? And why would you even want that? Just makes me think you want to think you are riding a bicycle even if you aren't. Just be satisfied with what you're doing.


What's wrong with revising a definition? It happens all the time. Definitions become dated and need to be updated. This subject is a perfect example of why. There's a reason signs say no motorized vehicles. Now why would they specifically say no motorized vehicles instead of no bicycles? Because according to the very definition that would allow a pedal assist bike. A definition should clearly define, there should be no room for interpretation. Your logic is flawed.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

And here comes the shitstorm...


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> What's wrong with revising a definition? It happens all the time. Definitions become dated and need to be updated. This subject is a perfect example of why. There's a reason signs say no motorized vehicles. Now why would they specifically say no motorized vehicles instead of no bicycles? Because according to the very definition that would allow a pedal assist bike. A definition should clearly define, there should be no room for interpretation. Your logic is flawed.


Sure, just like we revise the laws of physics to suit our respective agendas.


----------



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

ALimon said:


> A definition should clearly define, there should be no room for interpretation. Your logic is flawed.


When the definition was written it was clearly defined, any 5 year old could easily comprehend it. The author(s) had no idea of the litigious nature of people to come and that someone might attempt to twist it into a profitable loophole, e.g. turn something powered by a motor into something that is legally non-motorized.

Mopeds used a similar strategy in the 70's and once in quickly dropped the guise (pedals).


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

A bicycle, also called a cycle or bike, is a human-powered, pedal-driven, single-track vehicle, having two wheels attached to a frame, one behind the other. A bicycle rider is called a cyclist, or bicyclist.
definition from Wikipedia.
it is still a relevant description. does not state motor or assist motor so it doesn't need updating. It still describes people that propel themselves on a two wheel device without a motor or engine.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I just simply used the definition as it is. I did not try to interpret it in any way. Maybe it's time to revise the definition of bicycle.


Feel free to go discuss that somewhere else. 
For all intents and purposes here, a bicycle is a bicycle and an e-bicycle is an e-bicycle. Let's move on please, thanks...


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

In case it wasn't made clear enough for some people...again: move on.
That rathole is closed.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

slapheadmofo said:


> In case it wasn't made clear enough for some people...again: move on.
> That rathole is closed.


Just to Back up slap, please see the link in my sig to the "rules for eBike" section posting. In that post is a set of "definitions" agreed upon for discussion here.

Calling an eBike a motorcycle is not approved, calling an eBike a Bicycle is not approved. It is an eBike, electric bicycle or you can call it a Pedal Assist Mountain Bike. Having a motor is part of what an eBike is.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Don't forget about me; there's a huge spectrum of e-bikes that are mopeds (almost everything Luna sells and any Levo/Trek/Haibike that's been "tinkered" with)--- a moped by any other name is still a moped.

S/
Moe Ped


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Moe Ped said:


> Don't forget about me; there's a huge spectrum of e-bikes that are mopeds (almost everything Luna sells and any Levo/Trek/Haibike that's been "tinkered" with)--- a moped by any other name is still a moped.
> 
> S/
> Moe Ped


Luna, yes.

Spec/Trek/Haibike, not so much.

I know because I "tinkered" with a rental Levo to try it out as a commuter on pavement and found it to be pointless.

The stock gearing tops out around 22mph on a destricted Levo. Beyond this, the cadence gets stupid fast and the motor cuts out anyway, regardless of speed. A cassette and chainring swapout could increase the potential max speed, but with knobby tires, I'm doubtful it would get faster than 25-26mph without significant human effort.

I've had my Kenevo for almost 2 months now. I rarely exceed 15mph on flat fireroads so the 20mph limit (which is actually more like 18mph) is a non issue. I have no desire to derestrict my Kenevo. I also have my highest power setting at 75%, which is my sweet spot for shuttle days. This translates to about 375 watts peak. I'd probably dial it down to 50% or less for "enduro days", except for the fact that I don't do enduro days on the e-MTB. I go back to my Santa Cruz.

E-MTB is not about absolute speed. It's about relative speed, i.e. climbing the steepest hills in 1st or 2nd gear at 8mph. That's what puts smiles on riders' faces.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

ALimon said:


> What's wrong with revising a definition? It happens all the time. Definitions become dated and need to be updated. This subject is a perfect example of why. There's a reason signs say no motorized vehicles. Now why would they specifically say no motorized vehicles instead of no bicycles? Because according to the very definition that would allow a pedal assist bike. A definition should clearly define, there should be no room for interpretation. Your logic is flawed.


That's what "People for bikes" have been trying to do. Bicycle = class 1, class 2, class 3 and so forth. Change the definition and maybe people will fall for it. Ahem.. I mean believe it.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

ALimon said:


> You better get ready for e everything! Futurism is about to slap you right upside your head. E cars, e bikes, e motorcyles, e atv's, e dune buggies, e race cars, e boats, e scooters, e skateboards, e hikers lol etc.... If it has wheels it will have a battery. Get used to it.


That's what they said when segways first came on the scene.. then the owner fell off a cliff and died. True story.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Lemonaid said:


> That's what they said when segways first came on the scene.. then the owner rode off a cliff on one and died. True story.


fify

But I believe that was many years after they came out.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Are people really basing dozens or hundreds of posts in this thread based on whether or not people are capable at noticing differences? Can you tell a 125cc dirt bike apart from a 250cc after seeing both, and then being asked to identify examples of each by themselves? A compact sedan from a mid-size? A SUV from a pickup with a camper? Can you tell a Englishman from the Welsh, Scottish, or Aussies? A Chinese man from a Korean or Japanese man? Android from iPhone? A putter from a wedge? This is kind of turning into a childish game, with people acting like they don't know what the difference is between a motor scooter, moped, dirt bike, motorcycle, and ebike.

Was riding at night, on my ebike, with a group of riders all on regular bikes. There were fellow solo riders in the distance enjoying the trails at the same time. Some in our group were making comments like, "that guy's on an ebike, he looks so smooth and fluid up the climb." Sometimes they were right, sometimes they weren't. They joked with the people they got wrong, telling them they looked to have been on an e-bike. The ones they got right were giveaways, partly due to lights on the downtube/battery pack. People could visually confirm ebikes from over 100 yards, at night, just from the shape and proportions of the bike. This isn't the only time I've witnessed this "identify the ebiker" game played. There's some evidence here that suggests that it's difficult to tell class 1 ebikes apart from regular bikes at a distance.

Class 2 and class 3 should be easy to ID, as their differences are: acceleration without pedaling and unnatural acceleration beyond 20mph, up to 28mph. Delimiting a class 1 would make it no longer class 1 or 3. Identifying one should be simple as spotting it going faster than either. Verifying it could only require identifying mods to components that should be limiting speeds (e.g. speed sensor on chainstay altered).

Can't people just be a little bit more honest or authentic, so this thread can progress and people can actually learn about the topic? Don't want to end up writing a piece on how people act stupid since the reality of things contradicts their petty values and beliefs.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Varaxis said:


> blah blah blah


What?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

Check out this CL ad for custom built ebikes in Reno. Guy has an interesting point of view about wha one can get away with.

https://reno.craigslist.org/bik/d/the-fastest-electric-bike-on/6451828177.html

"This bike is illegal as hell and cannot be sold legally in just about any state. The reason is because of its power!
It has a 3000 watt rear hub motor (restricted in most of the USA for street use) with a powerful 72 volt 20 ah lithium battery that can be charged over 1000 times and can reach speeds up to 50 MPH if you dare? And can travel up to 50 miles on a single charge. 
I know there are lots of people out there that don't give a dam about regulations like restrictions of the power for electric bikes. It's a stinking bicycle to the powers it be!

I can build an electric bike to go as fast as you want and travel as far as you need to go on a charge, and if you want to be legal about it you can have it inspected by the DMV which probably have no clue on how to register something like this anyways. Then you can go with the general norm and pay for registration and pay for insurance like everybody else.

So if you're worried about getting into trouble for riding one of my rocket bikes, all you have to do when and if you get pulled over and are doing 50 mph or over (going uphill) is tell the cop that you're in training for the (tour de France) and has long as your peddling with the electric power it looks like your creating the speed yourself!. And how many cops carry a volt meter around with them to check and see how many watts and voltage your running?

(This is not a sure fire excuse to get out of receiving a ticket so please don't hold me responsible for any actions received, but it might get you off the hook, or maybe a good laugh with the officer?)

This bike is not for the average person as you can tell, so if you're not a rebel or against the establishments rules and regulations, this bike is not for you, and probably could not afford it anyways. (LOL)

But the point of having an electric bike is to keep the air clean, get to work and back for pennies a day, live healthy, get exercise while breathing in fresh air, and not pay for registration, not pay for insurance, (because it's a bicycle) and most of all!!!! To make people think you actually peddling the bike yourself when you're traveling at over 45 mph! Think of how impressive that would look! I have rode this bike out on the road and you would not believe the looks I get from people that I pass up peddling and using electric power at over 40 MPH, it's funny as hell!

You don't have to use the power just for speed, it's great for climbing hills and riding long distances without having to recharge, but it's nice to know it's there if you want it.

Just having 3000 watts of power and a 72 volt 20 ah lithium battery can make going for a causal ride turn into something very exciting, what kind of excitement do you think could you get when you ride your (government regulated) maximum allowed 750 watt max speed 15-20 MPH street legal electric bike that they will sell you in bike shops for over $3000.00. (Maybe getting from point A to point B.)
Because if you bought your 750 watt max power (that's legal) electric bike in a bike shop you probably paid over $3000.00 or more for it! 
So break out of the box, spend less and you never know, maybe that next ride you take might be the most exciting and best ride of your life!"


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

You go 50+ on that fatbike mongoose and you have waaay more balls than I do! Holy crap, that kona looks like a suicide bomber machine, terrible.


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

Mongoose, unsafe at any speed


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Idk, back in the day Mongoose was top notch. I used to race them with skyway tough wheels all over the states. Kind of a shame to see the mainstream sales and quality go downhill, although I read somewhere at around $200 for the fatbike it’s a hella bargain.
Thank god Redline held true.


----------



## Bjorn2Ride (Apr 4, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> There's an old saying among New England mountain bikers, coined by Mr Ted Wojcik AFAIK:
> 
> "I don't care how they do it in California."


Well, when it's 65 degrees and we are out riding green hills on a sunny day, and you are not, I suppose not caring is probably best.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> Well, when it's 65 degrees and we are out riding green hills on a sunny day, and you are not, I suppose not caring is probably best.


 Ok, warmer. Would this be the hills with earthquakes, mud slides or the burned out ones from forest fires?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> Well, when it's 65 degrees and we are out riding green hills on a sunny day, and you are not, I suppose not caring is probably best.


We don't require 65 and sunshine to ride, we're New Englanders. 
We run on piss and vinegar


----------



## Bjorn2Ride (Apr 4, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> It will be


What is an "active, current cyclist" ? I have 5 friends with Levos. All of them also have regular mountain bikes. My latest is a 2017 Stumpy Carbon. Basically a 30 pound Levo without the motor. The two bikes give me the ability to do a wide range of riding. As I have mentioned earlier, I am deeply involved with serious cyclists. Some who are professional mountain bikers. None of them have an issue with the Levo. Some have used one as a training aid. Coaches, definitely so. So what does "current and active" mean? What does fit mean? 140 pounds? Works for NPR?


----------



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

Bjorn2Ride said:


> What is an "active, current cyclist" ? I have 5 friends with Levos. All of them also have regular mountain bikes. My latest is a 2017 Stumpy Carbon. Basically a 30 pound Levo without the motor. The two bikes give me the ability to do a wide range of riding. As I have mentioned earlier, I am deeply involved with serious cyclists. Some who are professional mountain bikers. None of them have an issue with the Levo. Some have used one as a training aid. Coaches, definitely so. So what does "current and active" mean? What does fit mean? 140 pounds? Works for NPR?


^that's fine but why were you responding to me? I said that I believe most future electric bike buyers will come from bicycle riders.

Weird that you associate NPR with 140lbs and fit.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Learned that BLM and USFS don't have full sweeping bans on pedal assist mtbs. The Sandy Ridge guys claimed that the BLM rep they called up said pedal assist bikes are allowed. Cannell Plunge is USFS land and apparently they're allowed there. This inconsistency is confusing. Might be a stretch to say emtb views are becoming more tolerant based on it. How many other exceptions are there, I wonder.

Found it amusing that Utah's law, or at least Park City's, is that cat 1 emtbs are banned from singletrack, only allowed on "soft surface trails" which are at least 5' wide and/or marked as transportation corridors. Considered to be a "red" or unfriendly state to ebikes by pfb. Quite specific. xD


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Varaxis said:


> Found it amusing that Utah's law, or at least Park City's, is that cat 1 emtbs are banned from singletrack, only allowed on "soft surface trails" which are at least 5' wide and/or marked as transportation corridors. Considered to be a "red" or unfriendly state to ebikes by pfb. Quite specific. xD


Utah in general allows e-bikes anywhere unless specifically prohibited/further restricted by local ordinance. IMO that's a good way to do it - put control in the hands of the people who know the trails.

Park City has decided we don't want them, at least for now, on singletrack. I was peripherally involved in that decision and it came down to:
1: The trails are already crowded and conflict is becoming an issue. More users/faster users wasn't desirable. 
2: Some local shred-bros built DIY illegal/very fast bikes and made asses of themselves.
3: Many sections of trail here utilize chunks of private land with conservation/recreation easements that specifically prohibit motors and it's plausible that landowners could revoke that access legally if e-bikes were allowed.

In practice, there is not a lot of trail in UT that isn't either BLM/USFS or Park City/Summit County. So in terms of statewide legislation, it's very friendly. In terms of actual access, it's not.

-Walt


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

The USFS has begun to disassociate human power able electric bikes from engine only motorcycles and with good reason. The restrictions on motorization stem from the Supreme Court ruling that certain types of conveyance falls into the privilege category. That allows the state to legally violate a person's Right To Travel by any conveyance. 

The types of travel that are deemed a privilege are controlled via licensing. If you do not legally need a license to operate an electric bike, then riding it is a right protected by the Constitution, see Swift vs. Topeka for background.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Oh, jeez, not this again. LMs can discriminate against any vehicle they want. There is no constitutional right to operate your e-bike (or any bike) on a trail. 

FFS, why does this stuff keep coming up? I'd LOVE to see the look on a judge's face when you made this argument after poaching a trail. 

-Walt


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> Oh, jeez, not this again. LMs can discriminate against any vehicle they want. There is no constitutional right to operate your e-bike (or any bike) on a trail.
> 
> FFS, why does this stuff keep coming up? I'd LOVE to see the look on a judge's face when you made this argument after poaching a trail.
> 
> -Walt


I would love to challenge a ticket in court. Do you have any argument that refutes the Kansas Supreme Court? My guess is a Judge would side with Supreme Court over your gut feeling.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Linktung said:


> I would love to challenge a ticket in court. Do you have any argument that refutes the Kansas Supreme Court? My guess is a Judge would side with Supreme Court over your gut feeling.


Note that the USFS (federal) has NOT had to change restrictions based on a state court (wait...not even federal) ruling. And, note that Kansas court rulings have no legal bearing on any federal lands in Kansas, or anywhere else for that matter.

So, not only has the decision you reference had no impact on the USFS at the national level, but it has no bearing on any federal lands in KS. The people of Kansas can do whatever they want in that dump. Their laws and legal precedent have no bearing on federal lands.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Linktung said:


> I would love to challenge a ticket in court.


Shouldn't be that hard to make it happen. Let us know how it goes for you. Ideally wear a Go Pro the whole time. :thumbsup:


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

What on earth does a *Kansas* court decision have to do with federal land? 

-Walt


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Walt said:


> What on earth does a *Kansas* court decision have to do with federal land?
> 
> -Walt


I would love to hear Linktung's stellar legal reasoning on this one.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> What on earth does a *Kansas* court decision have to do with federal land?
> 
> -Walt


Look it up dear


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Walt said:


> Oh, jeez, not this again. LMs can discriminate against any vehicle they want. There is no constitutional right to operate your e-bike (or any bike) on a trail.
> 
> FFS, why does this stuff keep coming up? I'd LOVE to see the look on a judge's face when you made this argument after poaching a trail.
> 
> -Walt


The real tradgedy in all of this regardless of bike choice is how bicycles are frowned upon and prohibited in so many places.

In fact, a year after he signed the Wilderness Act of 1964, Lyndon Johnson said, "The forgotten outdoorsmen of today are those who like to walk, hike, ride horseback or bicycle. For them we must have trails as well as highways."

Legislation is turning the outdoorsman into the indoorsman. No wonder diabetes and obesity are an epidemic.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Varaxis said:


> Learned that BLM and USFS don't have full sweeping bans on pedal assist mtbs. The Sandy Ridge guys claimed that the BLM rep they called up said pedal assist bikes are allowed. Cannell Plunge is USFS land and apparently they're allowed there.


Links please


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> What is an "active, current cyclist" ? I have 5 friends with Levos. All of them also have regular mountain bikes. My latest is a 2017 Stumpy Carbon. Basically a 30 pound Levo without the motor. The two bikes give me the ability to do a wide range of riding. As I have mentioned earlier, I am deeply involved with serious cyclists. Some who are professional mountain bikers. None of them have an issue with the Levo. Some have used one as a training aid. Coaches, definitely so. So what does "current and active" mean? What does fit mean? 140 pounds? Works for NPR?


This is directed not solely at you, but you do realize that land managers are basing their decisions on what is legally allowed as an ebike, not just a 2017 Levo? Among other considerations that most proponents wave away. If the industry had changed the US legislation to mirror the EU one, a significant chunk of the opposition would vanish. It's their loss.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Linktung said:


> The USFS has begun to disassociate human power able electric bikes from engine only motorcycles and with good reason. The restrictions on motorization stem from the Supreme Court ruling that certain types of conveyance falls into the privilege category. That allows the state to legally violate a person's Right To Travel by any conveyance.
> 
> The types of travel that are deemed a privilege are controlled via licensing. If you do not legally need a license to operate an electric bike, then riding it is a right protected by the Constitution, see Swift vs. Topeka for background.


So you must be able to ride your real bike anywhere too? All these places that have banned mountain bikes for years are all taking my Constitutional rights away from me. Thank you for clearing this up for me. I'm heading to Mt Tam right now and telling all the rangers to FO


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

sfgiantsfan said:


> So you must be able to ride your real bike anywhere too? All these places that have banned mountain bikes for years are all taking my Constitutional rights away from me. Thank you for clearing this up for me. I'm heading to Mt Tam right now and telling all the rangers to FO


Yes, that is what the law says. If you get a ticket, I will help you clear it up.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

We're back on the black-helicopter sovereign-citizen illuminati thing again.

Sheesh. As I've said before, if your goal is to alienate reasonable people, that's a great way to do it. 

-Walt


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> We're back on the black-helicopter sovereign-citizen illuminati thing again.
> 
> Sheesh. As I've said before, if your goal is to alienate reasonable people, that's a great way to do it.
> 
> -Walt


You got an argument?


----------



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

ALimon said:


> Legislation is turning the outdoorsman into the indoorsman. No wonder diabetes and obesity are an epidemic.


Right, legislation is doing that...


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Well..e-bikes are a done deal. Our favorite mag...Mountainbikeaction...January '18.. has a few articles about e-bikes in my issue so...they must be a mtb..right?

The jocks and motorheads will never get along...


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Wait til Harley brings out their E motorcycle. I wonder how real Harley guys will accept that? Btw, I know it has nothing to do with this debate.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

ALimon said:


> The real tradgedy in all of this regardless of bike choice is how bicycles are frowned upon and prohibited in so many places.
> 
> In fact, a year after he signed the Wilderness Act of 1964, Lyndon Johnson said, "The forgotten outdoorsmen of today are those who like to walk, hike, ride horseback or bicycle. For them we must have trails as well as highways."
> 
> Legislation is turning the outdoorsman into the indoorsman. No wonder diabetes and obesity are an epidemic.


In 1965 the Sierra Club tried to get bikes banned from Wilderness and failed. An organization with a legal team the size of a small village balked at the idea of facing the Right To Travel in a court of law, because they knew they would lose.

All of the laws restricting the use of bicycles or low-power human electric bikes, fall into some form of tyranny. The ban on bikes in Wilderness is the greatest example of this. Municipalities and subsets of Government, writing conflicting and confusing regulations are precisely the reason why constitutional law exists. The problem we have right now is that there are very few challenges to these restrictions, partially because people are ignorant and the fines are rather small. It would cost more to challenge these laws then it is to pay the fees. Consequently, the heavy-handed restrictions get bolstered by apathy.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

1niceride said:


> Well..e-bikes are a done deal. Our favorite mag...Mountainbikeaction...January '18.. has a few articles about e-bikes in my issue so...they must be a mtb..right?
> 
> The jocks and motorheads will never get along...


MBA is a shopping catalog!


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> Right, legislation is doing that...


As a youth I used to put my "mtb"..year 1975 or so in my boat and row to some of the islands around here and make trails. The Patriot act changes all that. If the boat patrol sees anyone on the island they get a trespassing ticket...


----------



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

1niceride said:


> As a youth I used to put my "mtb"..year 1975 or so in my boat and row to some of the islands around here and make trails. The Patriot act changes all that. If the boat patrol sees anyone on the island they get a trespassing ticket...


And so now you just hang out on the couch and eat chips? Damn that Patriot act!


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> And so now you just hang out on the couch and eat chips? Damn that Patriot act!


Well I was 15 then..58 now so the wife and I are relegated to the bike path usually anyway so...I do have a Cheetos issue..real bad..I see an e-bike in my future..


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Here is another thought..If an e-bike was as quiet as a regular bike would anyone really know if it is powered or not?..minus the obvious visuals..

Or this...,a stealth seat post motor and hidden battery e-bike is riding along the trail. How would one know or care about the motor? Nothing is different to the non-ebiker..so..


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Harryman said:


> Links please


Going off of this for Sandy Ridge: http://forums.mtbr.com/oregon/ebikes-sandy-ridge-1066960.html#post13545909

And this for Cannell Trail/Plunge: 
- https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/static.peopleforbikes.org/PFB-0529 E-Bike Law Handouts_CA_V3.pdf
- https://www.trailforks.com/trails/the-cannell-meadow-trail/
- https://www.mtbproject.com/trail/5746950/cannell-trail-imba-epic

Edit: doh, the cannell trail is one that's okay for motor vehicles.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Varaxis said:


> Going off of this for Sandy Ridge: http://forums.mtbr.com/oregon/ebikes-sandy-ridge-1066960.html#post13545909
> 
> And this for Cannell Trail/Plunge:
> - https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/static.peopleforbikes.org/PFB-0529 E-Bike Law Handouts_CA_V3.pdf
> ...


Forgive me but I cannot find anything in this link

https://www.mtbproject.com/trail/574...rail-imba-epic

that shows e-bikes being permitted on that trail. Could you point it out please?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

And this one does not specify Cannel Plunge specifically, or did I miss something?

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/s...outs_CA_V3.pdf


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

And please forgive me once again but I do not see anything on e-bikes in this link, could you please enlighten me on where the info might be?

https://www.trailforks.com/trails/th...-meadow-trail/


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

@life behind bars Please look again or screenshot donation of $5 USD to the Rotary foundation and I'll do the work. xD


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Just point it out.


and, Sustainable Trails Coalition gets my freed up money so no joy.


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

Linktung said:


> The types of travel that are deemed a privilege are controlled via licensing. If you do not legally need a license to operate an electric bike, then riding it is a right protected by the Constitution, see Swift vs. Topeka for background.


That ruling would be presented as a precendental argument to SCOTUS, but that doesn't mean that they would accept to hear the case or that the judges would rule to support that decision nationwide. Even then, it is not likely to infer that you can ride wherever you want. I commute a lot in the city by way of multi-use trails and the road. That argument does not allow me to ride through people's yards or through any area that is not publicly accessible. In general, I use common sense to dictate where I should ride based on bike lanes and rules of the road that are in line with the legality of the places I can ride along with some courtesy for fellow riders or others using different forms of transportation in the same space. So, you ride where you are allowed or you present a petition to show public interest for access and an argument that addresses the issues to those who can grant access. Further, you must present in a way that shows you will also be mindful of the other users of the trail system. That said, in order to be granted access the LM or USFS have to agree with your argument. Going into that situation with the argument that you can ride anywhere you want because otherwise "they" are discriminating against your natural human rights to go anywhere you "need" will not gain you any traction whatsoever.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

dbhammercycle said:


> That ruling would be presented as a precendental argument to SCOTUS, but that doesn't mean that they would accept to hear the case or that the judges would rule to support that decision nationwide. Even then, it is not likely to infer that you can ride wherever you want. I commute a lot in the city by way of multi-use trails and the road. That argument does not allow me to ride through people's yards or through any area that is not publicly accessible. In general, I use common sense to dictate where I should ride based on bike lanes and rules of the road that are in line with the legality of the places I can ride along with some courtesy for fellow riders or others using different forms of transportation in the same space. So, you ride where you are allowed or you present a petition to show public interest for access and an argument that addresses the issues to those who can grant access. Further, you must present in a way that shows you will also be mindful of the other users of the trail system. That said, in order to be granted access the LM or USFS have to agree with your argument. Going into that situation with the argument that you can ride anywhere you want because otherwise "they" are discriminating against your natural human rights to go anywhere you "need" will not gain you any traction whatsoever.


The ruling is for public property only and even there, of course, would be nuances that could steer management away from allowing for bikes on every trail (an alternate route for example). The ruling does imply that any punitive costs associated with breaking a suggested route would be null and void.

Taking a case to court is a good way to test the strength of the law. And sure, there is still the chance that it won't be heard by a sympathetic judge, or a Judge familiar with law enforcement to see the error. Living as though the current rule of law is ironclad is wrong, but so is ignoring current law.

The problem we have as cyclists is that much of our advocacy dollars go to non-existent advocates like IMBA. Consequently, cyclists have rolled over every time an agency stomps on our rights to access. This has led to bolder and more aggressive attacks on our access.

Understanding rulings like Swift v. Topeka should help cyclists advocate for increased access and a rejection of arbitrary bans. This is the first step to regaining our footing as a user group with a backbone.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Sounds like you should go poach and run your ideas by a judge, Link.

One would think someone had already tested this, given that basically all public lands are managed in what you claim is an unconstitutional way, but Occam's razor isn't the strong suit of internet conspiracy theories. 

Still, if you do it (even if you don't win) my hat is off to you for at least backing up your anonymous words with action. 

-Walt


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> Sounds like you should go poach and run your ideas by a judge, Link.
> 
> One would think someone had already tested this, given that basically all public lands are managed in what you claim is an unconstitutional way, but Occam's razor isn't the strong suit of internet conspiracy theories.
> 
> ...


Poaching is what the agencies did to the rights of Americans.... Things are moving in the right direction, there are other avenues of attack other then civil disobedience. The prevalence of social media can help get the word out and we are already chipping away at the worst offenders. There is no conspiracy, the anti-cyclists have just been too powerful. The balance is shifting. When necessary I exercise my right to travel.


----------



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

Linktung said:


> Poaching is what the agencies did to the rights of Americans.... Things are moving in the right direction, there are other avenues of attack other then civil disobedience. The prevalence of social media can help get the word out and we are already chipping away at the worst offenders. There is no conspiracy, the anti-cyclists have just been too powerful. The balance is shifting. When necessary I exercise my right to travel.


Where on earth do you live? My riding opportunities are nearly unlimited.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> Where on earth do you live? My riding opportunities are nearly unlimited.


In ten minutes I can be on a trail that bans bikes because of Wilderness, another non-wilderness trail that bans bikes because of horses, another non-wilderness trail that bans bikes because of hikers, another trail that allows snowmobiles but bans electric bikes, and a tiny radius of area that allows cycling. All the close proximity Backcountry riding is closed to cycling. I am the perfect candidate to provide energy for access. To all you riders blessed with allowable terrain, take a moment to write your representatives in support of the cyclists who suffer.


----------



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

I prefer to focus on the positive.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Linktung said:


> Poaching is what the agencies did to the rights of Americans.... Things are moving in the right direction, there are other avenues of attack other then civil disobedience. The prevalence of social media can help get the word out and we are already chipping away at the worst offenders. There is no conspiracy, the anti-cyclists have just been too powerful. The balance is shifting. When necessary I exercise my right to travel.


But, you aren't a cyclist. You ride an e-bike.

Based on the actions of the USFS, BLM and others, it seems that the federal government has decided that those two things are simply not the same.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktungs profile claims he is sporting one of these...


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

life behind bars said:


> Linktungs profile claims he is sporting one of these...
> 
> View attachment 1183444


Now that's the perfect platform for an e-bike conversion!


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

A little slacker headtube wouldn't hurt.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

What's with the mobbing of Linktung? Just put them on ignore if you don't believe they are contributing. From an outsider's view, I am simply observing Linktung's posts as some sort of bait that attracts arrogant replies.

The Swift v Topeka case is interesting. It reminds me of when I went exploring and stayed past sunset and couldn't take bridge back across the Hudson since they gated off the pedestrian side. Ended up hitchhiking on the side of the off ramp. The guy insisted on driving me all the way to my parent's house (4-5 mi away). Instead of me being yelled at, they were thankful to the nice stranger and my mom tried to gift him food. I picked up on the mannerisms. Last time I got stranded and needed a ride, I did the same (I had some fried Vietnamese spring rolls I was saving).

Sorta related, I was looking into this study linking cardio to brain health earlier and was thinking of jocks (resistance and high intensity training) vs endurance vs sedentary types: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3991014/

Considering that pedal assist reduces the resistance training part, flattening out climbs...

As for why some people seemingly have a lack of brain health on mtbr forums, I suppose this study can explain some of them: https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa72/aa72.htm


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Le Duke said:


> But, you aren't a cyclist. You ride an e-bike.
> 
> Based on the actions of the USFS, BLM and others, it seems that the federal government has decided that those two things are simply not the same.


I suppose by your logic, everyone that rides an ebike is not a Cyclist? That's friggin funny.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Gutch said:


> I suppose by your logic, everyone that rides an ebike is not a Cyclist? That's friggin funny.


Kind of reminds me of Plato's Cave, where normal mtbers are prisoners in the cave and the escapee is the ebiker. The normal mtbers are frightened of the truths that the ebiker brings back, as it shatters the illusions they believe are their reality; they are also afraid of how the ebiker changed, to the point that they're willing to turn militant against them to avoid a similar fate.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Varaxis said:


> Kind of reminds me of Plato's Cave, where normal mtbers are in the cave and the escapee is the ebiker. The normal mtbers are frightened of the truths that the ebiker brings back, preferring to stay in their cave and belief their illusions.


What "truths"?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

You heard it here first - both the founders of the United States AND dead Greek philosophers agree - you should be able to ride your motorized bike anywhere you want!

Jeebus. One of y'all has GOT to come make this speech to a city council meeting sometime and then drop the mic...

-Walt


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Le Duke said:


> But, you aren't a cyclist. You ride an e-bike.
> 
> Based on the actions of the USFS, BLM and others, it seems that the federal government has decided that those two things are simply not the same.


 I don't need the federal gov't to tell me the definition of a cyclist.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

ALimon said:


> I don't need the federal gov't to tell me the definition of a cyclist.


Regardless of what you think you need, that's reality.

So, do you think you get to decide the regulations of the land you ride on?

Can I make my own regulations, too?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Le Duke said:


> Regardless of what you think you need, that's reality.
> 
> So, do you think you get to decide the regulations of the land you ride on?
> 
> ...


"Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

So to answer your question, yes I should get to decide. And you as well.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

ALimon said:


> "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
> 
> So to answer your question, yes I should get to decide. And you as well.


You do get to decide. By voting for people to represent you. In this case that means you are not a cyclist on an e-bike. If you are unhappy about that vote in someone different. If nobody is interested in making that change for you than you are out of luck in a representative democracy.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Ya still gotta pedal an e-bike at the moment...

If one pedals an ebike without the powered assist being used one is a cyclist. So if one pedals only half the time so what...

A lot of verbal gymnastics going on here...the real issue for most is the perceved increase of trail usage by undesirables. Just admit it and move on..it is obvious from these posts it is really not about the bike but about the personalities of ebikers. Increased cig butts, candy wrappers, empty containers, used needles and more will litter the trails...just ask the jocks..the world is their oyster.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

1niceride said:


> Ya still gotta pedal an e-bike at the moment...
> 
> If one pedals an ebike without the powered assist being used one is a cyclist. So if one pedals only half the time so what...


If you roll downhill on a dirt bike in neutral with the engine off are you on a non-motorized vehicle? No.

If you pedal an e-bike with the power off you are still e-biking.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

vikb said:


> If you roll downhill on a dirt bike in neutral with the engine off are you on a non-motorized vehicle? No.
> 
> If you pedal an e-bike with the power off you are still e-biking.


Incorrect..one is using it as a gravity powered, non-power assisted 2 wheeled contraption. If one is using it as a non-motorized unit it is not being powered.

Yea, I know...if one does not have a fishing license but has a pole stored in the boat are you fishing? Around here yes but that's all about the money and not about reality..


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

1niceride said:


> Yea, I know...if one does not have a fishing license but has a pole stored in the boat are you fishing? Around here yes but that's all about the money and not about reality..


It's the reality of the regulatory system we are talking about.


----------



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

Motorbikes aren't self propelled, they are throttle assist. They aren't going anywhere until a human twists that throttle.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

vikb said:


> It's the reality of the regulatory system we are talking about.


Yes..I just wish it had to do more with reality than money and politics..thats all I'm trying to get at. I guess I've blown my wad with this thread..


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> Motorbikes aren't self propelled, they are throttle assist. They aren't going anywhere until a human twists that throttle.


Just like firearms..one has to pull the trigger to use it.


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

What, money and politics aren't real? Well, what am I working for and voting about? Apparently nothing...

I also don't think it's really about dirty trashy human personalities, because those people exist and don't necessarily own an ebike though they could. It's about the electric motor, pretty sure.


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

1niceride said:


> Just like firearms..one has to pull the trigger to use it.


I'm getting really tired of all the "examples" of "rational" arguments. I've been told I can't do a number of things and using such arguments has never crossed my mind. Stick to the debate at hand, let's keep it compartmentalized rather than expanding this discussion into every moral and political debate that is going on in the world right now.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

dbhammercycle said:


> What, money and politics aren't real? Well, what am I working for and voting about? Apparently nothing...
> 
> I also don't think it's really about dirty trashy human personalities, because those people exist and don't necessarily own an ebike though they could. It's about the electric motor, pretty sure.


If ya did not know one had an electric motor would there still be an issue? If so that tells me its about control of others and not about the realistic effect of ebikes on trails.

Ill try to stay in my lane but..didn't we have someone who ran on taking money and politics out of our government? See how that went..

Happy e-biking everyone!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Varaxis said:


> Going off of this for Sandy Ridge: http://forums.mtbr.com/oregon/ebikes-sandy-ridge-1066960.html#post13545909
> 
> And this for Cannell Trail/Plunge:
> - https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/static.peopleforbikes.org/PFB-0529 E-Bike Law Handouts_CA_V3.pdf
> ...


I dunno, I wouldn't give too much weight on a hersay post on mtbr..... we've seen that here, where one person calls the office, they say one thing, another person calls, they say the opposite. I like to see a policy in writing


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

1niceride said:


> Just like firearms..one has to pull the trigger to use it.


So is this a thread that's outlived it's usefulness?

Might be time to continue the trend and lock it.


----------



## Bjorn2Ride (Apr 4, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> So is this a thread that's outlived it's usefulness?
> 
> Might be time to continue the trend and lock it.


It serves to illustrate the absurdity here . Gleeful use of "motorbike", etc. The more threads like this, the sooner an adult will step in and create a forum for eBikes and a spepartn forum for people who don't like eBikes and like calling them Mopeds and motorcycles and talk about banning them from mountain bike trails, etc. (This forum)


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

1niceride said:


> Just like firearms..one has to pull the trigger to use it.


Don't let those money grabbing politicians try to violate your right to carry a so called firearm onto a plane. It's not a firearm if it isn't fired, right?


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> talk about banning them from mountain bike trails, etc. (This forum)


I've suggested a separate e-biker site more than once. I think it would solve a bunch of problems.

To the point I quoted above you can't be banned from something you don't have access to. You need to generate the advocacy effort [in most places] before e-bikes will be allowed on human powered MTB trails.

Once that happens we can start talking about banning them.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Since MTBaction calls e-bikes mtbikes my guess they are mtbs..and we have a sub-forum called e-bikes here on mtbreview...so..

There is no law against being annoyed..so far..


There will be people who would join the ebiker site just to complain about the ebikers so...might as well do it here..


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Nurse Ben said:


> So is this a thread that's outlived it's usefulness?
> 
> Might be time to continue the trend and lock it.


It kind of loosely applies. The bike's a tool. It's like revolver and lever/pump-action shotgun users resisting against semi-automatic guns, saying they're like automatic weapons. ZOMG, just flick it to another mode (or modify it to add it) and you got an auto! Ignore the fact that they are all there to perform the same task: fire ammunition. All the guys with small arms are crying about the risk of their tools getting banned cause some guy snapped due to all the stress in his life, using such a tool to create a controversial disaster.

It's a blame game. A quick fix of banning guns won't do anything but make someone choose another tool. They can interpret "arms", in "right to bear arms" as something else. Your guns are not arms, arms are attached to your shoulders. A grudge-bearing emotional wreck is crazy with a gun and is also crazy with other explosives and other dangerous things. Guns just aren't seen as having any useful utility, same as mtn bikes, and both are getting political attention. People can literally just say take a hike or ride "mechanized trails".

Would it make sense if revolver owners alienated themselves from other gun owners and said semi-automatics aren't arms, they're weapons of deaths, which should be banned? Arms are something that you control with your arms! Having a stock and/or reducing recoil is cheating! What would you think of those revolver owners if you owned a glock and know that it's the AK47 or AR15 that was the tool of choice of the crazies (conveniently ignoring the non-crazy AR15 and AK47 owners)? Guns bring the potential of RPGs, heavy rotary cannons (Gatling/Vulcan), artillery, naval cannons, rail guns, mass drivers, etc.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

1niceride said:


> There will be people who would join the ebiker site just to complain about the ebikers so...might as well do it here..


I think that's an incorrect assumption. I doubt you'd see any mountain bikers on an e-bike forum.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

1niceride said:


> Since MTBaction calls e-bikes mtbikes my guess they are mtbs..and we have a sub-forum called e-bikes here on mtbreview...so..
> 
> There is no law against being annoyed..so far..
> 
> There will be people who would join the ebiker site just to complain about the ebikers so...might as well do it here..


Citing MTB Action to support your position automatically nullifies any and all plausibility.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

vikb said:


> I think that's an incorrect assumption. I doubt you'd see any mountain bikers on an e-bike forum.


I betcha a nickel they would..just look at this sub forum..

The boaters who don't fish complain about the people who fish...the fishermen complain about the pwc's and the skiers, the pwcers complain about people who fish in stupid spots just to aggravate and the skiers who are just as crazy as the pwcers. Now add the kayakers in the mix who consider themselves as the purists and ya got this mess..

Gollygeewhiz..in my sportsmen club fist fights between the archers and the gunners were getting outta hand...

Can't we just all get along? I am a 60's hippy though..these days it all about divide and conquer with no middle ground..


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

life behind bars said:


> Citing MTB Action to support your position automatically nullifies any and all plausibility.


I don't have a position on ebikes..just trying to ferret out the real reason for the rub between ya all. It doesn't seem to be about the bike...ya gotta pedal it also..


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

1niceride said:


> I don't have a position on ebikes..just trying to ferret out the real reason for the rub between ya all. It doesn't seem to be about the bike...ya gotta pedal it also..


Just do some more reading, check out the plethora of threads.

eBikes bring the potential to close down access to all bikes in a way that has been seen before.

Many on this site know that the pedelects if left stock are not going to harm the trail systems or cause some major trail conflict, but they can and are regularly modified to put out much more power.... that is what the posters here don't like. Why? More power means more trail damage and more user conflict. Trail damage and user conflict leads to Enforcement, and blanket bans of all Bikes pedal or electric assist is much easier than trying to only police certain bikes of certain wattage, or have some way to check them trailside. The other thing that is easy to do? Ban all eBikes. I am not saying that is the best solution, but it is the easiest for Land Managers.

So far they are still a very small niche market, so they go under the radar for most Land Managers at this point. No one here can say for certain what the future will hold.

One thing is for sure, sticking ones head in the sand and just stating "eBikes are the same as pedal bikes" is not going to accomplish anything.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Klurejr said:


> Just do some more reading, check out the plethora of threads.
> 
> eBikes bring the potential to close down access to all bikes in a way that has been seen before.
> 
> ...


I get all that and have read a ton on this issue. And you are right if ebikes get to this point of being motorcycles. But until then they need to be pedaled so...

Reminds me of the battery powered kayack crowd thats getting bigger here..


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

1niceride said:


> I get all that and have read a ton on this issue. And you are right if ebikes get to this point of being motorcycles. But until then they need to be pedaled so...
> 
> Reminds me of the battery powered kayack crowd thats getting bigger here..


Some of them need to be pedaled.

And just because they need to be pedaled does not mean they cannot be modified to have much more power.

Some eBikes ARE motorcycles.

I helped put together some clear definitions in the main rule sticky for this section. many a times new users come into this sub section and totally miss it. Link to in my sig.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

A more powerful ebike doesn’t necessarily mean a faster pace. You can only go so fast on trails to begin with especially with congestion. And if you could go faster, it’s because your either experienced and or have good sight lines. When talking about any sport, let’s talk about the masses, you know the 250w Pedelecs that all the manufacturers are currently producing. There will always be the oddball knucklehead. I ride everything and could care less what someone rides to clear their head, as long as they are abiding by the law. What’s the issue?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> It serves to illustrate the absurdity here . Gleeful use of "motorbike", etc. The more threads like this, the sooner an adult will step in and create a forum for eBikes and a spepartn forum for people who don't like eBikes and like calling them Mopeds and motorcycles and talk about banning them from mountain bike trails, etc. (This forum)


There's plenty of ebike forums out there already, just google. This one will never be as useful to ebikers as those are, since hardly any ebike info gets posted here.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

1niceride said:


> I get all that and have read a ton on this issue. And you are right if ebikes get to this point of being motorcycles. But until then they need to be pedaled so...
> 
> Reminds me of the battery powered kayack crowd thats getting bigger here..


And they all have motors. Don't forget that.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Harryman said:


> There's plenty of ebike forums out there already, just google. This one will never be as useful to ebikers as those are, since hardly any ebike info gets posted here.


Was useful to me in a philosophical sense. I got to witness the paradox of tolerance. Might have to go to another forum where there isn't tolerance for the intolerant.

Also got to witness many logical fallacies come out, and how people believe they're valid arguments (e.g. slippery slope) xD

Also got me to think deeper about the advocacy situation, which this quote helps explain:

"People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People's heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool."

"People need an enemy to feel a sense of purpose. It's easy to lead people when they have a sense of purpose. Sense of purpose is more important by far than the truth. In fact, truth has no bearing in this. [The liar] is providing them with an enemy, other than himself, a sense of purpose. People are stupid; they want to believe, so they do."

Kind of see all sorts of principles in action, from the models in Noam Chomsky's _Manufacturing Consent_, to other general human behavior patterns.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

You said what I've been trying to say without saying it..I guess my job is done here.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Varaxis said:


> Was useful to me in a philosophical sense. I got to witness the paradox of tolerance. Might have to go to another forum where there isn't tolerance for the intolerant.
> 
> Also got to witness many logical fallacies come out, and how people believe they're valid arguments (e.g. slippery slope) xD
> 
> ...


Dude, you're pretty deep. I don't mean that in a bad way, I'm just trying to wrap my head around this. Maybe I've had too many concussions!


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

The Nazi handbook Mein Kampf talks about how to do this..the present administration uses this all the time..think immigrants...


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

chazpat said:


> Don't let those money grabbing politicians try to violate your right to carry a so called firearm onto a plane. It's not a firearm if it isn't fired, right?


Its the person one worries about with the ebike...I mean gun...

Its not the item but the intent..

I'm taking a break before its too late..back to the boating forum for a couple of days..


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

vikb said:


> You do get to decide. By voting for people to represent you. In this case that means you are not a cyclist on an e-bike. If you are unhappy about that vote in someone different. If nobody is interested in making that change for you than you are out of luck in a representative democracy.


I would love to vote in someone different if there was someone different. At the moment it seems like everyone who runs for office is a cookie cutter looking for a job rather than someone looking to represent the people. I think we all know what happens when the people aren't heard..... expect more of the same.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Varaxis said:


> Was useful to me in a philosophical sense. I got to witness the paradox of tolerance. Might have to go to another forum where there isn't tolerance for the intolerant.
> 
> Also got to witness many logical fallacies come out, and how people believe they're valid arguments (e.g. slippery slope) xD
> 
> ...


That's one of the best post I've read. Absolute truth.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

1niceride said:


> Its the person one worries about with the ebike...I mean gun...
> 
> Its not the item but the intent..
> 
> I'm taking a break before its too late..back to the boating forum for a couple of days..


Going to troll the kayakers with your "battery powered kayack (sic) crowd"?


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

1niceride said:


> Its the person one worries about with the ebike...I mean gun...
> 
> Its not the item but the intent..
> 
> I'm taking a break before its too late..back to the boating forum for a couple of days..


Of course it's the intent, but the intent can't be there if the temptation is gone. The world would be much better off without guns. Same for e-bikes.



Varaxis said:


> Was useful to me in a philosophical sense. I got to witness the paradox of tolerance. Might have to go to another forum where there isn't tolerance for the intolerant.
> 
> Also got to witness many logical fallacies come out, and how people believe they're valid arguments (e.g. slippery slope) xD
> 
> ...


How do you know what "truth" is? Did you define it? Are people "idiots", like you quoted, if they don't believe your "truth"?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

How do you know what "truth" is? Did you define it? Are people "idiots", like you quoted, if they don't believe your "truth"?[/QUOTE]

You can find the truth to just about anything through research and education. Most people don't see past their own perspective, so they never really learn the truth. Most people get their information from mainstream media sites and the internet, that alone makes it harder to tell the difference between what's real and what's fake. An "idiot" will read something online or see it on the news and will believe that is must be true. An educated person will research and investigate and will ultimately learn the truth through hard work. Most people are just too damn lazy for that. They prefer to just believe what they read, what they hear or are told by a friend.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

ALimon said:


> How do you know what "truth" is? Did you define it? Are people "idiots", like you quoted, if they don't believe your "truth"?


You can find the truth to just about anything through research and education. Most people don't see past their own perspective, so they never really learn the truth. Most people get their information from mainstream media sites and the internet, that alone makes it harder to tell the difference between what's real and what's fake. An "idiot" will read something online or see it on the news and will believe that is must be true. An educated person will research and investigate and will ultimately learn the truth through hard work. Most people are just too damn lazy for that. They prefer to just believe what they read, what they hear or are told by a friend.[/QUOTE]

So who's research is correct? Unless you are doing your own experimenting and observing, can you trust other peoples' research? Even if you do your own research, tpyou don't know if there is bias or causation over correlation. There are truths out there, but when it comes to e-bikes, it's mostly opinion and common sense.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

mountainbiker24 said:


> . There are truths out there, but when it comes to e-bikes, it's mostly opinion and common sense.


Common Sense!!! With your statement below, I'd doubt that you are showing any.



mountainbiker24 said:


> The world would be much better off without guns. Same for e-bikes.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

KiwiPhil said:


> Common Sense!!! With your statement below, I'd doubt that you are showing any.


So you're saying that guns have benefitted mankind? Or e-bikes benefit anybody?


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

mountainbiker24 said:


> So you're saying that guns have benefitted mankind? Or e-bikes benefit anybody?


Personally I have benefitted from possessing both, and only someone with pure ignorance or arrogance could argue against.


----------



## Flagstaff23 (Feb 20, 2018)

There is such an easy answer to this debate. Allow Class 1 e-MTBs on trails anywhere a regular MTB is allowed. Regulate it. Require registration (yes, like a fishing or hunting permit). ****, limit it even further, if you like. 500 x$ permits to in-demand trails like Demo in Santa Cruz. After that, double the registration fee. "So, you want to ride demo on a class 1 ebike? Sorry, but the first 500 first come first serve permits are sold out--it's going to be double $$ for you, buddy..." Meanwhile, the forest service rakes in the dough, creating resources to both expand access to and protect the area like never before.

The caveat would be, anything over Class 1 is illegal, period, anywhere a current pedal powered MTB goes on designated MTB trails. Let's be real. Class 1 is all it takes to increase up-hill access for injured, disabled, physically unfit and/or newbs to experience the sport. 

Let's not be dicks. 3/4 of MTBers are fat-ass, out of shape, weekend warriors anyway (if that.) 

All Class 1 is going to do is allow 3/4 of everyone here protesting against it, to actually start to have some fun without risking a heart attack.

There's no environmental danger or otherwise with class 1 eMTBs people. Get over it and get over your fat-ass selfs feeling self righteous because you actually "work for it" and then float downhill on your motorcycle-grade Fox suspension, and then go drink a 12 pack of beer afterwards because you feel you "earned it" on the climb up.

**** that ****. Huffing your fat ass up a mountain in order to experience a motorcycle mechanical suspension on the downhill is no worse than eBike dudes getting a free ride up and getting their asses pummeled on the way down while trying to wrestle a 50lb bike around corners.

If class 1 eMTBs help get more people into the sport, that can only be a good thing for everyone! 

The bottom line is, more enthusiasts = more lobbying power at all of our local city/county councils to open up access on "hiking only" trails for everyone!


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Flagstaff23 said:


> There is such an easy answer to this debate. Allow Class 1 e-MTBs on trails anywhere a regular MTB is allowed. Regulate it. Require registration (yes, like a fishing or hunting permit). ****, limit it even further, if you like. 500 x$ permits to in-demand trails like Demo in Santa Cruz. After that, double the registration fee. "So, you want to ride demo on a class 1 ebike? Sorry, but the first 500 first come first serve permits are sold out--it's going to be double $$ for you, buddy..." Meanwhile, the forest service rakes in the dough, creating resources to both expand access to and protect the area like never before.
> 
> The caveat would be, anything over Class 1 is illegal, period, anywhere a current pedal powered MTB goes on designated MTB trails. Let's be real. Class 1 is all it takes to increase up-hill access for injured, disabled, physically unfit and/or newbs to experience the sport.
> 
> ...


Even better... NO MOTORS. Now that's easy.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mountainbiker24 said:


> You can find the truth to just about anything through research and education. Most people don't see past their own perspective, so they never really learn the truth. Most people get their information from mainstream media sites and the internet, that alone makes it harder to tell the difference between what's real and what's fake. An "idiot" will read something online or see it on the news and will believe that is must be true. An educated person will research and investigate and will ultimately learn the truth through hard work. Most people are just too damn lazy for that. They prefer to just believe what they read, what they hear or are told by a friend.


So who's research is correct? Unless you are doing your own experimenting and observing, can you trust other peoples' research? Even if you do your own research, tpyou don't know if there is bias or causation over correlation. There are truths out there, but when it comes to e-bikes, it's mostly opinion and common sense.[/QUOTE]

In the case of an ebike, everyone should ride one before they comment on them. Many anti ebike folk here say "they don't need to ride one because it has a motor". What a bunch of bs. That stance only makes you ignorant and incompetent. The truth is a pas ebike is not faster than a fit rider on a human powered bike. It also does not do anymore trail damage than a conventional mtb. Both of those comments are the truth, Anyone who rides a PAS with an open mind would find that as the truth, not an opinion


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Flagstaff23 said:


> There is such an easy answer to this debate. Allow Class 1 e-MTBs on trails anywhere a regular MTB is allowed. Regulate it. Require registration (yes, like a fishing or hunting permit). ****, limit it even further, if you like. 500 x$ permits to in-demand trails like Demo in Santa Cruz. After that, double the registration fee. "So, you want to ride demo on a class 1 ebike? Sorry, but the first 500 first come first serve permits are sold out--it's going to be double $$ for you, buddy..." Meanwhile, the forest service rakes in the dough, creating resources to both expand access to and protect the area like never before.
> 
> The caveat would be, anything over Class 1 is illegal, period, anywhere a current pedal powered MTB goes on designated MTB trails. Let's be real. Class 1 is all it takes to increase up-hill access for injured, disabled, physically unfit and/or newbs to experience the sport.
> 
> ...


? Good Post, I totally agree, however I also like to have a shot or two after I go deep!


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Flagstaff23 said:


> If class 1 eMTBs help get more people into the sport, that can only be a good thing for everyone!
> 
> The bottom line is, more enthusiasts = more lobbying power at all of our local city/county councils to open up access on "hiking only" trails for everyone!


The bottom line is, more bikes with motors = more hiking trails shut off to all bikes.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Even better... NO MOTORS. Now that's easy.


Not easy.

Class 1 E-MTBs generate very little motor noise. In the hands of a responsible rider, they move at roughly the same speed as regular bikes.

Let's say you spot a guy riding a Levo. He stuck a piece of tape over the LEDs, but anyone who's familiar with the bike knows it's a Levo. The huge motor housing is a dead giveaway. But how do you a REALLY know it's an e-bike? Is it conceivable that the bike has been gutted and no longer has a motor and battery cells inside? What are you going to do, smash it open with a sledgehammer to prove there's a motor in there? And for what reason? Because the guy climbed a hill at 8mph that most people climb at 4mph? This is the difficulty rangers will face trying to enforce a blanket ban on e-MTBs.

On the other hand, e-motos disguised as bikes? Those are easy to spot. They're the ones going uphill at 30mph.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

KiwiPhil said:


> Personally I have benefitted from possessing both, and only someone with pure ignorance or arrogance could argue against.


Wow. That's a pretty arrogant or ignorant thing to say.



ALimon said:


> So who's research is correct? Unless you are doing your own experimenting and observing, can you trust other peoples' research? Even if you do your own research, tpyou don't know if there is bias or causation over correlation. There are truths out there, but when it comes to e-bikes, it's mostly opinion and common sense.


In the case of an ebike, everyone should ride one before they comment on them. Many anti ebike folk here say "they don't need to ride one because it has a motor". What a bunch of bs. That stance only makes you ignorant and incompetent. The truth is a pas ebike is not faster than a fit rider on a human powered bike. It also does not do anymore trail damage than a conventional mtb. Both of those comments are the truth, Anyone who rides a PAS with an open mind would find that as the truth, not an opinion[/QUOTE]

For about the 50th time, I have ridden an e-bike. In fact, I probably rode an e-bike way before you did. It was a commuting bike with a throttle, and it was a blast and perfect for its application. It also had pedal-assist. Put some knobby tires on it, and it would have been easy to create extra user conflicts and damage sensitive trails.

I tried posting serious discussion points and legitimate concerns in this forum in the not so distant past, but no e-bike proponent ever seriously answered the questions or discussed the issues logically. There are no easy answers to support e-bikes on all mountain bike trails, so e-bikers use insults and try to pass opinion as fact. I find it annoying, so I am going to fight e-bikes on mountain bike trails every opportunity that I get.


----------



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

Flagstaff23 said:


> 3/4 of MTBers are fat-ass, out of shape, weekend warriors anyway (if that.)
> 
> All Class 1 is going to do is allow 3/4 of everyone here protesting against it, to actually start to have some fun without risking a heart attack.


75% of mountain bikers aren't having any fun? That doesn't jibe with my experience.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Even better... NO MOTORS. Now that's easy.












Well that's how all my local trails are signed anyways. I travel a fair bit and I am seeing more and more specific e-bike prohibited signs to clarify the no motor rules.

Locally I have not seen any evidence of advocacy effort on the part of e-bikers trying to get access to non-motorized trails.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Flagstaff23 said:


> There is such an easy answer to this debate. Allow Class 1 e-MTBs on trails anywhere a regular MTB is allowed. Regulate it. Require registration (yes, like a fishing or hunting permit). ****, limit it even further, if you like. 500 x$ permits to in-demand trails like Demo in Santa Cruz. After that, double the registration fee. "So, you want to ride demo on a class 1 ebike? Sorry, but the first 500 first come first serve permits are sold out--it's going to be double $$ for you, buddy..." Meanwhile, the forest service rakes in the dough, creating resources to both expand access to and protect the area like never before.
> 
> The caveat would be, anything over Class 1 is illegal, period, anywhere a current pedal powered MTB goes on designated MTB trails. Let's be real. Class 1 is all it takes to increase up-hill access for injured, disabled, physically unfit and/or newbs to experience the sport.
> 
> ...


 Wow, nice first post. Done any reading here on previous posts? Me, not out of shape, commuter and bikepacker as well. The HP issues are already covered under the Fed ADA rules, a non starter. So your way to get in shape is to use a motor? Hmmm, interesting. Get more people into the sport? Great except that the sport of mt biking doesn't have a motor, e bikes are something different. And need to be treated and regulated as such. I can have fun without a motor. As do my kids too. Not everyone wants motorized vehicles on multi use off road trails. Hikers, dog walkers and horse folk? Good luck with your joining forces with the other fat asses, really. This seems a great post to foster respect. MA rider here, for the most part, motorized vehicles not allowed on multi use off road trails in state parks. As well as conservation lands too. So just ignore the laws? Not. Add in some of those other state, local and fed rules, esp. out west. Seems some big road blocks in your way. Motor on. CA seems to be the test case for some of the e bike advances. Watch closely. Heart attack, that's funny. Ever work out or get in shape? Walk the dog? Run or gym? Not everyone gets a participation trophy. Mt biking too much work for you? Maybe the beach cruiser for coffee runs is more your style, motor optional. Cheers.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> Not easy.
> 
> Class 1 E-MTBs generate very little motor noise. In the hands of a responsible rider, they move at roughly the same speed as regular bikes.
> 
> ...


 So e bikes go the same speed as mt bikes, got it. And you are making a great case for banning all e bikes, no one can tell what's what in regards to class or power by looking at them, thanks.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

leeboh said:


> Great except that the sport of mt biking doesn't have a motor, e bikes are something different.


Yes. If e-bikers ever want to get access to trails that are currently non-motorized they need to accept they are not mountain bikes and advocate for themselves as a distinct user group.

I may not be pro-e-bike, but I have no issue with folks advocating for themselves. Making their case to land managers and regulators.

Standing next to a machine with a motor and saying over and over again it's not motorized because it has pedals is just a waste of time.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

leeboh said:


> And you are making a great case for banning all e bikes, no one can tell what's what in regards to class or power by looking at them, thanks.


No, it's a terrible case. We've been over this before.

The exact argument can be used by other trail users to make a case for banning all bikes, not just e-bikes.

Like I said in my post you quoted: not easy.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

EricTheDood said:


> The exact argument can be used by other trail users to make a case for banning all bikes, not just e-bikes.


Yet it's only motors that are being prohibited at this point because mountain bikers are doing a reasonable job advocating for themselves and just about everyone other than e-bikers can figure out the motor vs. no motor distinction.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

vikb said:


> Yet it's only motors that are being prohibited at this point because mountain bikers are doing a reasonable job advocating for themselves and just about everyone other than e-bikers can figure out the motor vs. no motor distinction.


You're talking about rules, I'm talking about enforcement.

You think enforcement is easy?


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

EricTheDood said:


> You're talking about rules, I'm talking about enforcement.
> 
> You think enforcement is easy?


Putting my land manager hat on I would say it's not crazy hard to generate the required outcome. The current enforcement regime assumes folks will generally obey posted signs. But, let's say e-bikers as a group say F--K it and poached a lot. Than I would setup a temporary program of enforcement with severe enough penalties to 1) educate people about the rules 2) provide enough negative reinforcement to change their mind.

Would it be hard to stop every bike in a periodic check stop, determine if it had a motor and apply the appropriate penalty? No.

Is that something land managers could do 24/7? No. So it would have to be a temporary thing and the penalties would have to be negative enough to motivate people to stop so this level of enforcement was unnecessary.

This is basically how all enforcement works.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

vikb said:


> Would it be hard to stop every bike in a periodic check stop, determine if it had a motor and apply the appropriate penalty? No.


In your opinion then, would it be just as easy to determine if a bike is Class 1 or not?


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

EricTheDood said:


> In your opinion then, would it be just as easy to determine if a bike is Class 1 or not?


No because hacking an e-bike is not something a land manager can easily determine. THe fact a motorized machine started as a class 1 doesn't mean it's still a class 1. Whether a machine has a battery and motor on the other hand is pretty simple to assess.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yes, the usual enforcement system for this kind of thing is for a ranger or sheriff to spend an afternoon or two at the trailhead handing out tickets and/or confiscating bikes or something similar. Nobody (well, almost nobody) has the money/inclination to do constant patrols. 

-Walt


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

This is why [with a one notable exception I can think of] if you get caught with a mountain bike in a wilderness area you are getting into trouble. Perhaps you are walking next to it or carrying it....doesn't matter as that would make enforcement too hard so the rules are you can't be there with a bike at all.

The one place I know of that's an exception is the Grand Canyon and you have to have the wheels off the frame and have it strapped to your back so there is no way you'd just jump off the bike when you saw a Ranger.

That's a real pain as it would be nice to cross wilderness areas sometimes to connect legal trails and it logical to argue that pushing a mountain bike is no different than hiking with poles for environmental impact, but the rules need to be enforceable and so they've selected something that's easy to work with.

Same goes for the argument pedalling an e-bike or pushing a motorcycle without using powered assist is the same as mountain biking/hiking. From an enforcement stand point that doesn't work at the e-biker and moto rider would still get penalised for being on a non-motorized trail.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Walt said:


> Yes, the usual enforcement system for this kind of thing is for a ranger or sheriff to spend an afternoon or two at the trailhead handing out tickets and/or confiscating bikes or something similar. Nobody (well, almost nobody) has the money/inclination to do constant patrols.
> 
> -Walt


You don't have to confiscate too many $5K+ e-bikes before word gets out that poaching is not a good idea.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> No, it's a terrible case. We've been over this before.
> 
> The exact argument can be used by other trail users to make a case for banning all bikes, not just e-bikes.
> 
> Like I said in my post you quoted: not easy.


 Back to the OP, " Why are e bikes a touchy subject in the US?" Mt bikes are allowed. You solution is to ban all bikes? Enforce the ban as they do now, motor=ticket, easy. Seems like a BIG stretch to say that someone buys an e bike and then takes out the motor and battery? Right.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

vikb said:


> You don't have to confiscate too many $5K+ e-bikes before word gets out that poaching is not a good idea.


Everyone here is guilty of poaching. And the hypocrisy rolls on...


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Everyone here is guilty of poaching. And the hypocrisy rolls on...


 I have an abundance of legal trails every where. Nope. Keep trying.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

ALimon said:


> Everyone here is guilty of poaching. And the hypocrisy rolls on...


If I am caught poaching a trail on a mountain bike and the land manager has a penalty in place that bikes get confiscated. They should take it.

If I am caught in wilderness area same thing. I've got zero problem with access restrictions, rules and penalties. That's how a society works.

I got pulled over a few months ago by a cop for going above the posted limit. I just handed him my license and registration and admitted I was going too fast.

I don't care what you are driving or riding you should follow the rules and if you don't you should accept the proscribed punishment. There is nothing hypocritical about that.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

I started out in support of e-bikes on trails where appropriate. Due to the ridiculous logical proofs that I see posted in every e-bike thread I am now opposed to e-bikes on all trails.

So to answer the OP's question; most people in the US these days are trying their best to avoid semantics arguments where both sides seem to be lying, yet use convoluted logic gleaned from freshman year philosophy classes to 'prove' that they are telling the truth. As such, when e-bikers decided that they'd try their best Jedi-mind trick impression on everyone by saying 'these are not the motors you're looking for' the rest of us had a knee-jerk reaction to run them out.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

TheDwayyo said:


> I started out in support of e-bikes on trails where appropriate. Due to the ridiculous logical proofs that I see posted in every e-bike thread I am now opposed to e-bikes on all trails.


That is a great opinion.
Horrible way to get there, but a great opinion.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Again it seems all about perceived increase in trail usage. Since the ebike rides the same to an onlooker..admitted by some..it can not be the bike format. The regulations are antiquated...were made before ebikes. It seems all about who can be the loudest in their position. 

I really do feel bad about the trail population issue a lot of ya have. I grew up when things were much different. Being annoyed was something accepted in life as we surely annoy others. We had thicker skin 50 years ago and accepted annoyance as part of life. It seems many have devloped onion skin. We have gotten mentally soft..so many people get a red ass over the idea of sharing and having an equil say with others. Instead its about divide and conquer..

Think how the hikers feel about the attacks on their way of excape my mtbers. Do ya think they are annoyed with us?


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

1niceride said:


> It seems all about who can be the loudest in their position.


It's called advocacy and if e-bikers can't be bothered to go through the same process every other user group goes through to ask for access, explain their position, discuss how impacts and interactions will be managed, how they will participate and contribute to the process....then stop complaining that you lack the access you wish you had.

I've spent many hours in meetings and planning sessions keeping our local trails open and getting access to new ones. It's a boring, slow process that can be painful at times. It's also absolutely vital if we want lots of trails to ride.

I frequently come across hikers when I am riding and I rarely have any issues. Stopping to chit chat with them might not be what I wanted to do at that exact moment, but they are out using trails they have access to so I respect that. I also know that antagonising a recognised local user group is not going to make us mountain bikers any friends when it comes time to make new plans and open new areas.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

1niceride said:


> Again it seems all about perceived increase in trail usage. Since the ebike rides the same to an onlooker..admitted by some..it can not be the bike format. The regulations are antiquated...were made before ebikes. It seems all about who can be the loudest in their position.
> 
> I really do feel bad about the trail population issue a lot of ya have. I grew up when things were much different. Being annoyed was something accepted in life as we surely annoy others. We had thicker skin 50 years ago and accepted annoyance as part of life. It seems many have devloped onion skin. We have gotten mentally soft..so many people get a red ass over the idea of sharing and having an equil say with others. Instead its about divide and conquer..
> 
> Think how the hikers feel about the attacks on their way of excape my mtbers. Do ya think they are annoyed with us?


Very well said! Regulations are antiquated! Times change, and regulations should change with the times. It wasn't long ago mountain bikes were born and showed up looking for the same trail access as the hikers before them. I'm sure the hikers weren't to happy about a two wheeled machine with gears riding at fast speeds on their lovely hiking trails? So here we are, it's 2018. Times are changing again. Ebikes are here, and here to stay. They're going to dominate bike sales in the near future. It's time for regulations to evolve with the times. Increase in trail usage is a poor argument. I'm sure the hikers said the same thing. I'm also sure the mountain bikers didn't care to hear that ridiculous argument either, nor do the ebikers.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

vikb said:


> It's called advocacy and if e-bikers can't be bothered to go through the same process every other user group goes through to ask for access, explain their position, discuss how impacts and interactions will be managed, how they will participate and contribute to the process....then stop complaining that you lack the access you wish you had.
> 
> I've spent many hours in meetings and planning sessions keeping our local trails open and getting access to new ones. It's a boring, slow process that can be painful at times. It's also absolutely vital if we want lots of trails to ride.
> 
> I frequently come across hikers when I am riding and I rarely have any issues. Stopping to chit chat with them might not be what I wanted to do at that exact moment, but they are out using trails they have access to so I respect that. I also know that antagonising a recognised local user group is not going to make us mountain bikers any friends when it comes time to make new plans and open new areas.


You are a good person and I agree with all of that. I don't own or want an ebike. My dad made one around 1940 or so and used 300ft of extension cords plugged together. I just hope your effort isn't circumvented by intollerance, money or influence. I'd rather make another gas assisted bike as they are better and nobody cares much around here what ya do..as long as ya don't burn the woods down..never made a full squish gas assisted bike...yet.

...carry on...


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

vikb said:


> It's called advocacy and if e-bikers can't be bothered to go through the same process every other user group goes through to ask for access, explain their position, discuss how impacts and interactions will be managed, how they will participate and contribute to the process....then stop complaining that you lack the access you wish you had.
> 
> I've spent many hours in meetings and planning sessions keeping our local trails open and getting access to new ones. It's a boring, slow process that can be painful at times. It's also absolutely vital if we want lots of trails to ride.
> 
> I frequently come across hikers when I am riding and I rarely have any issues. Stopping to chit chat with them might not be what I wanted to do at that exact moment, but they are out using trails they have access to so I respect that. I also know that antagonising a recognised local user group is not going to make us mountain bikers any friends when it comes time to make new plans and open new areas.


Ebikes are new borns. As they grow in popularity so will acceptance and access


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Ebikes are new borns. As they grow in popularity so will acceptance and access


Probably not, they are losing ground already.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> They're going to dominate bike sales in the near future.


I honestly do not think that is going to happen. At least not not for eMTB's.

Street Based eBikes, sure, those numbers will increase and it makes sense for them to do so.

Mount Bike eBikes.... I just don't see it ever being more than a niche like Fat Bikes are now.

I ride every week with a group of guys, and while none of us are opposed to low power Ped Electric eBikes, none of us want one.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> It's time for regulations to evolve with the times. Increase in trail usage is a poor argument.


It's not at all a poor argument with land managers IME, it's actually one of their primary concerns.

Regulations don't evolve on their own, if you want them to change, you'll have to spend the time to convince the people who make the decisions to change them.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

Klurejr said:


> I honestly do not think that is going to happen. At least not not for eMTB's.
> 
> Street Based eBikes, sure, those numbers will increase and it makes sense for them to do so.
> 
> ...


Yes, apparently exercise is good for your health.


----------



## Flagstaff23 (Feb 20, 2018)

ALimon said:


> Very well said! Regulations are antiquated! Times change, and regulations should change with the times. It wasn't long ago mountain bikes were born and showed up looking for the same trail access as the hikers before them. I'm sure the hikers weren't to happy about a two wheeled machine with gears riding at fast speeds on their lovely hiking trails? So here we are, it's 2018. Times are changing again. Ebikes are here, and here to stay. They're going to dominate bike sales in the near future. It's time for regulations to evolve with the times. Increase in trail usage is a poor argument. I'm sure the hikers said the same thing. I'm also sure the mountain bikers didn't care to hear that ridiculous argument either, nor do the ebikers.


Exactly! Regarding regulation, you want to go fishing? Guess what, you need a fishing license. You don't just "go fishing" without one. The same should apply for Class 1 eBikes on any trail.

Every eMTB being sold today, in 2018, in California, ALREADY requires a class certification sticker to be slapped on them before they can leave the sales room, by law.

The entire point of class certification was that Class 1 was the "trail approved" eMTB "pedal assist," top speed regulated certification (as it has already been widely accepted in Europe) and Class 2 and 3 were either "off road only" or commuter bikes for bike lanes only or whatever.

So, you bring your Class 1 certified bike bought from a a dealer down to the same place that sells fishing licenses, show your paperwork or whatever, pay your fee, get a sticker, put the "CA trail approved" sticker on the bike next to your Class 1 sticker, good to go.

If Rangers are going to have to start enforcing eMTB usage on trails, wouldn't it be easier if they could look at a sticker on the bike, take down your sticker # and wave you on?

Local jurisdictions might as well get on the band wagon and make some money, which will not only pay for the inspection/paperwork involved, but pay for trail maintenance, ranger enforcement and everything else.

And guess what, "normal" MTB riders get a free ride and don't need a sticker! Isn't that cool?

Didn't buy your bike from a manufacturer certified as a Class 1 bike model, no sticker, period. No DIY projects, no aftermarket BS, no hacking, period.

As others have pointed out here, riders being equal, a Class 1 will get you up a hill at 8mph instead of maybe 4mph or whatever (or maybe get you up a hill at 4mph that would have been impossible for you before).

Class 1 bikes are NOT "push the throttle" and spin your back tire whilst digging a trench up the hill. No pain no gain applies to Class 1 bikes too, it's pedal "assist," NOT a throttle actuated motor. It does nothing for you on the downhill, except maybe making you go slower. Fitness wise, it's not like a free ride to the top, your heart rate is still probably at 160bpm and you are sweating...so you can still enjoy your beer afterward and not feel guilty. People are going to have to work at it. Ideally, it will get more people into the sport, but many eMTBs might wind up right next to someone's treadmill or at the garage sale after they try it a few times and realize it's still work.

Contrary to the FUD being spread here because of DIY bikes shops like Luna that advertise 3000watt "motorcycle" bikes, you CAN'T just get a software update on the Dark Web or whatever and suddenly turn any legitimate Class 1 bike from a well known bike manufacturer into an off-road beast that's going to tear the tree roots out of trails and leave gouges in granite rocks.

It's simply impossible to mod an off-the-shelf Specialized Levo without significant additional mechanical/electrical mods that would not only practically require an advanced degree in electronics, but would void the warranty on your bike while also dropping your battery life in half as well as the life of the motor in your bike, making it not a very attractive proposition for a $5000 bike that already works perfectly well getting you up the hills to enjoy your trails!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Flagstaff23 said:


> It's simply impossible to mod an off-the-shelf Specialized Levo without significant additional mechanical/electrical mods that would not only practically require an advanced degree in electronics, but would void the warranty on your bike while also dropping your battery life in half as well as the life of the motor in your bike, making it not a very attractive proposition for a $5000 bike that already works perfectly well getting you up the hills to enjoy your trails!


Uh, try googling "modding a Specialized Levo", not difficult at all and there are plenty of people doing it if you read the comments on the first hit, a youtube video.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

The levo is actually the easiest and cheapest class 1 ebike to derestrict. Specialized doesn't appear to care


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Modding the Levo is fake news. The motor doesn't have any torque at high rpms, the crank set doesn't allow high speeds (gear bound), and you have to pedal to get assist. You could swap out the gear train but it would only be useful on flat ground. A 52lb bike and 200lb rider really needs the low gears for climbing. #fakehack

Even without the mods the Levo falls on its face at the first sign of a hill when in top gear. Please stop hating on the Levo by comparing it to some kind of electric motorcycle. The purists are losing credibility yet again.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> Probably not, they are losing ground already.


Probably not? Then please explain why every manufacturer is producing an emtb? Coincidence? Just an expensive hunch by the bike manufacturers? Lol. Hardly. It's happening and the bike industry knows where this is going. European bike manufacturers have already said the US is on practically the exact same path as Europe was as far as sales in the first two years. The ebike segment has grown in every year since its inception in Europe. People are the same regardless of where they live in the world. The US market will continue to grow, and will most likely follow the same popularity as in Europe.

In Mammoth/Tahoe all the bike shops have 30-40 e mountain bikes for rent. Now why would they have so many? Because the demand for them is there. I asked the sales staff if they were popular, they all said yes! "Pretty much all we rent these days".

Here is San Diego at the beach, nothing but e bikes and e scooters. I was in PB last week and I couldn't help but notice how e bikes/scooters dominated the area. It was crazy. E everything is the future. No doubt about it.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Uh, try googling "modding a Specialized Levo", not difficult at all and there are plenty of people doing it if you read the comments on the first hit, a youtube video.


It's a pointless mod, at least as far as trail riding is concerned.

Levo gearing is spot on for offroad riding - slightly taller than a regular mountain bike, but still able to tackle the steep stuff thanks to the assist, which cuts out around 17-18mph.

A hacked Levo (derestricted top speed) spins out its gears at 22mph. Swapping out the chainring results in the bike losing its ability to climb the steeps, and the rolling resistance of the tires is an issue past 20mph.

People buy e-MTBs to help them up the climbs, not to go faster on the flats. The hack is useful only for people who want to dual-purpose their Levos for both off-road riding and paved path / road commuting. A real speed pedelec like the top end Turbo Vado or Trek Super Commuter will smoke a hacked Levo on the road, any day of the week.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

I thought of a great analogy for the people that keep talking about derestricting a Class I ebike since they just don't get it. Pretend you are installing deck screws with a cordless drill. There is a reason you don't use the high speed drill function when installing screws. The cordless drill has a geared down setting that allows for more torque. Try putting in a box of screws with the drill in high speed drill mode. Not only is there not enough power to do it the motor will also overheat. The low powered ebike is the same way.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

No reason to fear. There will always be a place for regular mountain bikes.


----------



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

EricTheDood said:


> It's a pointless mod, at least as far as trail riding is concerned.


Do you know this from personal experience? Just wondering.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Giant Warp said:


> Modding the Levo is fake news. The motor doesn't have any torque at high rpms, the crank set doesn't allow high speeds (gear bound), and you have to pedal to get assist. You could swap out the gear train but it would only be useful on flat ground. A 52lb bike and 200lb rider really needs the low gears for climbing. #fakehack
> 
> Even without the mods the Levo falls on its face at the first sign of a hill when in top gear. Please stop hating on the Levo by comparing it to some kind of electric motorcycle. The purists are losing credibility yet again.





Flagstaff23 said:


> It's simply impossible to mod an off-the-shelf Specialized Levo without significant additional mechanical/electrical mods that would not only practically require an advanced degree in electronics, but would void the warranty on your bike&#8230;


I was showing that this is not true. It's not fake news.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Probably not? Then please explain why every manufacturer is producing an emtb? Coincidence? Just an expensive hunch by the bike manufacturers? Lol. Hardly. It's happening and the bike industry knows where this is going. European bike manufacturers have already said the US is on practically the exact same path as Europe was as far as sales in the first two years. The ebike segment has grown in every year since its inception in Europe. People are the same regardless of where they live in the world. The US market will continue to grow, and will most likely follow the same popularity as in Europe.
> 
> In Mammoth/Tahoe all the bike shops have 30-40 e mountain bikes for rent. Now why would they have so many? Because the demand for them is there. I asked the sales staff if they were popular, they all said yes! "Pretty much all we rent these days".
> 
> Here is San Diego at the beach, nothing but e bikes and e scooters. I was in PB last week and I couldn't help but notice how e bikes/scooters dominated the area. It was crazy. E everything is the future. No doubt about it.


 E bikes are great for commuters. You might note that what goes in CA just might not fly in other parts of the country. Been drinking wheatgrass smoothies showing off your kardashian butt implants? So what are doing for access? Think regs will just change because? Think about mt bikers being the minority trail users in most areas. Think the hikers, dog walkers and horse folk would have an opinion? Maybe yes. Cheers.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

When you push the motor on the Levo it gets hot and derates in the summer. When it derates it cuts you back on power like 50%. My Levo derated on every ride last summer. Not really a big deal because when it restricts your voltage it doubles distance by default.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> E bikes are great for commuters. You might note that what goes in CA just might not fly in other parts of the country. Been drinking wheatgrass smoothies showing off your kardashian butt implants? So what are doing for access? Think regs will just change because? Think about mt bikers being the minority trail users in most areas. Think the hikers, dog walkers and horse folk would have an opinion? Maybe yes. Cheers.


CA has always been a trend setting state. It usually happens here first then trickles down to other parts of the country. I'm not doing anything for access, I don't ride an eMTB. But one day I will like most here. I believe as the e revoulution grows, advocacy groups will form (and I will join) , rules n regs will adapt and some trails will eventually be given access to eMTB's. It only took one acorn to build a forrest, It will only take one trail to see how seemless a PAS eMTB can blend in with other trail users.

Why the hate on wheatgrass and butt implants? lol


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> CA has always been a trend setting state. It usually happens here first then trickles down to other parts of the country. I'm not doing anything for access, I don't ride an eMTB. But one day I will like most here. I believe as the e revoulution grows, advocacy groups will form (and I will join) , rules n regs will adapt and some trails will eventually be given access to eMTB's. It only took one acorn to build a forrest, It will only take one trail to see how seemless a PAS eMTB can blend in with other trail users.
> 
> Why the hate on wheatgrass and butt implants? lol


 Well, CA is as everyone does, thinking cheek implants myself. No access advocacy, got it.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> CA has always been a trend setting state. It usually happens here first then trickles down to other parts of the country.


Is that what you guys like to tell yourselves?

Too funny!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Is that what you guys like to tell yourselves?
> 
> Too funny!


Take skateboarding for example. Started right here in So Cal. Guys were riding for years before the rest of the country caught on. Eventually they did thanks to us.


----------



## Mookie (Feb 28, 2008)

CA also gave us the Kardashians.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

ALimon said:


> CA has always been a trend setting state. It usually happens here first then trickles down to other parts of the country. I'm not doing anything for access, I don't ride an eMTB. But one day I will like most here. I believe as the e revoulution grows, advocacy groups will form (and I will join) , rules n regs will adapt and some trails will eventually be given access to eMTB's. It only took one acorn to build a forrest, It will only take one trail to see how seemless a PAS eMTB can blend in with other trail users.
> 
> Why the hate on wheatgrass and butt implants? lol


lol you don't know East Coast culture. This is getting off topic but you asked... Men are supposed to be men there, or they get ostracized. It's like the Goodfellas and Reservoir Dogs movies, tough guys who mask their insecurities with machismo. A good example is Bill Parcells, former coach of the NY Giants. When he heard that the San Francisco 49ers were running a ball-control offense with short passes (revolutionary at the time), he dismissed it as that "West Coast Offense". As in the West Coast is inferior by definition, they are all a bunch of wussies, not up to the real male standards of his NY football team. It's all talk to intimidate others.

As for hating on stuff like wheatgrass: a lot more people smoke and drink heavily there, because that's how it's always been. They are not going to change just because someone else from the other side of the country says it's not healthy. That would be caving in to the wussies. Twice as many people get cancer East of the Mississippi river, mostly because of poor environmental choices. But you can't tell them that because that's the way they have always done things and therefore by definition they must be right in their behavior. See map below.

Yes, the West Coast starts the majority of the trends out there. And the East Coast, apart from some more progressive islands, is there to keep the status quo, in education, business, politics, basically everything. Example: TV shows are based on Eastern Standard Time, even if more people live in the Central, Mountain, and Pacific Time Zones. It's like the middle of the globe going through Greenwich England, it's just an ethnocentric think to do.

If you look at a map of the US, the Midwest geographically is really Colorado, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico, the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma. But the Midwest was shifted farther east to even Western Pennsylvania. Geographically the definition is incorrect. Ethnocentrically it's correct because if you look at it from an East Coast perspective, everything is West of them, therefore close to them is Midwest. It's not correct but that's how it's always been so that's how they will always keep it, and after all, they were here first from Europe, they get to choose the definitions. Why change anything if there is no internal pressure to change. On the West Coast many of us look at that attitude as backwards but they obviously don't care.

View attachment Doc2.pdf


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mookie said:


> CA also gave us the Kardashians.


And I apologize for that..


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

If it wasn’t for CA we wouldn’t be able to chat online as we are. Since we invented the internet I thinks it’s safe to say things do trickle down from trend setting Cali. Not too mention sour dough bread... yeah that’s ours too!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Are we about to have a East Coast/West Coast rap battle break out here?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> If it wasn't for CA we wouldn't be able to chat online as we are. Since we invented the internet I thinks it's safe to say things do trickle down form trend setting Cali. Not too mention sour dough bread... yeah that's ours too!


East coast invented America. Game over.

(I'm also butthurt about CA because I was dumb enough to order a crab cake in San Francisco. As a Marylander, I fear I may never recover from that unfortunate chapter in my life. Oh ya, I also went to Fresno. Nuff said. :eekster



chazpat said:


> Are we about to have a East Coast/West Coast rap battle break out here?


I'm not sure what's going on here, but yes I do believe that's the next step.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Are we about to have a East Coast/West Coast rap battle break out here?


East coasters don't want to go there.... West coast rappers set the bar!


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> If it wasn't for CA we wouldn't be able to chat online as we are. Since we invented the internet I thinks it's safe to say things do trickle down from trend setting Cali. Not too mention sour dough bread... yeah that's ours too!


 I'll just settle for the East Coast invented America. Ben, George and few other signers of that parchment. CA? An after thought of left over land from Mexico. I 'll give you the edge in fish tacos and red wine. The rest? Meh.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> East coasters don't want to go there.... West coast rappers set the bar!


Kool Herc might have a thing or three to say about that.


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

ALimon said:


> ... It usually happens here first then trickles down to other parts of the country.


Not even close to true, we are always three hours ahead of you!


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

ALimon said:


> East coasters don't want to go there.... West coast rappers set the bar!


Rapping is something you do.
Hip hop is something you live.

--someone you don't know, probably


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Zowie said:


> Rapping is something you do.
> Hip hop is something you live.
> 
> --someone you don't know, probably


 And rock is a way of life.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

Amoroso > Sourdough


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

holy crap guys.... back on topic please.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Probably not? Then please explain why every manufacturer is producing an emtb? Coincidence? Just an expensive hunch by the bike manufacturers? Lol. Hardly. It's happening and the bike industry knows where this is going. European bike manufacturers have already said the US is on practically the exact same path as Europe was as far as sales in the first two years. The ebike segment has grown in every year since its inception in Europe. People are the same regardless of where they live in the world. The US market will continue to grow, and will most likely follow the same popularity as in Europe.
> 
> In Mammoth/Tahoe all the bike shops have 30-40 e mountain bikes for rent. Now why would they have so many? Because the demand for them is there. I asked the sales staff if they were popular, they all said yes! "Pretty much all we rent these days".
> 
> Here is San Diego at the beach, nothing but e bikes and e scooters. I was in PB last week and I couldn't help but notice how e bikes/scooters dominated the area. It was crazy. E everything is the future. No doubt about it.


You realize that this isn't beach bike review , right? E- motorized bikes used on the mup's, at the beach, for commuting etc. have zero bearing on e-motorized mountain bikes on mountain bike trails. Now, if you'd like to discuss the increasing frequency of No motorized bike signs going up then we'd have something to discuss because that's where they are losing ground. Quickly I would add. Enjoy your beach bike.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

TheDwayyo said:


> East coast invented America.


The west coast perfected it. /


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Klurejr said:


> holy crap guys.... back on topic please.


I'm kinda enjoying this new direction.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Klurejr said:


> holy crap guys.... back on topic please.


I'm just waiting for the beer wars to break out


----------



## Mookie (Feb 28, 2008)

Klurejr said:


> holy crap guys.... back on topic please.


You should merge this thread with the climate change thread. Now that would be some prime entertainment.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Why did this move to general discussion? 

Also, e-bikes have nothing to do with the experience I want from riding.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> holy crap guys.... back on topic please.


This is actually refreshing. Same guys that usually are at each others throats are just having some for for a change. Cheers to that!


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

Mookie said:


> You should merge this thread with the climate change thread. Now that would be some prime entertainment.


Which bag for CCW on my ebike in Wilderness Areas?
I'm saving the planet from climate change, please help!


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

E-bikes are responsible for climate change on the West Coast and will eventually cause a giant earthquake because of the trail damage they do.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

EricTheDood said:


> It's a pointless mod, at least as far as trail riding is concerned.
> 
> Levo gearing is spot on for offroad riding - slightly taller than a regular mountain bike, but still able to tackle the steep stuff thanks to the assist, which cuts out around 17-18mph.
> 
> ...


I own both the turbo and a Levo and no question my Turbo would smoke a hacked out Levo. Rationally thinking, if there's no land managers posting on this sight, then access discussions are useless, so let the beer debate go on, Dilly Dilly!


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> if there's no land managers posting on this sight, then access discussions are useless,


They visit this site with regularity.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> They visit this site with regularity.


You know this for fact?


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Gutch said:


> You know this for fact?


I do; I've been approached. I'm aware of a handful of individuals working for the gov't that have MTBR usernames but they very seldom use them.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

I would love to put a land manager on a Levo for a day and hear their honest opinion.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ryguy79 said:


> Why did this move to general discussion?


http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/read-before-you-post-ebike-forum-rules-1022310.html


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

ALimon said:


> I would love to put a land manager on a Levo for a day and hear their honest opinion.


Rangers at OC Parks demo'd ebikes and decided they didn't want them in the park.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Klurejr said:


> http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/read-before-you-post-ebike-forum-rules-1022310.html


That's dumb. Overmoderation.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I would love to put a land manager on a Levo for a day and hear their honest opinion.


Staff here have demoed them and decided they don't fit in their parks.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Harryman said:


> I'm just waiting for the beer wars to break out


Colorado FTW!


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Harryman said:


> Staff here have demoed them and decided they don't fit in their parks.


I don't know which land mangers you are referencing, Harryman. In Colorado I called a dozen state parks I am interested in riding, to find out their policies on eBikes. Several broke into song about how they already had ebikes and loved them (Staunton as one example), and a couple others asked me questions about mine over the phone because they had heard about their use at the other parks and wanted to know more about them.

I was at a meeting on Tuesday night where Jeffco announced that Class 1 eBikes are now allowed on every trail where MTBs are allowed, and one of the rangers there told me they are using them now as well and will probably expand that use.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

I understand the push more in other areas.

The northern front range has great ORV trails.
Seems to me anyone wanting to ride faster would be better off on ORV's anyway.
I know I prefer them, and I'm a slow hack.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Mookie said:


> CA also gave us the Kardashians.


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

ryguy79 said:


> That's dumb. Overmoderation.


I have to agree with that.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> Staff here have demoed them and decided they don't fit in their parks.


I'd love to hear the reasoning behind that. I bet they don't even have a reason.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ryguy79 said:


> That's dumb. Overmoderation.





ALimon said:


> I have to agree with that.


It is the will of site ownership that the eBike section be for discussing models of eBike and parts, not for discussions of trail access and such. If you have a problem with this decision please take it up with those who pay for this site to be hosted online.

I am just a volunteer.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I'd love to hear the reasoning behind that. I bet they don't even have a reason.


Yes, everyone opposing e-bikes just hates on them for fun and/or is too dumb to get with the future. Keep up that mindset/strategy, it will make it much easier for trail advocates like myself to get you banned right off the bat!

Admitting that e-bikes are different from bicycles and trying to dispel some of the myths while addressing concerns (some are legit, more are not) would actually make this a tough debate... I suppose I am thankful that isn't the tact most e-bike advocates are taking.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I'd love to hear the reasoning behind that. I bet they don't even have a reason.


 Some parks( wait for it) ban motorized vehicles. Many times the land mangers just enforce the rules they have to follow.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

honkinunit said:


> I don't know which land mangers you are referencing, Harryman. In Colorado I called a dozen state parks I am interested in riding, to find out their policies on eBikes. Several broke into song about how they already had ebikes and loved them (Staunton as one example), and a couple others asked me questions about mine over the phone because they had heard about their use at the other parks and wanted to know more about them.
> 
> I was at a meeting on Tuesday night where Jeffco announced that Class 1 eBikes are now allowed on every trail where MTBs are allowed, and one of the rangers there told me they are using them now as well and will probably expand that use.


Colorado Springs parks, El Paso County parks, Colorado Springs Utilities. The USFS couldn't care less.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I'd love to hear the reasoning behind that. I bet they don't even have a reason.


Too fast

Ebike riders ride farther per ride, so more wear on already loved to death heavily used trails.

They don't have enforcement capabilities, so allowing any sort of ebike, allows them all. By not allowing them, they expect to only see the odd person poaching.

Allowing a motorized vehicle can present problems with past funding and easements.

They have no idea of what sort of emtbs are coming, based on the regs and the evolution of ebike tech, they'd rather wait and see.

None of them hate ebikes, they are promoting ebikes as transportation, and I know at least one of the staff who was planning on buying one. They just don't think it's a good fit for the trails they manage, and think it'll only add to their workload.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> Too fast
> 
> Ebike riders ride farther per ride, so more wear on already loved to death heavily used trails.
> 
> ...


 That "more wear" argument is ridiculous. I've built many trails, and when theyre built right they last forever. My rides are in the 20-25 mile range which is much further than most. Should I be banned because I go to far and cause extra wear? Maybe we should all remove the knobs from our tires and ride on big, soft slick gentle rubber that won't tear into the trail and erode it. And no tires with side knobs, can't have those either. Talk about trail excavators! I mean c'mon, that's such a silly argument.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Electric assisted bicycles, E-bikes, by description and name are not electric motorcycles...just to make that clear. 

The e-bike discussion here shows why they are a touchy subject here in the US. Hooray for me and fu. I have mine and you get nutten.. 

American society is getting cold. Ask people coming back from the military. So many people feel they are the only ones working hard and everybody else is slacking. The value of people is more and more about income and less about taking care of others. I look up to those who work in adult homes and such for crap pay. Try to find a family man today who turns down overtime to be with their family. Most can't wait to get away. And most wives enjoy time away from their jerk husbands. 

Add the fact most families need 2 incomes to survive. Who ever thought that was a good idea..now we have rudderless children doing the wrong thing in life and everybody wonders why...add the internet free space where birds of a feather flock together. Good and bad.

I was going somewhere with this and tying it all together but...lost my train of thought and I gotta peel potatoes for dinner with the fam damily...


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

ALimon said:


> That "more wear" argument is ridiculous. I've built many trails, and when theyre built right they last forever. My rides are in the 20-25 mile range which is much further than most. Should I be banned because I go to far and cause extra wear? Maybe we should all remove the knobs from our tires and ride on big, soft slick gentle rubber that won't tear into the trail and erode it. And no tires with side knobs, can't have those either. Talk about trail excavators! I mean c'mon, that's such a silly argument.


If one looks at the beloved MTBaction mag look at the pics carefully. What looks like a controlled drift is actually one with a full hand on the rear brake. They don't care about the trails. Do as I say not as I do...


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

More wear on already over ridden trails?

Let’s see: 

A rider on a normal bike rides 7 miles because the climbs are too hard for them. Now you put tha rider on an ebike who is now doing 15 miles because he can now since the bike is doing much of the work. That’s twice the miles than that one rider would normally ride. 

Now let’s muktiple that by, let’s be conservative and say 10 ebikers on that same 7 mile ride. 

Now let’s multiply that by, let’s be conservative and day 3 days a week. 

How is that not more wear and tear?

Now before someone chimes in, well....”I already ride 2x that amount of miles” or that anybody could go out and ride those 15 miles to do that wear and tear. Yes, you can....and yes they can. But this usually happens over time. 

And yes the amount of wear and tear I subject my local trails to is high, because I ride a lot. I put a lot of miles in. As a lot of people say, I’m not the average user. I also dont ride an ebike. I also don’t ride a 40+ lbs bike around.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

mtnbikej said:


> More wear on already over ridden trails?
> 
> Let's see:
> 
> ...


All of this is under the incorrect assumption that trail erosion is strictly a matter of mileage, not riding style.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

And on tight, narrow single track, more passing equals more wear/more trail widening.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Wear and tear is really a non-starter for arguments against the ebike. In the summer time all trails users (hikers, dogs, horses and bikes) create moon dust when the trail dries out. The first rain on the moon dust washes the dirt off the trail. The purpose of the trail is for human recreational use. Wear and tear is a natural function of the trail. If you want to rip on people that skid their tires then have at it, just don't blame ebikes for wear and tear. An ebike more than likely has what is called a mid fat tire. The additional rubber is great for climbing those sections that have loose gravel. I've watched year after year where regular mountain bikes always try to ride the easy dirt on the sides of the trail. Some trails move 12 inches per year thanks to mountain bikers. However, the additional torque and wide tires helps the ebiker stay on the harder (read loose) parts of the trail. Trail widening is in fact less likey to be caused by ebikes for the reasons just stated. I would really like to see these delicate trails that the purists are talking about. Where I live the the trails are quickly overrun by scrub oak if there isn't significant traffic and pruning.

In other news I have a couple of beefs about the forum rules in the ebike forum.
1: Forum Rules state that ebikes are not mountain bikes. In my state (Utah) a Class I-III ebike is considered by law to be a bicycle. There are no laws that use the term mountain bike. Just bicycle. 
2: Utah law explicity says that an electric assisted bicycle is not a moped.
3: Utah law explicity says that an electric assisted bicycle is not a motorcycle.
4: Purists keep posting pictures of the franken bike in the ebike forum as proof of something. Anything over 750 watts is not considered a bicycle by Utah law and is in fact illegal to ride on a bicycle approved trail. Yet they are always cited stating the sky is falling, the sky is falling. The sky is not falling. They are illegal on bicycle trails. The purists should stop being disengenous. It is illegal for a kid to ride a high powered electric bicycle and the cost of the bike is insane. Exactly who is going to be buying the franken bike? Someone that is foolish enough to buy one will quickly find out that you can't roost a bicycle tire. It's hard enough to keep knobs on my moto and they are very large and very tough. Bicycle tires wear out very quickly under normal riding. Put a large electric motor on one and you are going to have one nice bald tire on your $10,000 plus electric bike. If someone rides one of those things without moto apparel they will quickly be entered in the contest for the Darwin awards. 
Cheers


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mtnbikej said:


> More wear on already over ridden trails?
> 
> Let's see:
> 
> ...


There are so many variables that contribute to trail wear. Riding style has the biggest impact, not mileage alone. Poorly built trails with too much slope, camber, and poor drainage will succumb incredibly faster than well built trails. I ride super popular trails that have been around for 20 plus years and never seem to change. They've stood the test of time with an incredible amount of mileage over the years.

Does your 40lb plus bike comment mean you believe a heavier bike wears trails faster than a 26lb trail bike? If so, that wouldn't be a fair argument.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I don't see trail wear being a big issue if e-bikes were allowed on a number of the trail systems I know.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Giant Warp I think you are almost mistaken. Your laws on ebikes classified as bicycles may be correct as far as traffic rules but are not really correct as a whole. In Utah there are a lot of places where bicycles are allowed and ebikes are not. If your state government classifies them as bicycles then how can they be restricted?
I think wear and tear is something us ebike haters have pulled from the Sierra Club handbook and we better watch it or it is going to bite us right in the ass.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Giant Warp said:


> Wear and tear is really a non-starter for arguments against the ebike. In the summer time all trails users (hikers, dogs, horses and bikes) create moon dust when the trail dries out. The first rain on the moon dust washes the dirt off the trail. The purpose of the trail is for human recreational use. Wear and tear is a natural function of the trail. If you want to rip on people that skid their tires then have at it, just don't blame ebikes for wear and tear. An ebike more than likely has what is called a mid fat tire. The additional rubber is great for climbing those sections that have loose gravel. I've watched year after year where regular mountain bikes always try to ride the easy dirt on the sides of the trail. Some trails move 12 inches per year thanks to mountain bikers. However, the additional torque and wide tires helps the ebiker stay on the harder (read loose) parts of the trail. Trail widening is in fact less likey to be caused by ebikes for the reasons just stated. I would really like to see these delicate trails that the purists are talking about. Where I live the the trails are quickly overrun by scrub oak if there isn't significant traffic and pruning.
> 
> In other news I have a couple of beefs about the forum rules in the ebike forum.
> 1: Forum Rules state that ebikes are not mountain bikes. In my state (Utah) a Class I-III ebike is considered by law to be a bicycle. There are no laws that use the term mountain bike. Just bicycle.
> ...


The law says they are bikes for the road only, doesn't mean a thing on the trails. There are many places that consider them motorized and are banned from dirt.

It doesn't matter what the law says, they have motors and you need to stop denying that.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

chazpat said:


> And on tight, narrow single track, more passing equals more wear/more trail widening.


Yes, but regular MTBs catch more air than e-MTBs.

I don't know about you, but I breathe air, and it appears that regular MTBs are wasting my precious air by catching so much of it.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

rlee said:


> Giant Warp I think you are almost mistaken. Your laws on ebikes classified as bicycles may be correct as far as traffic rules but are not really correct as a whole. In Utah there are a lot of places where bicycles are allowed and ebikes are not. If your state government classifies them as bicycles then how can they be restricted?
> I think wear and tear is something us ebike haters have pulled from the Sierra Club handbook and we better watch it or it is going to bite us right in the ass.


Hi rlee, the law specifically states where they can be restricted. Any state or local authority that has jurisdiction can regulate the ebike. For instance Dead Horse Point by Moab is a state park. Ebikes are legal on mountain bike trails in the Dead Horse Point State Park. The law is not for roads only and that is a rumor that has been widely disseminated on MTBR. Here is copy of the law....

41-6a-1115.5. Electric assisted bicycles -- Restrictions -- Penalties.
87 (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, an electric assisted bicycle is subject
88 to the provisions under this chapter for a bicycle.
89 (2) An individual may operate an electric assisted bicycle on a path or trail designated

90 for the use of a bicycle.
91 (3) A local authority or state agency may adopt an ordinance or rule to regulate or
92 restrict the use of an electric assisted bicycle, or a specific classification of an electric assisted
93 bicycle, on a sidewalk, path, or trail within the jurisdiction of the local authority or state
94 agency.
95 (4) An individual under 16 years of age may not operate a class 3 electric assisted
96 bicycle.
97 (5) An individual under 14 years of age may not operate an electric assisted bicycle
98 with the electric motor engaged on any public property, highway, path, or sidewalk unless the
99 individual is under the direct supervision of the individual's parent or guardian.
100 (6) An individual under eight years of age may not operate an electric assisted bicycle
101 with the electric motor engaged on any public property, highway, path, or sidewalk.
102 (7) The owner of an electric assisted bicycle may not authorize or knowingly permit an
103 individual to operate an electric assisted bicycle in violation of this section.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

My suggestion for the purists is to embrace the new technology. Use the new members to push local governments for more trails. In Salt Lake City there is an effort by the city and state to get employees to use ebikes while at work. One ride is all it takes to indoctrinate the regular Joe. Regular Joe will then look for recreational activities outside of work. 

I would think that most mountainbikers would agree that riding a mountain bike on asphalt blows. The foot hills surrounding Salt Lake are covered in trails. The ebike would help eliminate all the cars at the trailhead from people that don't want to pound asphalt to get to the trail head. 

The people that I run into in Salt Lake don't use terms like trail wear and tear. They walk their dogs in rain and snow and ride their bikes everywhere and anywhere 24/7 365. The trails are not for wild life but for human life. The trails get rutted, moose post hole, then a week later the trails turn into moon dust. Utah is an outdoorsy state. As long as you are polite and give hikers the right of way there won't be a problem. Maybe the purists should realize that there is a trail revolution going on. Maybe the particular state that they live in things aren't so great. I understand that. Just don't project that negativity on the rest of the country. Millennials have been indoctrinated for years on the benefits of solar and electric power. Instead of alienated people I suggest using that indoctrination to get more trails.

cheers


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

As usual, the biggest posts contain the least useful info.

Some very amusing word salad there though, thanks!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Mr Warp appears to be wildly confused as to where state vehicle codes apply and where they do not.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Giant Warp said:


> Maybe the purists should realize that there is a trail revolution going on.


Please fill all of us uninformed "purist's" in on the details of this "trail revolution".


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> Please fill all of us uninformed "purist's" in on the details of this "trail revolution".


Stick around. The E revolution is coming. You can deny it all you want. But it's still coming. It wont be long before E bikes dominate the scene, and when they do, trail access will expand. The youth and the millenials dont care what the purist think, they will have the final say in the direction mountain biking goes from here. If you haven't noticed, they do love their gadgets.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

current sidebar ad:


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

chazpat said:


> current sidebar ad:
> 
> View attachment 1184651


Sidebar ads by Google are individualized based on your browsing history. See the X and the arrow on the top right corner?

Now we all know that you've been looking at Daymak bikes.

BTW, are you hinting that one can't tell the difference between a Daymak and say, a Levo?


----------



## scaryfast (Apr 23, 2004)

Because when bikes like this become more popular on your local trails 1) Your single track trails you love are gonna get torn up 2) Trail access will become a bigger uphill battle 3) Getting parks/land mgmt to let you build new trails will be even harder 4) Other user groups will lump those ebikes with mountain bikes (instead of motor cycles) and will make things harder for us. Clearly it is not a huge problem with majority of ebikes now but just on FB I saw another brand debut an ebike similar to the stealth bomber so to say it's not going to happen is bs. Then when people finally say they are motorized vehicles and are restricted to ohv areas, you swear anyone will listen? They're going to ride the fun single track everyone loves. Nobody is really going to enforce it. That's why it's a touchy subject at least for me.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Stick around. The E revolution is coming. You can deny it all you want. But it's still coming. It wont be long before E bikes dominate the scene....


We're not going anywhere, so why are your telling us to "stick around?"

So, when should we expect this revolution to come? This summer? Maybe next year, 2 years, 5 years? When?!?!?!!!! I need to know as I have yet to ever see an ebike on an mtb trail and I am not sure I will be able to handle the shock so a heads up would be great.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> If it wasn't for CA we wouldn't be able to chat online as we are. Since we invented the internet I thinks it's safe to say things do trickle down from trend setting Cali.


You guys are unbelievable! So far up your own backsides you can hardly see daylight.

You might think the world revolves around you but no, Californians didn't invent the internet. In fact it was such a slow-burning process that required so many key elements from around the world to function as we know it that I don't think any one country can claim to have invented it, never mind one state!

No wonder Oregon but signs like this up:


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

EricTheDood said:


> Sidebar ads by Google are individualized based on your browsing history. See the X and the arrow on the top right corner?
> 
> Now we all know that you've been looking at Daymak bikes.
> 
> BTW, are you hinting that one can't tell the difference between a Daymak and say, a Levo?


That's actually me on the bike, but notice I'm on the road. I wasn't hinting at anything, I just thought it was humorous. What is that, Class 7?


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

If ya look...ya see the brakes are set up moto..rear on left. The person is skidding,,.check out the left hand.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

1niceride said:


> If ya look...ya see the brakes are set up moto..rear on left. The person is skidding,,.check out the left hand.


All the average observer sees is roost, further enforcing the notion that e-mototorized damage trails. Once again, e-bikers are their own worst enemies.


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

Mr Pig said:


> You guys are unbelievable! So far up your own backsides you can hardly see daylight.


Please don't lump all Californians into the same group that say stupid **** like that.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

the one ring said:


> Please don't lump all Californians into the same group that say stupid **** like that.


Glad we agree on the quality of the statement ;0)


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Stick around. The E revolution is coming. You can deny it all you want. But it's still coming. It wont be long before E bikes dominate the scene, and when they do, trail access will expand. The youth and the millenials dont care what the purist think, they will have the final say in the direction mountain biking goes from here. If you haven't noticed, they do love their gadgets.


 Uhhh, ya. Gagets? Sitting on the couch with the BEST vr gaming mt bike stuff, awesome. How do you foresee this expanding trail access? Magic? Wishful thinking? And bikes don't have motors. Start there.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

1niceride said:


> If ya look...ya see the brakes are set up moto..rear on left. The person is skidding,,.check out the left hand.


Moto=clutch on the left.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Stick around. The E revolution is coming. You can deny it all you want. But it's still coming. It wont be long before E bikes dominate the scene, and when they do, trail access will expand. The youth and the millenials dont care what the purist think, they will have the final say in the direction mountain biking goes from here. If you haven't noticed, they do love their gadgets.


Gadgets don't do trail work.

Those who put in the sweat equity and create positive relationships with LMs will decide in the end. Not seeing much of that from e-bikers or millennials for the time being.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> You guys are unbelievable! So far up your own backsides you can hardly see daylight.
> 
> You might think the world revolves around you but no, Californians didn't invent the internet. In fact it was such a slow-burning process that required so many key elements from around the world to function as we know it that I don't think any one country can claim to have invented it, never mind one state!
> 
> ...


The internet's birthplace is the University of California at Los Angeles. Fact!


----------



## simbot (May 29, 2007)

MTB9488 said:


> I Never thought I would buy an Ebike. But After 30+ years of abusing myself mountain biking, countless emergency room visits, broken bones, stitches, dislocating multiple joints, and Recently a mini stroke. Now at 50+ I'm feeling The years of abuse. I don't care about riding fast anymore I just want to ride, and ride longer (hours/miles).


Pretty much the same story for me. I'm 54 years old, I've been Mt biking since my early 20's. I never gave much thought to getting an e-bike. My son-in-law works at a bike shop at let me demo a Giant Full-E +1.

When he suggested it, I said no I'm good on my Giant Reign, he insisted I tried it. It did, and it was awesome, and I decided I had to get one. I didn't get it so I can go faster, I got it so I can ride with 25 year olds all day. I could keep up with them on the downhills, and for a while climbing, but not all day.

As far as the argument that a bunch of noobs are going to clogs the trails on newly purchased e-bikes, and wear out trails, that really doesn't hold water.

When I talk to my co-workers about getting into Mt biking, they are often shocked that they will have to spend more than $1000 on a used bike to get something even marginally functional. So you think that noobs are now going to buy $5000 bikes and ruin it for everyone else? Please...........


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> The internet's birthplace is the University of California at Los Angeles. Fact!


Read my post. Getting one computer to talk to another over a phone line is one thing but it took a lot of bright ideas and developments to make it work as the world wide web we know today and these ideas came from Europe, the UK and the US. It's like pointing to the guy who made the first wooden wheel and saying 'he invented the motor car'. No he didn't, he invented something that would go on to form a part of a motor car.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Gadgets don't do trail work.
> 
> Those who put in the sweat equity and create positive relationships with LMs will decide in the end. Not seeing much of that from e-bikers or millennials for the time being.


Everything changes otherwise the horse and buggy would still be around. Times change, people change. Those land managers will one day be ebike riders. The trail builders will be ebike riders. Change is good! Choices are good!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> Read my post. Getting one computer to talk to another over a phone line is one thing but it took a lot of bright ideas and developments to make it work as the world wide web we know today and these ideas came from Europe, the UK and the US. It's like pointing to the guy who made the first wooden wheel and saying 'he invented the motor car'. No he didn't, he invented something that would go on to form a part of a motor car.


The first connection between two computers was from a lab at UCLA and the Stanford research institute. This is why UCLA is known as the birthplace of the internet.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Everything changes otherwise the horse and buggy would still be around. Times change, people change. Those land managers will one day be ebike riders. The trail builders will be ebike riders. Change is good! Choices are good!


That's simply a WAG on your part.


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

ALimon said:


> The first connection between two computers was from a lab at UCLA and the Stanford research institute. This is why UCLA is known as the birthplace of the internet.


Great, the first intercomputer communication over ARPANET. The National Physical Laboratory in the UK pioneered packet switching, which was an influential predecessor to the ARPANET.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> That "more wear" argument is ridiculous.


You're entitled to your opinion, but outside of filling up internet space, it doesn't matter. My local land managers look ahead at the possibility of 25% - 50% of the current mtb population riding two laps instead of one on an ebike, on their trails, and they weren't interested. The people who have to maintain the trails and manage the public on them on a daily basis, have a different perspective than users do.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> Moto=clutch on the left.


A clutch on an ebike...Could rev the motor and drop the clutch..that would make the anti's real happy...would need coaster brake though...


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

life behind bars said:


> All the average observer sees is roost, further enforcing the notion that e-mototorized damage trails. Once again, e-bikers are their own worst enemies.


Well...ebike companies who advertise their product know their demographics very well..just look at that sales pic..


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> That "more wear" argument is ridiculous. I've built many trails, and when theyre built right they last forever. My rides are in the 20-25 mile range which is much further than most. Should I be banned because I go to far and cause extra wear? Maybe we should all remove the knobs from our tires and ride on big, soft slick gentle rubber that won't tear into the trail and erode it. And no tires with side knobs, can't have those either. Talk about trail excavators! I mean c'mon, that's such a silly argument.


Almost all of your "facts" are ridiculous.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> Gadgets don't do trail work.
> 
> Those who put in the sweat equity and create positive relationships with LMs will decide in the end. Not seeing much of that from e-bikers or millennials for the time being.


E-bikers ride what lies...don't need no trail make'in...


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> You're entitled to your opinion, but outside of filling up internet space, it doesn't matter. My local land managers look ahead at the possibility of 25% - 50% of the current mtb population riding two laps instead of one on an ebike, on their trails, and they weren't interested. The people who have to maintain the trails and manage the public on them on a daily basis, have a different perspective than users do.


When land managers take that stance, then expect rogue trail building and poaching. Practically all of.the good riding areas in so cal are all rogue trails.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Almost all of your "facts" are ridiculous.


Good! Only dead fish swim with the current.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> When land managers take that stance, then expect rogue trail building and poaching. Practically all of.the good riding areas in so cal are all rogue trails.


Except for the USFS, my local land mangers are 110% behind mtbs, and are building new trails like crazy, some even mtb specific. We've got it good here.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

...now tealy...most ebikers are/were mtbers. Ya catch more flies with sugar than with vinager......well I guess poop works also...

Being a good ambassador for ebikers will go a long way towards access.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

tealy said:


> American mountain bikers hate e-bikes because American mountain bikers are stupid. Just listen to any European cyclist and they're like what's the big deal, we've had e-bikes for years and everything's fine.
> 
> Betcha 20 dollars the person who hates e-bikes for destroying "nature" is out there on weekends digging miles of "perfect" trail, popping out all annoying rocks, and clearing major veg.
> 
> E-bikes aren't roosting out trails nearly as much as anyone doing sweet cutties. Whatever.


American mtbrs are stupid? Really? Wow, brilliant comment.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> Except for the USFS, my local land mangers are 110% behind mtbs, and are building new trails like crazy, some even mtb specific. We've got it good here.


You're lucky. In my area mtb trails are always in jeopardy of being closed for one reason or another. Extremely frustrating. That's why we have so many rogue trail builders building away.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> When land managers take that stance, then expect rogue trail building and poaching. Practically all of.the good riding areas in so cal are all rogue trails.


 Rogue trail building and poaching? How's that working for you in expanding trail access for the E's?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> When land managers take that stance, then expect rogue trail building and poaching. Practically all of.the good riding areas in so cal are all rogue trails.


Yup, the guys that can't put out the effort to actually pedal their bike are gonna go do the hard work of rogue building... Good one! 

E-bikers will poach trails built by real mountain bikers, since that's the lazy-ass way of getting it done (just like bringing a motor on a bike ride).



ALimon said:


> Good! Only dead fish swim with the current.


Ah, you're one of these... 'If the majority of people think I'm wrong, I must be right!' Good luck with that, it works well almost half way through high school.

How old are you? I'm gonna guess 17. That seems to be the height of this type of stupidity for most. Good news is you'll grow out of it.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Yup, the guys that can't put out the effort to actually pedal their bike are gonna go do the hard work of rogue building... Good one!
> 
> E-bikers will poach trails built by real mountain bikers, since that's the lazy-ass way of getting it done (just like bringing a motor on a bike ride).
> 
> ...


Ah you're one of these. You know those people who if you don't agree with them they don't know what to do with themselves. Lol. Based on your comments it appears you have it all figured out, now who sounds like their 17?

I grew out of 17 many years ago, I'm an ex pro, raced, trained and suffered for more miles than most people put on their cars. Shoveled my ass off building trails as well. Nothing lazy about me.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Ah you're one of these. You know those people who if you don't agree with them they don't know what to do with themselves. Lol. Based on your comments it appears you have it all figured out, now who sounds like their 17?
> 
> I grew out of 17 many years ago, I'm an ex pro, raced, trained and suffered for more miles than most people put on their cars. Shoveled my ass off building trails as well. Nothing lazy about me.


I don't care that we don't agree, but the way you try to persuade others is pretty toxic. At the very least, your arguments are incredibly lazy.

I do have this issue figured out; as long as e-bikers want to minimize actual issues related to trail access rather than address them land managers aren't going to give a crap what you have to say. These semantics arguments may fly in forum posts, but the real world isn't having any of this 'it's still a bicycle, even with a motor.'

We've all got growing left to do, some more than others.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

TheDwayyo said:


> I don't care that we don't agree, but the way you try to persuade others is pretty toxic. At the very least, your arguments are incredibly lazy.


You don't consider "E-bikers will poach trails built by real mountain bikers, since that's the lazy-ass way of getting it done" as confrontational and toxic?

I happen to ride a KTM e-Bike, a Santa Cruz Hightower, a Borealis fattie, and a KTM 2 stroke. Some days I feel like doing enduro sessions I'll take the eBike and enjoy 2X as much downhill (it's a 6" travel bike). I've also probably moved more dirt building trails than you. It has NOTHING to do with laziness. It's just another bike in the quiver, for a different purpose.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

RickBullottaPA said:


> You don't consider "E-bikers will poach trails built by real mountain bikers, since that's the lazy-ass way of getting it done" as confrontational and toxic?


I do think it follows logic, but yes I'll admit it was. The difference is I was responding to days worth of those types of posts from him and addressing him directly. I'm not trying to persuade him, more just counter balance the stupidity he's injecting into this 'discussion.'

But again, does it not follow logic? The best argument I've heard for e-bikes is for those who have medical reasons they can't ride normally, which I support... But are those guys really gonna show up to work days? Then there are those with no physical limitation who choose to use a motor instead of their own effort... Is it not reasonable to guess they won't want to put in hours of trail work where no motor assist is offered?

In reality I just need to stay out of e-biker threads. I used to post in support of them, feeling they were given unfair criticism, but they've changed my mind with their BS arguments. I now fully agree that their goal is to erode the difference between a bicycle and an e-bike, rather than find appropriate venues for both, and I'll never be in support of that.



RickBullottaPA said:


> I happen to ride a KTM e-Bike, a Santa Cruz Hightower, a Borealis fattie, and a KTM 2 stroke. Some days I feel like doing enduro sessions I'll take the eBike and enjoy 2X as much downhill (it's a 6" travel bike). I've also probably moved more dirt building trails than you. It has NOTHING to do with laziness. It's just another bike in the quiver, for a different purpose.


So you want to ride twice as much descending but don't want to have to pedal twice as much? And you take offense to me implying laziness may be a part of that equation? :madman:

Look, I'm not calling you lazy (I called his arguments lazy, which they are) but you have to admit that's laziness. You want to use a motor (in a sport that has almost by definition not had motors up until recently) to make up for the fact that you don't want to put in the effort. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. I know 'lazy' has a heavy negative connotation, particularly among active people, but that doesn't change the definition of the word just because it offends you.


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

TheDwayyo said:


> So you want to ride twice as much descending but don't want to have to pedal twice as much? And you take offense to me implying laziness may be a part of that equation? :madman:
> 
> Look, I'm not calling you lazy (I called his arguments lazy, which they are) but you have to admit that's laziness. You want to use a motor (in a sport that has almost by definition not had motors up until recently) to make up for the fact that you don't want to put in the effort. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. I know 'lazy' has a heavy negative connotation, particularly among active people, but that doesn't change the definition of the word just because it offends you.


I'm guessing you never rode a bike park or a downhill course then...

My HR at the bottom of an enduro segment or DH run is every bit as high as a climb...and a full day of technical descending is a helluva workout. Not exactly sitting in the saddle...


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

RickBullottaPA said:


> I'm guessing you never rode a bike park or a downhill course then...
> 
> My HR at the bottom of an enduro segment or DH run is every bit as high as a climb...and a full day of technical descending is a helluva workout. Not exactly sitting in the saddle...


I'm in charge of maintaining some of the gnarliest DH runs on the East Coast... I let your boast about digging more dirt than me slide, because it's just not productive, but don't get too carried away with thinking you know me or my contributions to the sport.

How about your heart rate on the climb compared to without the motor? I don't see how your point is relevant since that's not the part of the ride the motor helps with... If you ditched the weight of the motor, descending might be a bit easier on you though. 

I shuttle sometimes... It's because I'm being lazy, whereas most days I choose to pedal to get those DH laps instead. I don't have a problem admitting it, why do you?


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

The problem I have with these threads is that the more I hear the opinions and arguments of eBikers, the less I like them. Both the arguments and the individuals. If the goal is to create some kind of unity between eBikers and 'real' bikers they are doing a poor job. Perhaps because all eBikers seem to be interested in is getting what they want, which is to be counted alongside non-motorized bikes.

As for the situation in Europe, you can't really compare the two. Land management and access laws are very different and eBikes are not yet a big thing in Europe. You see a few here and there but not a lot. Once they start to have an impact on trail centers things might change. No one complains when a few immigrants move into town, but they sure will when they number enough to take away jobs!


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

Mr Pig said:


> As for the situation in Europe, you can't really compare the two. Land management and access laws are very different and eBikes are not yet a big thing in Europe.


"Not a big thing in Europe". Um, no. While it varies somewhat by region, e-bike sales are averaging 20-30% of total new bike sales. That's kind of a "big thing". And overall, e-bike sales growth is counteracting declining bike sales. But let's not confuse the discussion with facts.

Market Report Germany: E-Bike Sales Grows in Declining Market 

Trend Reversal in Holland; E-Bike Sales Growth Stopped


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

Mr Pig said:


> The problem I have with these threads is that the more I hear the opinions and arguments of eBikers, the less I like them. Both the arguments and the individuals. If the goal is to create some kind of unity between eBikers and 'real' bikers they are doing a poor job. Perhaps because all eBikers seem to be interested in is getting what they want, which is to be counted alongside non-motorized bikes.


Exactly. I literally was in support of them a few weeks ago, my posts will prove that if anyone cares enough to dig. Congrats e-bikers of MTBR, you persuaded me the wrong way!


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

RickBullottaPA said:


> "Not a big thing in Europe". Um, no. While it varies somewhat by region, e-bike sales are averaging 20-30% of total new bike sales. That's kind of a "big thing". And overall, e-bike sales growth is counteracting declining bike sales. But let's not confuse the discussion with facts.
> 
> Market Report Germany: E-Bike Sales Grows in Declining MarketÂ*
> 
> Trend Reversal in Holland; E-Bike Sales Growth StoppedÂ*


While I agree he misspoke there, I'd also point out that in Europe we're primarily talking about commuter bikes. E-bikes as MTB is a much, much smaller number.

Also, I appreciate the irony that after making a lazy straw man argument to defend your absolute lack of laziness you then skipped over my response and chose to respond to a more easily refuted point...


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

TheDwayyo said:


> While I agree he misspoke there, I'd also point out that in Europe we're primarily talking about commuter bikes. E-bikes as MTB is a much, much smaller number.


I'm talking about mountain bikes that are actually used off road based on what I see on the ground. I might see fifty or more bikes on a visit to a busy trail center of of those maybe three or four are eBikes. I've never seen one in the countryside. I do expect the numbers to increase of course and it will be interesting to see how or if attitudes change when they do.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> I don't care that we don't agree, but the way you try to persuade others is pretty toxic. At the very least, your arguments are incredibly lazy.
> 
> I do have this issue figured out; as long as e-bikers want to minimize actual issues related to trail access rather than address them land managers aren't going to give a crap what you have to say. These semantics arguments may fly in forum posts, but the real world isn't having any of this 'it's still a bicycle, even with a motor.'
> 
> We've all got growing left to do, some more than others.


How am I trying to persuade? I'm merely giving my opinion. You use the word "lazy" quite a lot. You do realize your definition of lazy is just your opinion? How is someone out riding a bike of any type lazy? So if someone doesn't "earn" their descents they're lazy according to you? What a load of crap.

We're all lazy including you.... that's why we drive cars, use elevators, escalators, remote controls etc....


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> We're all lazy including you.... that's why we drive cars, use elevators, escalators, remote controls etc....


That's a fair point actually. Who are you and what have you done with ALimon?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> How am I trying to persuade? I'm merely giving my opinion. You use the word "lazy" quite a lot. You do realize your definition of lazy is just your opinion? How is someone out riding a bike of any type lazy? So if someone doesn't "earn" their descents they're lazy according to you? What a load of crap.
> 
> We're all lazy including you.... that's why we drive cars, use elevators, escalators, remote controls etc....


You've stated your opinion over and over again, often as fact. Seems like an attempt at persuasion to me.

Exactly! So why is the word lazy met with such offense from e-bikers? You took a sport based on human-power and added a motor... That's being lazy!

I am lazy when I drive to work, microwave my dinner, hell when I buy my dinner rather than killing or growing it I'm being lazy... But when I go out specifically to engage in a physical activity, I leave the laziness (and motor) at home.

Maybe we should invent a self-driving e-bike? That way you can sit at home and the bike just goes for a ride so you can post your Strava data for your friends to admire! (Tongue in cheek of course, but at some point you have to admit taking a sport focused on physical exertion and using a motor to overcome that exertion is certainly a step in that direction.)


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> You've stated your opinion over and over again, often as fact. Seems like an attempt at persuasion to me.
> 
> Exactly! So why is the word lazy met with such offense from e-bikers? You took a sport based on human-power and added a motor... That's being lazy!
> 
> ...


I don't think you have ever ridden a PAS ebike. Had you, you wouldn't think physical exertion doesn't exist. I rode a levo with a group of other fit riders on a demo day. I was gassed at the pace we were riding, and the effort involved. Nothing lazy about it. Still plenty of physical exertion, it's just different.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I don't think you have ever ridden a PAS ebike. Had you, you wouldn't think physical exertion doesn't exist. I rode a levo with a group of other fit riders on a demo day. I was gassed at the pace we were riding, and the effort involved. Nothing lazy about it. Still plenty of physical exertion, it's just different.


Cool. I have, but it's fine if you want to assume things you don't know. Clearly it's a habit for you.

Can you please point out where I said 'no physical exertion?' It might take you a little while since I didn't. Much easier to fight the straw man than your actual opponent isn't it?

It is by definition less exertion because you're using a motor to produce some of the power otherwise produced by you alone. This is what drives me nuts about the e-bike cult; YOU ADDED A MOTOR TO YOUR BIKE TO MAKE IT EASIER TO PEDAL. I hate when people type in all caps normally, but damn you guys just can't seem to get that fact (not opinion, not anecdote, not theory) into your heads. You didn't add a motor to make it 'different,' you added a motor to make it easier. That's what motors do when added to human powered vehicles.

I can admit I'm being lazy when I shuttle, why can't you admit you're being lazy when you e-bike?


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> I rode a levo with a group of other fit riders on a demo day. I was gassed at the pace we were riding, and the effort involved. Nothing lazy about it. Still plenty of physical exertion, it's just different.


Sorry, not seeing it. I'd be willing to put money on it that most eBike sales result from a desire to get into mountain biking without having to work too hard.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> a sport focused on physical exertion


Maximum exertion isn't the focus for everyone.
My focus is having fun. Exercise is just a bonus.

I also don't see why anybody gives a damn about how hard other people are working. Go spend your time doing cross-fit 'competitions' if that's what you're into. I'd rather gouge my eyes out with a fork personally.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Maximum exertion isn't the focus for everyone.
> My focus is having fun. Exercise is just a bonus.
> 
> I also don't see why anybody gives a damn about how hard other people are working. Go spend your time doing cross-fit 'competitions' if that's what you're into. I'd rather gouge my eyes out with a fork personally.


I didn't say maximum, but when the device the sport focuses is on can only (until now anyway) be propelled by human power I'd say it's fair to say it's a focus of the sport.

I don't care how hard others are working, I care how we market our sport to land managers because I am involved in mtb advocacy and want to see forward progress which I think dishonest arguments will hinder.

Saying e-biking is not easier it's 'just different' is dishonest.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> I didn't say maximum, but when the device the sport focuses is on can only (until now anyway) be propelled by human power I'd say it's fair to say it's a focus of the sport.
> 
> I don't care how hard others are working, I care how we market our sport to land managers because I am involved in mtb advocacy and want to see forward progress which I think dishonest arguments will hinder.
> 
> Saying e-biking is not easier it's 'just different' is dishonest.


Never heard any LMs mention that effort level was a concern myself. 
Don't care how e-bikers present themselves as beyond ensuring they present themselves as distinct from mountain bikers.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

TheDwayyo said:


> I do think it follows logic, but yes I'll admit it was. The difference is I was responding to days worth of those types of posts from him and addressing him directly. I'm not trying to persuade him, more just counter balance the stupidity he's injecting into this 'discussion.'
> 
> But again, does it not follow logic? The best argument I've heard for e-bikes is for those who have medical reasons they can't ride normally, which I support... But are those guys really gonna show up to work days? Then there are those with no physical limitation who choose to use a motor instead of their own effort... Is it not reasonable to guess they won't want to put in hours of trail work where no motor assist is offered?
> 
> ...


Here we go again with the laziness argument, jeez. Let's go to the moto track and do a few motos, lazy? Hardly. Grow some nuts dude and enjoy speed.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Never heard any LMs mention that effort level was a concern myself.
> Don't care how e-bikers present themselves as beyond ensuring they present themselves as distinct from mountain bikers.


... Which is the exact discussion you jumped into the middle of and starting nit-picking my posts. Admittedly we are a bit down the rabbit hole but that's my point; e-bikers can't admit they are distinct and so we get into these semantics debates.

Land managers may not care about actual energy expended per rider, but they sure as hell do care when efficiency provided by a motor starts allowing new issues to arise.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Here we go again with the laziness argument, jeez. Let's go to the moto track and do a few motos, lazy? Hardly. Grow some nuts dude and enjoy speed.


Ya I got pulled a bit far down the rabbit hole on the laziness aspect. As was said, we all do lazy ****. That's not my issue. That was a specific back and forth related to the 'soon-to-appear' influx of e-biker created rogue trails and not meant to be taken as a larger argument.

E-bikes are lazy compared to bicycles. That's a fact based on the definition, but not necessarily one that matters. Motos are a totally different thing so the comparison is invalid. The only difference between an e-bike and an mtb is the motor... Not the case between mtb and moto.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

No worries, some of us ebikers are also mtbrs and understand, they are different. I’ve never said otherwise. The problem is EVERYBODY gets lumped together, and not every ebiker or mtbr or “both” see things the same. Emtbs are just different, but the same- if that makes sense? If there was Trail jeopardy where I ride my mtb, because of Ebikes. I’d sell immediately. I’m kind of in a wait and see in my area. They are fun and at the end of the day, isn’t that what matters?


----------



## simbot (May 29, 2007)

TheDwayyo said:


> E-bikes are lazy compared to bicycles. That's a fact based on the definition, but not necessarily one that matters. Motos are a totally different thing so the comparison is invalid. The only difference between an e-bike and an mtb is the motor... Not the case between mtb and moto.


You seem very caught up with the amount of effort, or really the lack of. You refer to non-motorized MTBs are "real" mt bikers, the clear implication is that eMTB's are "less than", posers, and should not be considered on the same pedestal. I don't get this thinking at all.

Why do you care how much effort other trail users are expending? Lazy, sure you can say that, I don't care. At the end of a ride I've expended jsut as much total energy as I do on my "real" mt. bike, but I've covered a lot more ground in the process. had the freedom to explore new routes that I wouldn't have on my "real" mtb bike. Is it the lazy way to do it? Maybe I don't care if you call it that, I don't care what you think at all.

All I know is that I am out there having fun, I'm not hurting anyone else, not impacting what others are doing in any way, so why do you care what I'm doing?

The only viable argument that I've heard is that land managers don't like e-bikes, and this will color their thinking of all MTB'ers. That's a reasonable argument. The solution to it is education of the land managers. I can't see why anyone should be opposed to pedal assist ebikes.

I think we can all agree that going downhill they are equal. Going uphill ebikes require less effort. No one is going 20mph uphill on an e-bike. I go slightly faster uphill than when on my "real" MTB, I just have the ability to spread out the energy expended over a longer distance. Lazy? ok sure, don't care.

Why do you care that I am lazier and morally inferior to you? Because of my laziness I am not worthy of sharing the trail with you? Seems pretty self centered.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

simbot said:


> The only viable argument that I've heard is that land managers don't like e-bikes,


You listed two other valid reasons yourself.


----------



## Weaponized (Oct 22, 2017)

Reclassify bikes as...road bikes, Mt. bikes, and assault bikes. Problem solved. If it doesn't meet the purest definition of the 1st two it gets the assault moniker and can be banned.

Sent from my HTC6535LVW using Tapatalk


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

simbot said:


> At the end of a ride I've expended jsut as much total energy as I do on my "real" mt. bike, but I've covered a lot more ground in the process. had the freedom to explore new routes that I wouldn't have on my "real" mtb bike. Is it the lazy way to do it?


If your riding your ebike on a trail that doesn't allow motorized vehicles, then yes, it is the lazy way to do it.

However, i don't think it is fair to say riding your ebike on a trail that does allow motorized vehicles is the lazy way to do it.

How does that sound?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

leeboh said:


> Rogue trail building and poaching? How's that working for you in expanding trail access for the E's?


Probably not so good....

http://forums.mtbr.com/california-socal/camino-ruiz-trail-pq-damaged-idiot-1069313.html


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Maximum exertion isn't the focus for everyone.
> My focus is having fun. Exercise is just a bonus.
> 
> I also don't see why anybody gives a damn about how hard other people are working. Go spend your time doing cross-fit 'competitions' if that's what you're into. I'd rather gouge my eyes out with a fork personally.


I agree 100%. Whatever happened to minding your own business and stop worrying about what others do.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

Gutch said:


> No worries, some of us ebikers are also mtbrs and understand, they are different. I've never said otherwise. The problem is EVERYBODY gets lumped together, and not every ebiker or mtbr or "both" see things the same. Emtbs are just different, but the same- if that makes sense? If there was Trail jeopardy where I ride my mtb, because of Ebikes. I'd sell immediately. I'm kind of in a wait and see in my area. They are fun and at the end of the day, isn't that what matters?


Yes, this is the e-biker mentality I am happy to agree with. I'm very much in favor of discussing how and when they are appropriate, but when the loudest proponents are saying 'they're no different, they should be allowed anywhere bikes are' I cannot support that. So far I've heard from far more of those types than those like you.



simbot said:


> You seem very caught up with the amount of effort, or really the lack of. You refer to non-motorized MTBs are "real" mt bikers, the clear implication is that eMTB's are "less than", posers, and should not be considered on the same pedestal. I don't get this thinking at all.
> 
> Why do you care how much effort other trail users are expending? Lazy, sure you can say that, I don't care. At the end of a ride I've expended jsut as much total energy as I do on my "real" mt. bike, but I've covered a lot more ground in the process. had the freedom to explore new routes that I wouldn't have on my "real" mtb bike. Is it the lazy way to do it? Maybe I don't care if you call it that, I don't care what you think at all.
> 
> ...


I didn't really mean for the 'real mountain biker' phrasing to add the the already pejorative nature of my comment, I just always struggle with what to call 'non-e-bikes.' I am not too worried about if it offends people though; a real mountain bike does not have a motor. That's my opinion, if you dislike it then that's fine.

I do think it matters that you are covering more ground and at higher speeds with less energy expended. I'm not gonna freak out over the implications at this point, but to say that they're meaningless is not true either. If people gradually ramp up the speed and distances involved in mountain biking it will impact trails and trail users... No way around that.

You're not impacting anyone in any way? BS. I'm impacting others when I ride my 'real' mountain bike, particularly if I'm not cautious to be considerate, and sometimes even when I am (we've all scared the occasional hiker in a blind turn or something). This is the argument that drives me nuts; let's not ignore the issues, let's address them. They do exist. They aren't entirely distinct from 'real' mountain bikes, but they are exaggerated in some ways. Why not admit that and move forward?

I totally agree educating land managers will be key, but that education needs to admit that they are different from non-motorized bikes. Trying to pull the wool over land managers eyes to say 'they're just the same, there will be zero issues' is going to jeopardize the trust advocates (of 'real' mountain biking for the record) have worked hard to earn. That matters greatly to me.

I do not agree they are equal going downhill... They're heavy as hell! 

For someone who doesn't care what I think you spent a lot of your post worried about how I view your decision to e-bike. Just know that I don't look down on you individually as inferior for it, but I do see your seat at the table as a new one still needing to be earned. Mountain bikers have worked hard to get where we are, and we still aren't where we want to be (in terms of advocacy and access) so e-bikers just need to be patient and understand that if there is any worry that your arrival on the scene will jeopardize our efforts there's going to be push back. At this time that worry exists.



ALimon said:


> I agree 100%. Whatever happened to minding your own business and stop worrying about what others do.


Am I supposed to mind my own business if you ride a dirt bike on my trails? So clearly it's perfectly reasonable to discuss where to draw the line... Besides 'minding my own business' will include advising my local land manager on how to approach e-bikes in the near future I'm sure. 'My own business' involves a lot of unpaid time working to create and keep awesome mountain bike trails in my area, so these issues are very much a part of it.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I agree 100%. Whatever happened to minding your own business and stop worrying about what others do.


 Ok, great, except for the rogue trail building and poaching affects all trail uses. Start there. If one is e biking on a legal/moto trail, I got no issues. If that same rider is poaching, doing trail damage( cutting trees etc) or causing issue with the legit trail users, I have some concerns.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Ok, great, except for the rogue trail building and poaching affects all trail uses. Start there. If one is e biking on a legal/moto trail, I got no issues. If that same rider is poaching, doing trail damage( cutting trees etc) or causing issue with the legit trail users, I have some concerns.


No doubt. That is a valid and legitimate concern. What should'nt be a concern is why people choose to ride an eMTB. Calling someone "lazy" for not earning it is ridiculous.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> No doubt. That is a valid and legitimate concern. What should'nt be a concern is why people choose to ride an eMTB. Calling someone "lazy" for not earning it is ridiculous.


Boiling down an issue that clearly affects all of us as mountain bikers to simply say 'whatever happened to minding your own business and stop worrying about what others do' is ridiculous.

Calling the use of a motor to accomplish something that can be (and has been for over a century) done without one 'lazy' isn't ridiculous. More pejorative than necessary, sure. Ridiculous, nope.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> Calling the use of a motor to accomplish something that can be (and has been for over a century) done without one 'lazy' isn't ridiculous.


Sounds quite a bit like the crap the HOHs throw around trying to keep mtbs out.
Adding mechanical devices when feet have been fine for thousands of years, moving too fast, covering too much ground...all the same arguments we've been on the wrong side of a million times. Now some of us are all too happy to wield them. Seems kind of hypocritical to me.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Sounds quite a bit like the crap the HOHs throw around trying to keep mtbs out.
> Adding mechanical devices when feet have been fine for thousands of years, moving too fast, covering too much ground...all the same arguments we've been on the wrong side of a million times. Now some of us are all too happy to wield them. Seems kind of hypocritical to me.


Is it hypocritical to not want dirt bikes on our trails too then? How about dune buggies? Monster trucks? Hell, if we don't want to sound like hypocrites we better allow them all!

I want non-motorized vehicles only on my non-motorized trails. I don't think that's hypocritical, in fact it makes my head spin trying to think of how you can possibly think that (other than the reality which is you're just looking for any holes you can poke.)


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Boiling down an issue that clearly affects all of us as mountain bikers to simply say 'whatever happened to minding your own business and stop worrying about what others do' is ridiculous.
> 
> Calling the use of a motor to accomplish something that can be (and has been for over a century) done without one 'lazy' isn't ridiculous. More pejorative than necessary, sure. Ridiculous, nope.


If I may ask, what mtb do you ride?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> If I may ask, what mtb do you ride?


Trek Remedy

Let me save you some time; suspension is not a motor. Hydraulic brakes are not a motor. Twelve speed drivetrain is not a motor. You can point out how my bike is technologically optimized to make riding easier, but at the end of the day it does not have a motor which is the distinction we are discussing.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Trek Remedy
> 
> Let me save you some time; suspension is not a motor. Hydraulic brakes are not a motor. Twelve speed drivetrain is not a motor. You can point out how my bike is technologically optimized to make riding easier, but at the end of the day it does not have a motor which is the distinction we are discussing.


Trek Remedy? How lazy are you? You really need suspension? How about using your legs? Hard tails have been around for over a century and now all of a sudden you need suspension to make your ride easier? LMFAO. What a hypocrite!!!!!


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> If I may ask, what mtb do you ride?





TheDwayyo said:


> Trek Remedy
> 
> Let me save you some time; suspension is not a motor. Hydraulic brakes are not a motor. Twelve speed drivetrain is not a motor.


Yup, and also to save some time, my BC skis have mechanical parts in them. Gonna say those shouldn't be allowed if motors are not too?


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Trek Remedy? How lazy are you? You really need suspension? How about using your legs? Hard tails have been around for over a century and now all of a sudden you need suspension to make your ride easier? LMFAO. What a hypocrite!!!!!


Suspension makes the ride safer as well and makes it harder to pedal. I regularly take my rigid 26" for rides when being lazy because It is much easier to pedal than my lumbering 150mm full squish 29er.

Your point holds absolutely no water and is irrelivent to the conversation. But good to see your running out of ways to defend your motoroized vehicle.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Trek Remedy? How lazy are you? You really need suspension? How about using your legs? Hard tails have been around for over a century and now all of a sudden you need suspension to make your ride easier? LMFAO. What a hypocrite!!!!!


How lazy are your arguments when I can respond to them before you make them?

... And how lazy are you to see that and still not think of anything better to say?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

tahoebeau said:


> Suspension makes the ride safer as well and makes it harder to pedal. I regularly take my rigid 26" for rides when being lazy because It is much easier to pedal than my lumbering 150mm full squish 29er.
> 
> Your point holds absolutely no water and is irrelivent to the conversation. But good to see your running out of ways to defend your motoroized vehicle.


My point holds no water but yours does? I feel like I am administering medicine to the dead.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> My point holds no water but yours does? I feel like I am administering medicine to the dead.


If you can't see why adding a motor to a bike and adding suspension to a bike are not comparable when discussing access to non-motorized trails then I don't think we need to discuss any further.

For the record, I do follow the rules and stay off the 'non-suspensionized trails' in my area. :thumbsup:


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> Is it hypocritical to not want dirt bikes on our trails too then? How about dune buggies? Monster trucks? Hell, if we don't want to sound like hypocrites we better allow them all!


Nope, because all of those things can all be easily shown lead to incredibly higher amounts of actual trail degradation.

Picture your favorite skinny singletrack trail through the woods.

Picture it after a low power PAS e-bike passes down it.
Picture it after a KX450 passes down it.
Picture it after a dune buggy passes down it.
Picture it after a monster truck passes down it.

Do all these pictures look the same to you?


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Nope, because all of those things can all be easily shown lead to incredibly higher amounts of actual trail degradation.
> 
> Picture your favorite skinny singletrack trail through the woods.
> 
> ...


You forgot a picture...

Picture it after a massive influx of trail users passes down it.

These would be the huge amount of users that didn't ride off-road due to the physical requirements of a non-motorized bike on dirt now riding inexpensive ebikes on trails that were once quite and peaceful.

That's what ebikes are saying and waniting right? The e-revolution that's coming?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Nope, because all of those things can all be easily shown lead to incredibly higher amounts of actual trail degradation.
> 
> Picture your favorite skinny singletrack trail through the woods.
> 
> ...


So when we decide whether motorized vehicles should be allowed on non-motorized trails we should focus solely on the damage done to the trail itself? So we should forget that the reason non-motorized trails were deemed non-motorized takes into account any number of other user issues, not to mention the intent of the trail itself, and focus solely on trail damage?

Now let's try a similar game, if you want to stick solely to trail damage (which is only a part of the issue, but I'll play along):

Picture your favorite skinny singletrack trail through the woods.

Picture it after a mountain bike passes down it.
Picture it after a low power PAS e-bike passes down it.
Picture it after a medium power PAS e-bike passes down it.
Picture it after a high power PAS e-bike passes down it.
Picture it after an electric dirt bike passes down it.
Picture it after god knows what other vehicle people strap an electric motor to passes down it.
Picture it after twice the normal traffic, at twice the normal speed, passes down it.
Now picture the mountain bikers who have done all the advocacy, building and maintenance on this trail for years as they picture what has become of their trail.

Done enough picturing yet?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

A massive number of mountain bikers will do the same thing a massive numbers of low-powered e-bikes will do. I've seen tons of trails, including ones that I've helped build, that used to be pristine and hardly used become highly worn and blown out by high bicycle traffic. Time to ban mountain bikes? Put a daily limit on number of users and miles traveled per user?

Many of the same arguments you guys are making are the ones used against us in the past. It's hypocritical to say they don't apply to us but should apply to other user groups IMHO.


----------



## simbot (May 29, 2007)

TheDwayyo said:


> I do think it matters that you are covering more ground and at higher speeds with less energy expended. I'm not gonna freak out over the implications at this point, but to say that they're meaningless is not true either. If people gradually ramp up the speed and distances involved in mountain biking it will impact trails and trail users... No way around that.


Why does it matter how much ground I cover and how much energy I expend? So I guess we need a gatekeeper, "Sir how many miles do you plan to ride today?" 25 "sorry that's too much. please go away, or limit yourself to 12. Oh and you need to expend more energy so please hang these weights on your back."

Makes no sense.



TheDwayyo said:


> You're not impacting anyone in any way? BS. I'm impacting others when I ride my 'real' mountain bike, particularly if I'm not cautious to be considerate, and sometimes even when I am (we've all scared the occasional hiker in a blind turn or something). This is the argument that drives me nuts; let's not ignore the issues, let's address them. They do exist. They aren't entirely distinct from 'real' mountain bikes, but they are exaggerated in some ways. Why not admit that and move forward?


This is not a motor vs. non-motor issue. I'm talking about all other factors being equal, anyone can be an ahole on either type of bike.



TheDwayyo said:


> I totally agree educating land managers will be key, but that education needs to admit that they are different from non-motorized bikes. Trying to pull the wool over land managers eyes to say 'they're just the same, there will be zero issues' is going to jeopardize the trust advocates (of 'real' mountain biking for the record) have worked hard to earn. That matters greatly to me.


Of course they are different mechanically, I never claimed otherwise. The impact to the trail is not different (when used in non-ahole mode) and that's what matters. I'd wager that most people I pass have no idea I'm riding an e-bike.



TheDwayyo said:


> For someone who doesn't care what I think you spent a lot of your post worried about how I view your decision to e-bike. Just know that I don't look down on you individually as inferior for it, but I do see your seat at the table as a new one still needing to be earned. Mountain bikers have worked hard to get where we are, and we still aren't where we want to be (in terms of advocacy and access) so e-bikers just need to be patient and understand that if there is any worry that your arrival on the scene will jeopardize our efforts there's going to be push back. At this time that worry exists.


You missed my point entirely, as I mentioned several times I don't care what you think of me and my ebike. But you seem to want to restrict my access because I'm lazy. *My choice* to be lazy has nothing to do with you, so mind your own business.

Do you hate hybrid cars on the freeway?



TheDwayyo said:


> Am I supposed to mind my own business if you ride a dirt bike on my trails? So clearly it's perfectly reasonable to discuss where to draw the line... Besides 'minding my own business' will include advising my local land manager on how to approach e-bikes in the near future I'm sure. 'My own business' involves a lot of unpaid time working to create and keep awesome mountain bike trails in my area, so these issues are very much a part of it.


A dirt bike is a totally different animal, and you know it. Bringing that into the argument is disingenuous.

I've been a mt. biker for 25 years and done my share of trail building and advocacy, you don't hold the moral high ground.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> A massive number of mountain bikers will do the same thing a massive numbers of low-powered e-bikes will do. I've seen tons of trails, including ones that I've helped build, that used to be pristine and hardly used become highly worn and blown out by high bicycle traffic. Time to ban mountain bikes? Put a daily limit on number of users and miles traveled per user?
> 
> Many of the same arguments you guys are making are the ones used against us in the past. It's hypocritical to say they don't apply to us but should apply to other user groups IMHO.


Cool, how about medium powered? High powered? Throttle driven? Electric dirt bikes? Where do we draw the line and who is going to pay for enforcement? Seems to me drawing a line at 'has a motor' is working just fine.

When mountain bikers were fighting for access we weren't trying to get motors onto non-motorized trails. This is not the same.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

We were trying to get mechanized and wheeled travel onto foot trails. 
Not exactly the same, but not really all that different. Spent plenty of my own time fighting against some of these same arguments in order to get bikes on trails.

I personally concern myself less with semantics than actualities.
There's much less difference between PAS bikes and mountain bikes than there is between mountain bikes and foot travel.

There is pretty much zero enforcement of any type anywhere in the northeast corner of the US and somehow we manage pretty well.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

simbot said:


> 1. Why does it matter how much ground I cover and how much energy I expend?
> 
> 2. This is not a motor vs. non-motor issue. I'm talking about all other factors being equal, anyone can be an ahole on either type of bike.
> 
> ...


1. Answered that in the quoted text; I'm not worked up over it, but I'm not ready to call it a null distinction either. E-bikes let you go further and faster and there will be ramifications of that.

2. Yes, I know you e-bikers want to remove the motor from the discussion... But it's literally the crux of the whole discussion so the conversation is irrelevant without it. Remove the motor from your bike and I'll remove the motor from my concerns.

3. Again, if you go further and faster that changes the impact on the trail. Also again, I'm not worked up about it, but I'm not ready to call it null either.

4. You're hung up on lazy. I don't want to ban your access because you're lazy, I want to ban your access because my trails are deemed non-motorized and your bike has a motor. Pretty simple right?

5. Terrible analogy. Cars were always driven by something other than human power... Not to mention an e-bike increases your carbon footprint, while a hybrid decreases it. I could go on for days. Again, terrible comparison.

6. Is it?






7. Agreed. I don't do pissing matches over volunteerism and that wasn't my point. My point was this is 'my business' just as much as it is yours. In fact, as current regulations stand it's my business and not yours... You are not allowed on my local trails with your e-bike and I'm glad for it.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> We were trying to get mechanized and wheeled travel onto foot trails.
> Not exactly the same, but not really all that different. Spent plenty of my own time fighting against some of these same arguments in order to get bikes on trails.
> 
> I personally concern myself less with semantics than actualities.
> ...


Either we look like hypocrites (in your eyes) and ban them or we prove the guys crying 'slippery slope' back then right by allowing them. Either way those against MTB access are loving the predicament e-bikes have put us in.


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

Mr Pig said:


> Sorry, not seeing it. I'd be willing to put money on it that most eBike sales result from a desire to get into mountain biking without having to work too hard.


There's a few local ebike riders here and they're all experienced riders that can no longer ride a normal mountain bike for health reasons, unlike road cycling there's a lot more to mountain biking than just power so if people aren't bothered about building up the fitness to go mountain biking then they're also not bothered about building up the skills and technique for mountain biking either.

There are beginners I've seen on e-MTB's but just to ride a canal path or similar and no interest in trails so I don't count them as mountain bikers.

I've seen the same point made for years now that electric mountain bikes are going to be a serious problem because it means anyone can just hop on one and take them onto the trails but not seeing anything like that happen despite them being available for quite some time now and reasonably affordable. Those looking for powered riding here are much more interesting in petrol motorbikes which are a lot cheaper and more powerful plus cause genuine issues on trails. Thankfully they're pretty rare though.

John


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> Either we look like hypocrites (in your eyes) and ban them or we prove the guys crying 'slippery slope' back then right by allowing them. Either way those against MTB access are loving the predicament e-bikes have put us in.


Around here, it's not up to mountain bikers to decide who gets banned and who doesn't, and since I'm neither a land manager nor some wanna-be cop type of person, I'll let the LMs worry about what they allow on their trails and how they'r going to enforce it. My only input to them is simply to keep all e-bikes a distinct user group from mountain bikes so if they do run into any issues with them, they don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Judging by the fact that e-bikes seem to pretty much universally a separate line-item than traditional bikes anywhere I've ever looked, that seems to be covered. From there on in, they can sink or swim on their own. If I do end up seeing a bunch of issues arising from their use, I'll bring them up at that time. I'm not about to go getting worked up about a bunch of 'what ifs' though.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Around here, it's not up to mountain bikers to decide who gets banned and who doesn't, and since I'm neither a land manager nor some wanna-be cop type of person, I'll let the LMs worry about what they allow on their trails and how they'r going to enforce it. My only input to them is simply to keep all e-bikes a distinct user group from mountain bikes so if they do run into any issues with them, they don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Judging by the fact that e-bikes seem to pretty much universally a separate line-item than traditional bikes anywhere I've ever looked, that seems to be covered. From there on in, they can sink or swim on their own. If I do end up seeing a bunch of issues arising from their use, I'll bring them up at that time. I'm not about to go getting worked up about a bunch of 'what ifs' though.


Totally agree... Just got sucked into the discussion a bit too much so some of my personal beliefs that aren't necessarily actionable came to the surface.

I do think our land managers will be asking us though. It's not our decision, but they'll want to know where we stand.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> Either we look like hypocrites (in your eyes) and ban them or we prove the guys crying 'slippery slope' back then right by allowing them. Either way those against MTB access are loving the predicament e-bikes have put us in.


I'm sure they love hearing some of us now using the tired arguments from their playbooks to fight against e-bikes. Oh the irony!


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

JohnMcL7 said:


> I've seen the same point made for years now that electric mountain bikes are going to be a serious problem because it means anyone can just hop on one and take them onto the trails but not seeing anything like that happen...


Well the old man who almost ran into me on his new eBike tells me it does happen.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> Totally agree... Just got sucked into the discussion a bit too much so some of my personal beliefs that aren't necessarily actionable came to the surface.
> 
> I do think our land managers will be asking us though. It's not our decision, but they'll want to know where we stand.


It's a tough balance to strike. 
I distinctly remember having to listen to lots of sour old 'environmentalists' ranting about trails being trashed, nature being defiled, children being run down, trout being wiped off the planet, and tens of thousands of bikers 'racing' down the trails on a daily basis, and many other wild 'what if' scenarios presented as arguments against bikes being allowed. I found it ridiculous and wildly out of touch with reality, so not in a big hurry to turn into a wheeled version of that same sort of person.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

Mr Pig said:


> Well the old man who almost ran into me on his new eBike tells me it does happen.


I think of the eventualities as similar to the big box bike carnage I see on any trail that resembles a difficult one, same thing happens with noobs without motors.

I suppose the broken ebikes will have cost an order of magnitude more.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Let’s wait and see how the “test” area goes in California. The what if’s scenarios are not needed at this point in time. If you ride in an area of less dense users, a PAS is not a biggie. Some mtb riders have converted or ride both, and have been thru the trail access scenario. Like someone mentioned, permit them and collect a fee. Either way the same amount of users are going to be on the trail that like bikes. Can’t ride both at the same time. Emtbs May be a fad, but JMO I seriously doubt it. Too much R&D. Also, please stop calling “you ebikers” like we are a clan! I’m too sensitive and might end up drinking too many beers !😋


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Let's wait and see how the "test" area goes in California. The what if's scenarios are not needed at this point in time. If you ride in an area of less dense users, a PAS is not a biggie. Some mtb riders have converted or ride both, and have been thru the trail access scenario. Like someone mentioned, permit them and collect a fee. Either way the same amount of users are going to be on the trail that like bikes. Can't ride both at the same time. Emtbs May be a fad, but JMO I seriously doubt it. Too much R&D. Also, please stop calling "you ebikers" like we are a clan! I'm too sensitive and might end up drinking too many beers !?


Here, have another one on me:

You ebikers!


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Dammit Chazpat! Shot time now. Headed your way to MB dome to watch SX this weekend. I’m entering my Levo in the 250 class. Maybe I’ll holeshot!


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Let's wait and see how the "test" area goes in California.


Nope, not waiting. Doing every bit that I can to confine e-motors to motorized trails.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> Nope, not waiting. Doing every bit that I can to confine e-motors to motorized trails.


Great! If you don't ride in my general area, I could care less. BRAAAP! I love the smell of VP in the morning.. it smells like victory.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> If you can't see why adding a motor to a bike and adding suspension to a bike are not comparable when discussing access to non-motorized trails then I don't think we need to discuss any further.
> 
> For the record, I do follow the rules and stay off the 'non-suspensionized trails' in my area. :thumbsup:


Then start discussing access. Saying ebikes are for lazy people has nothing to do with access.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> Then start discussing access. Saying ebikes are for lazy people has nothing to do with access.


I can't count the amount of times I have heard on these forums that the only reason I am riding is because of an e bike. I would have been sitting on my couch if not for my e-bike. Im old and tired but my e bike makes me keep up with my friends, so now I am exercising again. All of those are people just being lazy.

You switch your position any way you can to support your motor. Ive heard that they are not faster that a regular bike, actually slower on the downs, but I can do the same loop in half the time now, sounds a lot faster to me. I do not want to have to ride slower on my downhills that I earned, so you can double your speed on the way up and ride more.

There is definitely a place for them, one way trails, fire roads, but keep them off the single track.


----------



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

slapheadmofo said:


> Nope, because all of those things can all be easily shown lead to incredibly higher amounts of actual trail degradation.


Trail degradation isn't the only consideration, I've mentioned others but most here dismiss them outright, usually derisively which isn't much of a surprise on a mtb forum I guess.

Anyway I agree with Dwayyo, most who want 250, 750 or whatever watt electric cycles accepted and regulated the same as bicycles are hypocrites if they snub their noses at allowing something a little more powerful on "their" trails.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

I was wondering if the anti-ebike thing is a red state blue state thing? Are the purists more likely to live in a state where they try to ban salt and buttered popcorn at the movie theater or ban soft drinks over a certain size? I stop and talk to hikers all the time and show them my ebike. Their impressions are 100% opposite of the vocal purists on MTBR.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Giant Warp said:


> I was wondering if the anti-ebike thing is a red state blue state thing? Are the purists more likely to live in a state where they try to ban salt and buttered popcorn at the movie theater or ban soft drinks over a certain size? I stop and talk to hikers all the time and show them my ebike. Their impressions are 100% opposite of the vocal purists on MTBR.


I'm fairly certain we are of all political persuasions.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

I recently did a 28 mile ride on asphalt with my Levo. Average speed was 14 mph. My bike does not have the awesome mods/hacks I keep reading about from the anti-ebikers on MTBR. Why is my speed lower than the 17 mph governor?

I recently did a 12 mile ride on dirt single track and pedaled my little heart out. My average speed was 8 mph. Where is this break neck speed I keep hearing about from the purists?


----------



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

Giant Warp said:


> I recently did a 12 mile ride on dirt single track and pedaled my little heart out. My average speed was 8 mph.


Then why bother with all the complications and expense of hauling around a motor and battery?


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> Then why bother with all the complications and expense of hauling around a motor and battery?


Because when an ebiker says they double their speed in half the time they are talking about going from 4 mph to 8 mph and reducing the ride from 3 hrs to 1.5 hrs. In other words they get to ride like a real boy.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Giant Warp said:


> Because when an ebiker says they double their speed in half the time they are talking about going from 4 mph to 8 mph and reducing the ride from 3 hrs to 1.5 hrs. In other words they get to ride like a real boy.


You shouldn't have to explain why you ride an ebike. Why the hell does anyone drive a Prius? Who cares why. It's their choice. Ride what you like, if anyone has a problem with it well then too bad for them.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> Trail degradation isn't the only consideration, I've mentioned others but most here dismiss them outright, usually derisively which isn't much of a surprise on a mtb forum I guess.
> 
> Anyway I agree with Dwayyo, most who want 250, 750 or whatever watt electric cycles accepted and regulated the same as bicycles are hypocrites if they snub their noses at allowing something a little more powerful on "their" trails.


I also have legitimate concerns regarding e-bikes, particularly I don't ever want e-bikes equated with 'real' bikes as far as trail access. If people are cool I'm willing to share though.


----------



## scaryfast (Apr 23, 2004)

I think there are valid reasons on both wanting and not wanting ebikes. The main argument for Ebikes is that it allows for people who can't get out there to still enjoy riding. The counter argument of course is what happens when you let the cat out of the bag, right? For the most part I want to say most people in here are ethical riders, they care and respect the trails. The biggest problem are those who don't give AF, and when they start ripping up trails in numbers, the damage is done (physically to the trail but also the relationships with the land/property owners). Clearly there are going to be riders of ebikes who aren't going to care where they ride or what damages they cause. Likely nobody is going to regulate or enforce ebike rules so after a while, things will get out of hand. The problem and worry with that mentality is that potentially normal mountain bikers will likely be also lumped into that category (anything with two wheels) so the trails we love could be off limits moving forward. People care because it's their passion, and to potentially have it taken away from them due to another user groups action, well that doesn't sit well with many of us.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

scaryfast said:


> I think there are valid reasons on both wanting and not wanting ebikes. The main argument for Ebikes is that it allows for people who can't get out there to still enjoy riding. The counter argument of course is what happens when you let the cat out of the bag, right? For the most part I want to say most people in here are ethical riders, they care and respect the trails. The biggest problem are those who don't give AF, and when they start ripping up trails in numbers, the damage is done (physically to the trail but also the relationships with the land/property owners). Clearly there are going to be riders of ebikes who aren't going to care where they ride or what damages they cause. Likely nobody is going to regulate or enforce ebike rules so after a while, things will get out of hand. The problem and worry with that mentality is that potentially normal mountain bikers will likely be also lumped into that category (anything with two wheels) so the trails we love could be off limits moving forward. People care because it's their passion, and to potentially have it taken away from them due to another user groups action, well that doesn't sit well with many of us.


Most guys that ride mtb are pretty cool and respectful. Most of us ride because we love to ride, not because we enjoy tearing up trails. I can do a lot damage to a trail on my stumpy if I chose to, it really has nothing to do with an ebike, more to do with a riders intentions.


----------



## scaryfast (Apr 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Most guys that ride mtb are pretty cool and respectful. Most of us ride because we love to ride, not because we enjoy tearing up trails. I can do a lot damage to a trail on my stumpy if I chose to, it really has nothing to do with an ebike, more to do with a riders intentions.


Totally. I know you get it but not everyone does or will. I posted a screenshot of the Stealth Bomber Ebike somewhere above. It can hit 80kmph or 50mph with 8 inches of travel. Not like a Specialized Turbo Levo that's just getting you out further because you can't ride as far as you used to or for whatever reason. The direction that ebikes are going is definitely more high power than what's being offered today. I think the Turbo Levo's a great bike, it's not going to rip sheit up any more than a Stumpy. As the market of of Ebikes grow, the worry is that not everyone will ride ethically. I think most people in here get it, they don't want to destroy trails but when in the upcoming years, those bikes will get more and more popular and the spots we find sacred could be at risk of losing access. Some may argue that this is a paranoid/pessimistic view but I don't think it's far fetched. I mean think about it, for those who can't pedal very far but still want to have huge amounts of fun without much effort, this would be the easy ticket. People producing these bikes aren't going to care where you ride it as long as they're making money. I could be wrong, but being in marketing and seeing the trends, I don't think I'm far off. I hope I am.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Again, let’s stick to the masses, like 250w Pedelecs. The ones EVERY MAJOR BRAND IS PRODUCING.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Again, let's stick to the masses, like 250w Pedelecs. The ones EVERY MAJOR BRAND IS PRODUCING.


Why should we? Enforcement will be tough at best and non-existent at worst so I think it is perfectly fair to assume any and all iterations will find their way onto our trails... Particularly as more models crop up and prices come down.


----------



## Steve Adams (Sep 17, 2010)

I guess every ebike hater here is going to have a S*&T fit over my new Stealth F37 ha ha. Best part, we have NO land owned trails. All wilderness. No "rules" from one side or the other! it's great. I have a new fun trail bike that burns no gas, create minimal noise and I can ride down the road to the trails here with no issues! woo hoo!


----------



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

Steve Adams said:


> Best part, we have NO land owned trails. All wilderness. No "rules" from one side or the other!


What is a land owned trail? Where do you live?



ALimon said:


> You shouldn't have to explain why you ride an ebike.


Even a "hater" like me agrees with this^


----------



## Steve Adams (Sep 17, 2010)

JB...a trail on Private land, or one run by state. Our province has none of that, some small ones in town for walking trails but no one rides bikes on them anyways.


----------



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

I am grateful to live in an area that has millions of acres of public land.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Good! Only dead fish swim with the current.


"swim with the current", I guess you're referring to riding using electrical current? So ebikers are "dead fish"? Are you calling them lazy?

I'm 100% joking here guys.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Steve Adams said:


> I guess every ebike hater here is going to have a S*&T fit over my new Stealth F37 ha ha. Best part, we have NO land owned trails. All wilderness. No "rules" from one side or the other! it's great. I have a new fun trail bike that burns no gas, create minimal noise and I can ride down the road to the trails here with no issues! woo hoo!


NL is like BC and most of the provinces. The laws are pretty free if you are under the 500w and meet the requirements for pedal assist. If over 500w and or you have a throttle you must meet different requirements like licencing and insurance. So you are really breaking the law whenever you ride. In BC if you are over the requirements then you need licencing and insurance for off road also, I suspect most provinces are this way also. The problem is that there is no policing. The way it will get dealt with is with user conflict and trail closure.


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

chazpat said:


> "swim with the current", I guess you're referring to riding using electrical current? So ebikers are "dead fish"? Are you calling them lazy?


Resistance is futile.

E-jokes! I've got









of 'em!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> Again, let's stick to the masses, like 250w Pedelecs. The ones EVERY MAJOR BRAND IS PRODUCING.


Why? The laws allow 750w, it's naive to think manufacturers aren't going to compete with each other by making models at the limit of the regs. Joe blow walks into a shop, and he can either buy a 45 lb 250w ebike or a 47 lb 750w ebike, for the same price, which will he choose? There will always be a sensible segment of the market looking for just assist, and light weight, but the majority will be seduced by more power.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Steve Adams said:


> I guess every ebike hater here is going to have a S*&T fit over my new Stealth F37 ha ha. Best part, we have NO land owned trails. All wilderness. No "rules" from one side or the other! it's great. I have a new fun trail bike that burns no gas, create minimal noise and I can ride down the road to the trails here with no issues! woo hoo!


You do realize that all land is owned by someone? Either privately or by a government agency?

I guess except Antartica, maybe you're riding there?


----------



## Steve Adams (Sep 17, 2010)

Sorry...It's crown land meaning full public use until purchased by someone. Pretty well the entire island is like this. Also, I can guarantee that NO forestry officers will look at my bike and say...hey....thats 4000w your screwed. NOT HERE. Again. As long as I do not ride on public streets, I can ride a 80 hp 500cc 2 stroke monster on any trail in newfoundland and be legal...no way they are going to bother whining about a ebike. Thats why I find all this funny.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

^^^ Ok great. CAD ain't USA. Cheers.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Giant Warp said:


> Because when an ebiker says they double their speed in half the time they are talking about going from 4 mph to 8 mph and reducing the ride from 3 hrs to 1.5 hrs. In other words they get to ride like a real boy.


But you are only increasing speeds on the climbs and flats. We have heard many times that they are slower on the downs than mountain bikes.

If your normal loop on a mountain bike is 1hr. With a 45min climb and 15min decent. If you can do 2 laps now in one hour, that means two 15 min descents and two 15 min climbs. Your speed on the ups is much faster than 2x normal.

I know this is a very simple example but, this is what I am worried about. The increase in closing speeds. Of course all of the HOHA's here too will just want to ban all bikes. Marin is tough enough as it is.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

scaryfast said:


> Totally. I know you get it but not everyone does or will. I posted a screenshot of the Stealth Bomber Ebike somewhere above. It can hit 80kmph or 50mph with 8 inches of travel. Not like a Specialized Turbo Levo that's just getting you out further because you can't ride as far as you used to or for whatever reason. The direction that ebikes are going is definitely more high power than what's being offered today. I think the Turbo Levo's a great bike, it's not going to rip sheit up any more than a Stumpy. As the market of of Ebikes grow, the worry is that not everyone will ride ethically. I think most people in here get it, they don't want to destroy trails but when in the upcoming years, those bikes will get more and more popular and the spots we find sacred could be at risk of losing access. Some may argue that this is a paranoid/pessimistic view but I don't think it's far fetched. I mean think about it, for those who can't pedal very far but still want to have huge amounts of fun without much effort, this would be the easy ticket. People producing these bikes aren't going to care where you ride it as long as they're making money. I could be wrong, but being in marketing and seeing the trends, I don't think I'm far off. I hope I am.


Bikes like the Levo will be the hot sellers and will eventually gain more access. I don't see bikes like the stealth bomber ever gaining too much momentum simply because e dirt bikes are on the way. As e dirt bikes price point becomes more reasonable, Bike's like the stealth bomber will be **** out of luck.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Bikes like the Levo will be the hot sellers and will eventually gain more access. I don't see bikes like the stealth bomber ever gaining too much momentum simply because e dirt bikes are on the way. As e dirt bikes price point becomes more reasonable, Bike's like the stealth bomber will be **** out of luck.


250w emtbs will only sell where you can ride them, it's the chicken and egg dilemma. And, I've yet to see sales have any affect on access, the land managers I know could care less who sells what.

Affordable emotos are already here, both better and far cheaper than a Bomber. Luna will sell a controller that will get you 12k watts out of this. There's more models that are similar being announced as well.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

They need to change the title of that vid. He ain’t hangin with no 450. I’d lap the ebike in no time on my 450


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> Bikes like the Levo will be the hot sellers and will eventually gain more access. I don't see bikes like the stealth bomber ever gaining too much momentum simply because e dirt bikes are on the way. As e dirt bikes price point becomes more reasonable, Bike's like the stealth bomber will be **** out of luck.


Is this another of your "facts"? They sell mountain bikes all the time and they do not gain access just because they were sold.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Is this another of your "facts"? They sell mountain bikes all the time and they do not gain access just because they were sold.


Lol. What the hell are you talking about? Your comment makes no sense...... again


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Bikes like the Levo will be the hot sellers and will eventually gain more access.

It is pretty hard to understand your comments, even when YOU make them.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Bikes like the Levo will be the hot sellers and will eventually gain more access.
> 
> It is pretty hard to understand your comments, even when YOU make them.


You took my comment out of context as usual and used it to your liking. Follow along and you might understand what was being said.

But to answer your spin, access is coming to PAS bikes wether you like it or not. You might cry the day they do eh? Lol.

Like the day my cubs beat your giants and went on to win the the World Series? He he


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

No, that's how I interpreted it, too. If we both took it out of context, then I have no idea what the context was.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> Why? The laws allow 750w, it's naive to think manufacturers aren't going to compete with each other by making models at the limit of the regs. Joe blow walks into a shop, and he can either buy a 45 lb 250w ebike or a 47 lb 750w ebike, for the same price, which will he choose? There will always be a sensible segment of the market looking for just assist, and light weight, but the majority will be seduced by more power.


I think your wrong on that Harryman. The law will change to 250w. This is the reason so many are being produced. If not all 2018 would be 750w Levo's etc. The "law" is 750, but we're only looking for 250w Pedelecs.. that may be the industry's case.


----------



## Steve Adams (Sep 17, 2010)

ALimon said:


> They need to change the title of that vid. He ain't hangin with no 450. I'd lap the ebike in no time on my 450


Agreed...The guy on the 450 was not even trying...that being said, I will still have a big grin from ear to ear on my F37 out blasting some trails around here. It will be about the same as my CRF230 mod but without the noise and weight of the bike!


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> But to answer your spin, access is coming to PAS bikes wether you like it or not. You might cry the day they do eh? Lol.


When? When is this e-revolution and access for ebikes coming? This summer? Next year, 2 Year's, 5 years.... WHEN?!?!?



Gutch said:


> The law will change to 250w. This is the reason so many are being produced. If not all 2018 would be 750w Levo's etc. The "law" is 750, but we're only looking for 250w Pedelecs.. that may be the industry's case.


When will this law change? Next year? 5 Year's?

What evidence do you have that this is in the works, because I love to tell you this, no one cares and therefore no effort will be made to change it.

750 with a throttle actually makes a lot of sense if your using an ebike for what the law intended them for. The extra power vs a 250w is needed when say commuting on the ebike with equipment for your work, for using the ebike to do some shopping and bring goods back, for those planning on using ebikes to make deliveries and other reasons. Plus, many ebikes that have already been sold and are on sale today already exceed the 250w mark like Sondors. Maybe you should have taken some action earlier

These are are all very good reasons why the law will not change. What reasons do you have for why it _would_ change other than It helps your arguement for riding an ebike on non-motorized trails?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

tahoebeau said:


> if your using an ebike for what the law intended them for.


Wait - so 'the law' came up e-bikes?

Haven't heard that one before...do tell.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> 250w emtbs will only sell where you can ride them, it's the chicken and egg dilemma. And, I've yet to see sales have any affect on access, the land managers I know could care less who sells what.
> 
> Affordable emotos are already here, both better and far cheaper than a Bomber. Luna will sell a controller that will get you 12k watts out of this. There's more models that are similar being announced as well.





tahoebeau said:


> When? When is this e-revolution and access for ebikes coming? This summer? Next year, 2 Year's, 5 years.... WHEN?!?!?
> 
> When will this law change? Next year? 5 Year's?
> 
> ...


Who cares when. But eventually it will. The writing is on the wall. Anyone who isn't illiterate can see that.

You mad bro? You seem rather angry.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Who cares when. But eventually it will. The writing is on the wall. Anyone who isn't illiterate can see that.
> 
> You mad bro? You seem rather angry.


Access is absolutely coming (and already available) to e-bikes... On motorized trails as well as any trail that the local land manager has deemed appropriate.

I think the writing is on the wall that it will stay that way. Blanket access will never happen, because blanket anything doesn't happen in the way of trails... It's always up to the local land managers.

To say any different is ludicrous. You think congress is going to pass a law that says you can't ban e-bikes from your trails? You think the Supreme Court is gonna take up the case when some entitled jack-wagon tries to sue for access?

I'd say the guy who ignores every post that he can't refute so he can tell himself he's 'winning' is probably the one who is mad, bro.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

JMO, 250w will be allowed by “some” land managers. Period. I have no facts to prove this, neither can anyone see into their crystal ball. I’m a logical mtbr and really don’t care if y’all like Ebikes or not. They will be around and surface, that’s reality. I don’t agree with ICE motors on non-motorized trails, but after owning 3 Levo’s see absolutely no problems with them anywhere. Yes ANYWHERE. They throw no roost, WAY less sliding and skidding and not gonna loop out or anything crazy. They are a tank. Most people that “I’ve” encountered and own 250w Pedelecs are mature riders and if they were allowed and the frankenbike was poaching, for sure they’d be vocal. We wouldn’t want to loose our access over some irresponsible jackass. No different than on a mtb. Broken record..


----------



## faceplant72 (Oct 25, 2009)

ALimon said:


> They need to change the title of that vid. He ain't hangin with no 450. I'd lap the ebike in no time on my 450


You should check out Alta Motors. The Redshift probably could hang with your 450. It does concern me that in at least two YouTube videos the sponsored riders alluded to poaching mountain bike trails. The red shift just needs some pedals and it's a 37000w ebike.

Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

It couldn’t be an ebike with pedals. How would you pedal it?!!!


----------



## simbot (May 29, 2007)

*The Crux of it*

Ok, good progress we are getting to the crux of it.



TheDwayyo said:


> 2. Yes, I know you e-bikers want to remove the motor from the discussion... But it's literally the crux of the whole discussion so the conversation is irrelevant without it. Remove the motor from your bike and I'll remove the motor from my concerns.
> 
> 3. Again, if you go further and faster that changes the impact on the trail. Also again, I'm not worked up about it, but I'm not ready to call it null either.
> 
> ...


2) Right, because it's irrelevant (within bounds). The fact that I have a weak motor on my PAS bike doesn't change how I impact the trail or other users. I need to respect other riders and the land in the process, just as non-motor assisted MTB's need to. Ties into #6

3) The same can be said about STD MTB's, therefore it's a non-issue.

5) Agreed

6) Electrical motorcycles are not even close to the same as PAS MTB's. I ride dirt bikes myself, and would never try to push for access to MTB trails on it. They are clearly different, and need to be separated.

The distinction is obvious, and continuing to drag them into the debate is just ridiculous. Pretty easy to draw the line. One has a throttle, and has so much power that it can kick up roost. That is impossible on a PAS MTB. The slippery slope of increasing power to the point e-bike's approach dirt bike power is nonsense, out of scope for this debate. Sure the technology is there, but it's pretty easy to draw a clear line between the two. The bike industry has already done it, class 1 e-bike.

I know,,, one has a motor and one doesn't. So it comes down to this:

I think the motor is too weak to have any impact beyond that of standard MTB, and you don't.

I ride MTB's to have fun, e-bikes are fun, and I'm not bothering anyone else in the process. I'm not bothering you, so don't bother me.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> I think your wrong on that Harryman. The law will change to 250w. This is the reason so many are being produced. If not all 2018 would be 750w Levo's etc. The "law" is 750, but we're only looking for 250w Pedelecs.. that may be the industry's case.


While I agree, that having a separate class for 250w etmbs would have been the intelligent and logical thing to do if you wanted to gain access, I've seen zero evidence that anyone is working towards that. I asked the lawyer at P4B in charge of writing the legislations why they didn't just adopt the EU system, since it seems to be working just fine and he said they couldn't since dealers were already selling 750w 20mph bikes under the fed law. He showed no interest anything but what they are already pitching. It's also very expensive to submit legislation apparently, so I wouldn't expect them to start over in the states where they've already passed legislation.

Land managers have always been able to make their own rules concerning ebikes, the CA legislation didn't change that at all, if they want to allow access to 250w etmbs only, they're free to do so. I doubt you'll see much of it, especially as higher power ebikes roll out.

The pioneers of ebikes have been the chinese, and they're coming out with decent 750w etmbs now, maybe not of the quality of an enthusiasts emtb, but I have friends in the industry and the boutique guys are not going to stick with EU spec bikes forever, I can guarantee that. The engineers have been hard at work solving problems....


----------



## MTB9488 (Jun 18, 2012)

TheDwayyo said:


> Is it hypocritical to not want dirt bikes on our trails too then? How about dune buggies? Monster trucks? Hell, if we don't want to sound like hypocrites we better allow them all!
> 
> I want non-motorized vehicles only on my non-motorized trails. I don't think that's hypocritical, in fact it makes my head spin trying to think of how you can possibly think that (other than the reality which is you're just looking for any holes you can poke.)


The federal law that was created back in 1983 UL RF4745.21 in short (obviously too long to post) any motorized vehicle that can exceed 25mph and/or creates excessive noise is prohibited on federal land. Nothing in the law specifically states "motorized vehicle". So The word "No motorized vehicle" is taken out of context. So legally a class 1 ebike is not prohibited. if you don't believe me talk to lawyer and look it up....i did.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

MTB9488 said:


> The federal law that was created back in 1983 UL RF4745.21 in short (obviously too long to post) any motorized vehicle that can exceed 25mph and/or creates excessive noise is prohibited on federal land. Nothing in the law specifically states "motorized vehicle". So The word "No motorized vehicle" is taken out of context. So legally a class 1 ebike is not prohibited. if you don't believe me talk to lawyer and look it up....i did.


I believe you are just as wrong as the rest of these guys. Please go ride your moped on federal land and see what happens when you go to court.


----------



## MTB9488 (Jun 18, 2012)

sfgiantsfan said:


> I believe you are just as wrong as the rest of these guys. Please go ride your moped on federal land and see what happens when you go to court.


I'm a lawyer nothing will happen. Please go back to school and get your GED


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

MTB9488 said:


> I'm a lawyer nothing will happen. Please go back to school and get your GED


Every lawsuit ever filed, a lawyer loses, loser.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

MTB9488 said:


> The federal law that was created back in 1983 UL RF4745.21 in short (obviously too long to post) any motorized vehicle that can exceed 25mph and/or creates excessive noise is prohibited on federal land. Nothing in the law specifically states "motorized vehicle". So The word "No motorized vehicle" is taken out of context. So legally a class 1 ebike is not prohibited. if you don't believe me talk to lawyer and look it up....i did.


link?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> While I agree, that having a separate class for 250w etmbs would have been the intelligent and logical thing to do if you wanted to gain access, I've seen zero evidence that anyone is working towards that. I asked the lawyer at P4B in charge of writing the legislations why they didn't just adopt the EU system, since it seems to be working just fine and he said they couldn't since dealers were already selling 750w 20mph bikes under the fed law. He showed no interest anything but what they are already pitching. It's also very expensive to submit legislation apparently, so I wouldn't expect them to start over in the states where they've already passed legislation.
> 
> Land managers have always been able to make their own rules concerning ebikes, the CA legislation didn't change that at all, if they want to allow access to 250w etmbs only, they're free to do so. I doubt you'll see much of it, especially as higher power ebikes roll out.
> 
> The pioneers of ebikes have been the chinese, and they're coming out with decent 750w etmbs now, maybe not of the quality of an enthusiasts emtb, but I have friends in the industry and the boutique guys are not going to stick with EU spec bikes forever, I can guarantee that. The engineers have been hard at work solving problems....


It all boils down to the LM on a case by case basis. IMO 750w is way overkill for a emtb. E-RB, perfect.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

MTB9488 said:


> The federal law that was created back in 1983 UL RF4745.21 in short (obviously too long to post) any motorized vehicle that can exceed 25mph and/or creates excessive noise is prohibited on federal land. Nothing in the law specifically states "motorized vehicle". So The word "No motorized vehicle" is taken out of context. So legally a class 1 ebike is not prohibited. if you don't believe me talk to lawyer and look it up....i did.


"The federal law that was created back in 1983 UL RF4745.21 in short (obviously too long to post) any motorized vehicle that can exceed 25mph and/or creates excessive noise is prohibited on federal land."

"The word "No motorized vehicle" is taken out of context."

In your post, or the law?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

MTB9488 said:


> I'm a lawyer nothing will happen. Please go back to school and get your GED


I really doubt that, you can't even write properly.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

MTB9488 said:


> I'm a lawyer nothing will happen. Please go back to school and get your GED


So step up and be the test monkey.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

ya all still at this...holy cow..some need to give themselves an oil change..then ya will feel better...

Here is an idea..ebikers use the trails on days friday, saturday, sunday, monday and mtbers tuesday wednsady and thursday. Then ya don't have to see each other.


----------



## MTB9488 (Jun 18, 2012)

Harryman said:


> link?


http://lmgtfy.com/


----------



## IPunchCholla (Dec 8, 2013)

MTB9488 said:


> http://lmgtfy.com/


Well I can't find the law copy and pasting your info, not does your oh so funny let me Google that for you link work.

Funny thing is, I've ridden in motor vehicles capable of going over 25mph and creating excessive noise on federal land. It was being driven by the ranger. Who also use motos to patrol. So I would like to see the context of your claim.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> I really doubt that, you can't even write properly.


When you take the bar examination, they could care less about your grammar, you're graded on your logic.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Access is absolutely coming (and already available) to e-bikes... On motorized trails as well as any trail that the local land manager has deemed appropriate.
> 
> I think the writing is on the wall that it will stay that way. Blanket access will never happen, because blanket anything doesn't happen in the way of trails... It's always up to the local land managers.
> 
> ...


And when that local land manager buys an eMTB what happens next?


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> When you take the bar examination, they could care less about your grammar, you're graded on your logic.


Lol. Or your lack there of. Sometimes, attorneys are actually educated.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> And when that local land manager buys an eMTB what happens next?


We are still working on them getting a regular mtb... They tend to be nature purists in my experience, at least ours are. Good luck selling them a moped to ride in the woods.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> We are still working on them getting a regular mtb... They tend to be nature purists in my experience, at least ours are. Good luck selling them a moped to ride in the woods.


You still haven't answered the question.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

TheDwayyo said:


> We are still working on them getting a regular mtb... They tend to be nature purists in my experience, at least ours are. Good luck selling them a moped to ride in the woods.


Oh man, you're so lucky this is in general now.

I hear the "M" word is banned in the ebike safe space.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

TheDwayyo said:


> We are still working on them getting a regular mtb... They tend to be nature purists in my experience, at least ours are. Good luck selling them a moped to ride in the woods.


Rangers in several Colorado State Parks are using eBikes now to patrol and do trail maintenance, as well as Jefferson County Open Space rangers.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

MTB9488 said:


> LMGTFY


I tried googling it originally, and your info led me to nothing related to motor vehicles, which why I asked for a link. If you can't provide it, I'll assume it's bogus.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

While I was on a Levo a ranger in my area was checking out the bike. I offered him to throw a leg over. So he did. And of course he loved it.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/durango-area-trails-could-see-e-bike-access/

Say what? Eventually opening up trails in the Hermosa area to ebikes?

It's happening people!


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

"A photo of Travis Brown’s daughter on a trail adjacent to the trails in the Hermosa Creek Special Manangement Area currently under review. Brown says that the profound experience of sharing this ride (four hours, 3500 feet of climbing) with his daughter would not have been possible without a pedal-assist e-bike."

I guess people that can't afford an moped for their daughter are just going to have to abandon them in the forest. This is no reason to open access to motors on trails.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/durango-area-trails-could-see-e-bike-access/
> 
> Say what? Eventually opening up trails in the Hermosa area to ebikes?
> 
> It's happening people!


Yeah, it's the area in and around the ski area, I read about that last year.


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

1niceride said:


> ya all still at this...holy cow..some need to give themselves an oil change..then ya will feel better...
> 
> Here is an idea..ebikers use the trails on days friday, saturday, sunday, monday and mtbers tuesday wednsady and thursday. Then ya don't have to see each other.


:thumbsup:...:thumbsup:...:thumbsup:...:thumbsup:...:thumbsup:


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/durango-area-trails-could-see-e-bike-access/
> 
> Say what? Eventually opening up trails in the Hermosa area to ebikes?
> 
> It's happening people!





Harryman said:


> Yeah, it's the area in and around the ski area, I read about that last year.


Ya, here is some of the language for that pilot program. I like the part I put in bold. Sounds like a great pilot program to me :thumbsup:

"The duration of the Pilot Program will be up to one year and during this time, Class I and Class II electric bicycles that are low speed pedal-assist or throttle assisted two-wheeled bicycles equipped with an electric motor will be permitted on designated City trails. The designated multi-use hard surface trails are limited to the Animas River Trail including adjacent spur connections, Florida Road Trail and Goeglein Gulch Road Trail. *Electric bicycles are not permitted on natural surface trails*."

http://www.durangogov.org/DocumentCenter/View/8869

Here is a map of the new ebike trails:


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

ALimon said:


> When you take the bar examination, they could care less about your grammar, you're graded on your logic.


You may have a problem taking the bar; your logic is circular and the proper expression is "could not care less".


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

ALimon said:


> While I was on a Levo a ranger in my area was checking me out. I offered him to throw a leg over. So he did. And of course he loved it.


fify.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

tahoebeau said:


> Ya, here is some of the language for that pilot program. I like the part I put in bold. Sounds like a great pilot program to me :thumbsup:


No, it's actually this:

https://www.durangotelegraph.com/news/top-stories/along-for-the-ride/


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

sfgiantsfan said:


> "A photo of Travis Brown's daughter on a trail adjacent to the trails in the Hermosa Creek Special Manangement Area currently under review. Brown says that the profound experience of sharing this ride (four hours, 3500 feet of climbing) with his daughter would not have been possible without a pedal-assist e-bike."
> 
> I guess people that can't afford an moped for their daughter are just going to have to abandon them in the forest. This is no reason to open access to motors on trails.


Moped? Really, wow.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Last I knew, mopeds need a tag? How many Levo’s or like have you seen with a registration? Crickets... yup.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Harryman said:


> No, it's actually this:
> 
> https://www.durangotelegraph.com/news/top-stories/along-for-the-ride/


Looks pretty cool. Much more intriguing than what I found. I like that they are using newly built trails for the pilot. Would be good to have an ebike rental business in the area.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mileslong said:


> You may have a problem taking the bar; your logic is circular and the proper expression is "could not care less".


I have no interest in taking the bar.....I have no interest in law, and we have too many blood sucking attorneys as it is.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> No, it's actually this:
> 
> https://www.durangotelegraph.com/news/top-stories/along-for-the-ride/


All ebikes ever needed was a chance. Once they get their chance, the rest will be history. I've tried to tell ya all... they're coming!


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> All ebikes ever needed was a chance. Once they get their chance, the rest will be history. I've tried to tell ya all... they're coming!


They make fabulous commuters, the dirt is where you'l never find them. History.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> They make fabulous commuters, the dirt is where you'l never find them. History.


Never? That's interesting. I see them out on the trails all the time. It's happening! Stay in denial, it's better for your health,


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> They make fabulous commuters, the dirt is where you'l never find them. History.


Never? That's interesting. I see them out on the trails all the time. It's happening! Stay in denial, it's better for your health!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Last I knew, mopeds need a tag?


I believe that depends on which state you're in.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> All ebikes ever needed was a chance. Once they get their chance, the rest will be history. I've tried to tell ya all... they're coming!


At ski areas? Fine by me.


----------



## IPunchCholla (Dec 8, 2013)

ALimon said:


> Never? That's interesting. I see them out on the trails all the time. It's happening! Stay in denial, it's better for your health!


I've yet to see a single one on the trail. Even the Moto allowed ones I ride the most. But then I live about 20 years behind everyone else in the US out here in NM. Personally, in fine with 250 PAS bikes on the trails, but some of the BS on here makes me want to lobby against them, even on the Moto legal trails.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> At ski areas? Fine by me.


The ski area is the acorn that will build the forest


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> When you take the bar examination, they could care less about your grammar, you're graded on your logic.


What is the latest time you get get out of court and still make it through the traffic to the golf course.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> What is the latest time you get get out of court and still make it through the traffic to the golf course.


There is no traffic on an ebike


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Breaking news!!!! Salt Lake City has just said that anyone with an electric car can use any government charging station for free. The irony is thick. Leftists pushing electric power to the masses. How are the purists going to keep the ebikes off of "their" trails? Indoctrination at its finest.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Utah law.....
(d) "Moped" does not include an electric assisted bicycle.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Giant Warp said:


> How are the purists going to keep the ebikes off of "their" trails?


We just sit back and let the local land managers ban them.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

What if the land manager drives a Prius?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> We just sit back and let the local land managers ban them.


That will only last so long. If that's what you're banking on you're in big trouble! Lol.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

While we’re at it, we should ban electric golf carts too! I mean why ride a cart when you can walk. How lazy of anyone who rides a cart  Ever notice how much damage an electric cart does to grass? It’s just horrible.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Golf carting is not the sport. Golfing is. It is like driving your car to the trailhead.
Are emtb and mtb the exact same sport?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

rlee said:


> Golf carting is not the sport. Golfing is. It is like driving your car to the trailhead.
> Are emtb and mtb the exact same sport?


Golf carting is most definitely a sport. Some of the most fun I've ever had with my buds!

just having some fun. Geez you anti bikers are so tightly wound.


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

Giant Warp said:


> What if the land manager drives a Prius?


Then E-Bikes will soon be on all the trails under his management......................SWEET!!


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> That will only last so long. If that's what you're banking on you're in big trouble! Lol.


Dream on.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Geez you anti bikers are so tightly wound.


Anti-bikers? I think that would be you and Giant Waste, I mean Warp.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Golf carting is most definitely a sport. Some of the most fun I've ever had with my buds!
> 
> just having some fun. Geez you anti bikers are so tightly wound.


And logic, is clearly not your gig. You've assumed the position as the mouthpiece of your hobby. While I'm sure you make a wonderful mouthpiece, I assure you that you're doing your hobby no favors. So, you go.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

tom erb said:


> Then E-Bikes will soon be on all the trails under him management......................SWEET!!


Not sure what that means, but way to go!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Giant Warp said:


> What if the land manager drives a Prius?


As opposed to what? A pedal car? Like the Flintstones?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Anti-bikers? I think that would be you and Giant Waste, I mean Warp.


Anti biker? I don't ride an ebike. Follow along.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> Dream on.[/QUOTE
> 
> I just realized all you e bike haters really are at the discretion of the land managers. When they give in, and they eventually will, you all are **** out of luck.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I just realized all you e bike haters really are at the discretion of the land managers. When they give in, and they eventually will, you all are **** out of luck.


de·lu·sion
dəˈlo͞oZHən/Submit
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

De-lu-Sion. Noun. Any one who thinks an eMTB is not in the future. Lol

BTW. I love everyone’s passion for their beliefs wether your pro or anti ebike. That’s what these forums are for. How boring would it be if we all agreed? 

It’s going to be fun to see where this goes...... enjoy the ride!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Anti biker? I don't ride an ebike. Follow along.





ALimon said:


> I just realized all you e bike haters really are at the discretion of the land managers. When they give in, and they eventually will, you all are **** out of luck.


Yes, I am well aware that you don't ride an ebike, you've stated that several times. So you seem to be more of a troll. Do you go into the single speed forum and argue that you only use one speed at a time so they should consider you a single speeder? Maybe go on Trout Unlimited's website and argue that corn should be considered fly-fishing? Bow hunting website and argue that bullets are mini arrows?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Yes, I am well aware that you don't ride an ebike, you've stated that several times. So you seem to be more of a troll. Do you go into the single speed forum and argue that you only use one speed at a time so they should consider you a single speeder? Maybe go on Trout Unlimited's website and argue that corn should be considered fly-fishing? Bow hunting website and argue that bullets are mini arrows?


Wow, you're just a confrontational lad ain't ya? It's ok, there's always that guy.

So are you a troll? You're in a ebike forum but you don't ride an E bike either? I rode the levo for 3 months, and I'm definitely buying an e mtb in the future which would make me more qualified to be in an ebike forum than you. Now tell me again why you're here Mr. Troll?


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Wow, you're just a confrontational lad ain't ya? It's ok, there's always that guy.
> 
> So are you a troll? You're in a ebike forum but you don't ride an E bike either? I rode the levo for 3 months, and I'm definitely buying an e mtb in the future which would make me more qualified to be in an ebike forum than you. Now tell me again why you're here Mr. Troll?


Pssst...you're not it an ebike forum.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

mbmb65 said:


> Pssst...you're not it an ebike forum.


Yep, the safe space is over there ----------->


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> De-lu-Sion. Noun. Any one who thinks an eMTB is not in the future. Lol
> 
> BTW. I love everyone's passion for their beliefs wether your pro or anti ebike. That's what these forums are for. How boring would it be if we all agreed?
> 
> It's going to be fun to see where this goes...... enjoy the ride!


I'm thinking that the industry will end up shooting themselves in the foot, as higher powered emtbs will make land managers that much less likely to grant access. Once a few idiots on ebikes like these start making the rounds, it's game over. Half the price of a big name emtb, 2500w with a throttle and no one can tell the difference just looking at it.

https://electricbike.com/forum/forum/ask-lunacycle/luna-cycle-new-ebikes/46227-luna-apollo

I'm really fine with the decisions land managers make regarding ebikes, but pretending there won't be problems with them, since it's so easy to believe the industry's spin that it's only going to be a bunch of old slow guys, still going slow, is sticking your head in the sand. Fast guys on even faster emtbs will ruin it for the old and slow.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> I'm thinking that the industry will end up shooting themselves in the foot, as higher powered emtbs will make land managers that much less likely to grant access. Once a few idiots on ebikes like these start making the rounds, it's game over. Half the price of a big name emtb, 2500w with a throttle and no one can tell the difference just looking at it.
> 
> https://electricbike.com/forum/forum/ask-lunacycle/luna-cycle-new-ebikes/46227-luna-apollo
> 
> I'm really fine with the decisions land managers make regarding ebikes, but pretending there won't be problems with them, since it's so easy to believe the industry's spin that it's only going to be a bunch of old slow guys, still going slow, is sticking your head in the sand. Fast guys on even faster emtbs will ruin it for the old and slow.


I disagree. But I see you're point. I think when the regs change to PAS bikes like the Levo then riders will be purchasing ebikes that will follow along with the regs and allow them to ride designated trails. Yes, there will always be a few morons, but 99% will follow along.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I disagree. But I see you're point. I think when the regs change to PAS bikes like the Levo then riders will be purchasing ebikes that will follow along with the regs and allow them to ride designated trails. Yes, there will always be a few morons, but 99% will follow along.


It only takes 1% to screw it up and they will most assuredly will.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I don’t understand why everyone is worried about them anyway. Everybody says they “rarely” or have never seen one on the trail. Unless they think they will be the next thing😀


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> I don't understand why everyone is worried about them anyway. Everybody says they "rarely" or have never seen one on the trail. Unless they think they will be the next thing?


I rrely see them because they are prohibited in most places I choose to ride so I really don't worry that they'll be the net "big Thing". Next big passing trend perhaps.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> I rrely see them because they are prohibited in most places I choose to ride so I really don't worry that they'll be the net "big Thing". Next big passing trend perhaps.


Do you fear they will gain more access?


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

Gutch said:


> I don't understand why everyone is worried about them anyway. Everybody says they "rarely" or have never seen one on the trail. Unless they think they will be the next thing?


I see them all over the place.....especially in places where they are prohibited.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

mtnbikej said:


> I see them all over the place.....especially in places where they are prohibited.


This. I almost exclusively ride in non motorized areas. I catch an ebiker on the trails at least once a week.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Do you fear they will gain more access?


Nope, they lose more every single week.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

life behind bars said:


> Nope, they lose more every single week.


This. I've never, ever seen one here, outside of 1 in a parking lot, and in some of the shops. But, as I've learned on the thread, the moped apocalypse is pending. Fortunately they're not allowed here, and are very much opposed.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I disagree. But I see you're point. I think when the regs change to PAS bikes like the Levo then riders will be purchasing ebikes that will follow along with the regs and allow them to ride designated trails. Yes, there will always be a few morons, but 99% will follow along.


I've seen zero evidence of the regs changing to what you want, and I pay attention.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> I've seen zero evidence of the regs changing to what you want, and I pay attention.


How new is the e mtb scene? It's just getting started.....


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

Gutch said:


> The law will change to 250w. This is the reason so many are being produced. If not all 2018 would be 750w Levo's etc. The "law" is 750, but we're only looking for 250w Pedelecs.. that may be the industry's case.





ALimon said:


> I think when the regs change to PAS bikes like the Levo then riders will be purchasing ebikes that will follow along with the regs and allow them to ride designated trails. Yes, there will always be a few morons, but 99% will follow along.


Why do you think there is any chance of the laws changing?

Also, not sure what the obsession with the Levo is, but that kind of ebike is and will always be a very, very small % of ebikes, so why would any law maker be concerned with what the Levo specs are? Most people are going to be buying something like one of these "e-mountain bikes" from this website, which, by the way, doesn't even sell any 250w Ebikes and all of their off-road capable-ish ebikes come with a throttle standard.

https://bestebikestore.com/collections/mountain-bikes


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

singletrackmack said:


> Why do you think there is any chance of the laws changing?
> 
> Also, not sure what the obsession with the Levo is, but that kind of ebike is and will always be a very, very small % of ebikes, so why would any law maker be concerned with what the Levo specs are? Most people are going to be buying something like one of these "e-mountain bikes" from this website, which, by the way, doesn't even sell any 250w Ebikes and all of their off-road capable-ish ebikes come with a throttle standard.
> 
> ...


How many off brand mtbs do you see on real singletrack, versus the big companies? It will be the same with emtbs. Commuters, maybe different. Please remember that most buyers are mtbrs. Why would their trail etiquette or buying behaviors change?


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

How many rhetorical questions does it take to win the argument?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Zowie said:


> How many rhetorical questions does it take to win the argument?


This argument is un winnable at the moment. I'm saving my "I told you so" for a later time.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

singletrackmack said:


> Why do you think there is any chance of the laws changing?
> 
> Also, not sure what the obsession with the Levo is, but that kind of ebike is and will always be a very, very small % of ebikes, so why would any law maker be concerned with what the Levo specs are? Most people are going to be buying something like one of these "e-mountain bikes" from this website, which, by the way, doesn't even sell any 250w Ebikes and all of their off-road capable-ish ebikes come with a throttle standard.
> 
> ...


When I refer to bikes like the Levo I'm referring to 250w PAS eMTB. Those will be the bikes you see on the trails, not the bikes you depicted. Guys that want to get into an ebike will learn what's legal at their LBS. I'm going to guess 80% of eMTB sales will be to guys that already ride mtb.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I am so glad I don't have to babysit some of you guys in the e-bike subforum anymore.
What a shitshow.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ALimon said:


> When I refer to bikes like the Levo I'm referring to 250w PAS eMTB. Those will be the bikes you see on the trails, not the bikes you depicted. Guys that want to get into an ebike will learn what's legal at their LBS. I'm going to guess 80% of eMTB sales will be to guys that already ride mtb.


Yeah the simpleton search for Specialized Bike's Turbo Levo will turn up the words "250 watt nominal"; go a little deeper and you'll find that they're already outputting up to 530 watts. I'm sure the factory is playing with even more powerful versions; the park where I'm allowed to ride my 2 kW-ish moped (as an uniformed volunteer) is near Specialized's HQ and is used as a proving ground by them. I have a couple of Strava e-bike climbing KOM's but most are held by Spesh factory riders riding "special" Levos.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ALimon said:


> When I refer to bikes like the Levo I'm referring to 250w PAS eMTB. Those will be the bikes you see on the trails, not the bikes you depicted. Guys that want to get into an ebike will learn what's legal at their LBS. I'm going to guess 80% of eMTB sales will be to guys that already ride mtb.


This.


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

Silentfoe said:


> This. I almost exclusively ride in non motorized areas. I catch an ebiker on the trails at least once a week.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Well if you are catching up to E- Bikes you must be hauling butt on the trails and pissing off other trail users.......because we know all E-Bikes on the trails are going too fast..........


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

1niceride said:


> What is different from a personality perspective from purists and ebikers...Do ya really think ebikers are a bunch of outlaws?


Most e-bikes are not going to be purchased at bike shops nor will they be 250 w. I know it, you know it, everyone knows it. But we still have some pushing the myth of 250 w motorbike and the law abiding e "cyclist". Keep going with the ridiculous propaganda, you guys have done more damage than you know, especially when the Land managers and others that actually make decisions read these laughable claims.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

tom erb said:


> Well if you are catching up to E- Bikes you must be hauling butt on the trails and pissing off other trail users.......because we know all E-Bikes on the trails are going too fast..........


Yeah, because they are always moving or going the same direction. You must be a shitty detective.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

life behind bars said:


> Most e-bikes are not going to be purchased at bike shops nor will they be 250 w. I know it, you know it, everyone knows it. But we still have some pushing the myth of 250 w motorbike and the law abiding e "cyclist". Keep going with the ridiculous propaganda, you guys have done more damage than you know, especially when the Land managers and others that actually make decisions read these laughable claims.


Ya avoided my question..is there a personality flaw with ebikers..

Your answer reminds me of a song lyric..If one says there a wise man it certainly means they don't know. You sound like one of those...


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> Yeah, because they are always moving or going the same direction. You must be a shitty detective.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Another outburst like that and I'm demoting you to 2nd best friend for an entire week.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Moe Ped said:


> Yeah the simpleton search for Specialized Bike's Turbo Levo will turn up the words "250 watt nominal"; go a little deeper and you'll find that they're already outputting up to 530 watts.


250w nominal, not peak, is aligned with EU laws.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

1niceride said:


> Ya avoided my question..is there a personality flaw with ebikers..
> 
> Your answer reminds me of a song lyric..If one says there a wise man it certainly means they don't know. You sound like one of those...


And you sound like a one track record. Your question has absolutely zero to do with the subject, it's just more chaff in the propaganda that emotorists spew.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

life behind bars said:


> And you sound like a one track record. Your question has absolutely zero to do with the subject, it's just more chaff in the propaganda that emotorists spew.


The question at hand...why are ebikes such a touchy subject....,You seem to have forgotten the question...I asked if you feel ebikers have a flawed personality..Your perception of anybody who would ride an ebike, as your replies indicate, says yes. That's okay..just seems you are so angry.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

1niceride said:


> The question at hand...why are ebikes such a touchy subject....,You seem to have forgotten the question...I asked if you feel ebikers have a flawed personality..Your perception of anybody who would ride an ebike, as your replies indicate, says yes. That's okay..just seems you are so angry.


Personalities have no bearing on this, stop being obtuse. And no, e-motors don't make me angry, however the propagandists that attempt to cloak them in euphemisms and outright lies do.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> I am so glad I don't have to babysit some of you guys in the e-bike subforum anymore.
> What a shitshow.


There is nothing over there anymore to moderate. Fos'l lets them do whatever they want anyway.

All the pro moped guys wanted us off their forum and now they are all over here.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

life behind bars said:


> e-motors don't make me angry, however the propagandists that attempt to cloak them in euphemisms and outright lies do.


Ya gotta admit..both sides are guilty of this...

Someone wants to cut in with your significant other and you are pissed....I understand all that..I don't like others on the trail either unless the girls are pretty..point is its not all about ourselves...the selfish thought of whats in it for me and no body else matters is a symptom of a declining society...well evidenced by this thread and the personalities in it.

..on to my boating fourm to be an arm chair therapist there..and argue with the 2 stroke v 4 stroke people...and the skiers v fisherpeople v kayackers...This disease is spreading..


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> Most e-bikes are not going to be purchased at bike shops nor will they be 250 w. I know it, you know it, everyone knows it. But we still have some pushing the myth of 250 w motorbike and the law abiding e "cyclist". Keep going with the ridiculous propaganda, you guys have done more damage than you know, especially when the Land managers and others that actually make decisions read these laughable claims.


You don't know ****! Stop acting like you do. Your guess is as good as anyone else's. Only thing laughable is your narrow mind.


----------



## tealy (Mar 7, 2013)

Mountain bikers hate e-bikes because mountain bikers are elitist.

End of thread.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

tealy said:


> Mountain bikers hate e-bikes because mountain bikers are elitist.
> 
> End of thread.


Purist, not elitist. If you're going to spread hate at least use the proper phrasing.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> You don't know ****! Stop acting like you do. Your guess is as good as anyone else's. Only thing laughable is your narrow mind.


You posting this after all the posts you made touting the emotor take over is bringing the irony.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

...how the ebikers present themselves on and off the trail will determine their fate. 

something like this..join a riding club and explain that you are an ebiker also and would like to maybe ride ebikes on a particular day. Also explain you would like to do some cleanup, kp duty or signage or other kind thing to show how helpful one can be. After awhile they would not want to be without you and your fellow ebikers. 

I am a 60's hippy though.. still...


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> You don't know ****! Stop acting like you do. Your guess is as good as anyone else's. Only thing laughable is your narrow mind.


You do the EXACT same thing you are accusing him of. How many percentages of future moped riders do you throw out? How many times have you said that all a LM has to do is ride one, then trails open? More sales equals more trails....


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

life behind bars said:


> Most e-bikes are not going to be purchased at bike shops nor will they be 250 w. I know it, you know it, everyone knows it.


Ya, it's not that hard to figure out.



ALimon said:


> You don't know ****! Stop acting like you do. Your guess is as good as anyone else's. Only thing laughable is your narrow mind.


Why guess? From BicycleRetailer.com:

"There's also a major opportunity for IBDs. Cherry said _two-thirds of respondents bought their e-bikes from online sellers or from specialty e-bike shops._"
"*Only 16 percent bought an e-bike from a conventional independent bike shop.*"

Industry talks marketing, trail access, retail hurdles at annual e-bike summit | Bicycle Retailer and Industry News


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> Purist, not elitist. If you're going to spread hate at least use the proper phrasing.


What exactly is a purist anyway? The purist mountain biker is long gone. He disappeared when suspension, dropper posts, carbon, and big ass wheels were needed to roll over things easier.... LOL.

But I'm sure you're going to tell me you're a purist anyway.. yeah right.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

1niceride said:


> Ya avoided my question..is there a personality flaw with ebikers..
> 
> Your answer reminds me of a song lyric..If one says there a wise man it certainly means they don't know. You sound like one of those...


Ironically, you have those lyrics wrong, they are actually the speaker talking in first person, so the correct lyrics are quite fitting in your post. What they actually are:

And if I claim to be a wise man,
Well, it surely means that I don't know


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> When I refer to bikes like the Levo I'm referring to 250w PAS eMTB. Those will be the bikes you see on the trails, not the bikes you depicted. Guys that want to get into an ebike will learn what's legal at their LBS. I'm going to guess 80% of eMTB sales will be to guys that already ride mtb.


Ok, I am honestly asking you, what if we go further into the future? Based on your 80%, that would mean the majority still start out on actual mountain bikes and later buy an ebike. So you think 80% of noobs will still start on an actual mountain bike and 20% will start on an ebike? So you don't agree with some of the other ebike posters who say ebikes will become the majority of sales? Will those 20% that start on an ebike later buy an actual bike?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

chazpat said:


> Ironically, you have those lyrics wrong, they are actually the speaker talking in first person, so the correct lyrics are quite fitting in your post. What they actually are:
> 
> And if I claim to be a wise man,
> Well, it surely means that I don't know


Can't resist...


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

tom erb said:


> Well if you are catching up to E- Bikes you must be hauling butt on the trails and pissing off other trail users.......because we know all E-Bikes on the trails are going too fast..........


He said catch, not catch up to.. as in red handed.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

ALimon said:


> You don't know ****! Stop acting like you do. Your guess is as good as anyone else's. Only thing laughable is your narrow mind.


It's extremely ironic that you said this. In this and most other threads I have seen you participate in, most of the time you're predicting the future and claiming it's inevitable.

It seems you think everyone else is guessing, and you're the only one who knows.

If your Only purpose of being here is to educate others in why you're right, you likely won't do that at all.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Ok, I am honestly asking you, what if we go further into the future? Based on your 80%, that would mean the majority still start out on actual mountain bikes and later buy an ebike. So you think 80% of noobs will still start on an actual mountain bike and 20% will start on an ebike? So you don't agree with some of the other ebike posters who say ebikes will become the majority of sales? Will those 20% that start on an ebike later buy an actual bike?


I'm not sure what bike a noob will start out on. The noobs that start out on ebikes will probably be those who want to go ride with their friends and family but are physically challenged or just not active folks. I could see guys buying eMTB's for their significants, parents, friends, family members in order to share their riding adventures. So yes, some new riders will start out on a eMTB just because they think they're cool.

But regardless, I do think eMTB will dominate in time. I can guarantee you that the guys here knocking them will most definitely buy one when the the time comes where that will be their only option to continue riding.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

slapheadmofo said:


> Can't resist...


No problem!

I saw them around 1990. We knew what to expect and hung back at the bar. There were some skinheads up in the front who got blasted with various fluids. They appeared to be quite dazed and unsure if they were having fun or if they should be really pissed.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> Personalities have no bearing on this, stop being obtuse. And no, e-motors don't make me angry, however the propagandists that attempt to cloak them in euphemisms and outright lies do.


Us ebikers "Sit on a throne of lies!" I rode mtb with this stranger once, and he kept rumbling about him, her, their bikes, the trail etc. A real ball of joy to ride with.. So I dropped him. I believe a few posters on here share that trait.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> Can't resist...


Damn, you guys are a bunch of twisted mofo's in MA! Love it. I saw that band riding 25000 watt Ebikes at Pisgah the other day, but I was too scared to ask them to leave, so I sidehacked them and rode on.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

chazpat said:


> No problem!
> 
> I saw them around 1990. We knew what to expect and hung back at the bar. There were some skinheads up in the front who got blasted with various fluids. They appeared to be quite dazed and unsure if they were having fun or if they should be really pissed.


 Classic.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Damn, you guys are a bunch of twisted mofo's in MA! Love it. I saw that band riding 25000 watt Ebikes at Pisgah the other day, but I was too scared to ask them to leave, so I sidehacked them and rode on.


Liar.


----------



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

life behind bars said:


> Most e-bikes are not going to be purchased at bike shops nor will they be 250 w. I know it, you know it, everyone knows it.


You don't think? Where are they going to sell all those Specialized, Giant, Trek, etc, electric bikes then?

I have no idea about the 250 watt deal.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> You don't think? Where are they going to sell all those Specialized, Giant, Trek, etc, electric bikes then?
> 
> I have no idea about the 250 watt deal.


The biggest ebike sellers by far are not traditional bike companies. And it depends on how you define a emtb, those same companies sell many that could be ridden on singletrack, like efat bikes, but most likely won't, they're basically upscale big box bikes. Most "real" high end emtbs are currently sold at lbs. There are some decent Chinese high powered emtbs coming out now that will likely be outside the lbs supply chain, and ofc, moto shops are going to sell e-motos with pedals.


----------



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

Harryman said:


> The biggest ebike sellers by far are not traditional bike companies.


...yet. I believe they will be but like most posts here that's just conjecture.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

mbmb65 said:


> Liar.


Just humor bud. Find some.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

tfinator said:


> It's extremely ironic that you said this. In this and most other threads I have seen you participate in, most of the time you're predicting the future and claiming it's inevitable.
> 
> It seems you think everyone else is guessing, and you're the only one who knows.
> 
> ...


We are all guessing. Predicting anything is a guess. The only difference is I'm not throwing a tantrum and getting all pissy when I hear things I don't agree with. There is a distinct difference in behavior here between those who are pro ebike and those who aren't.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Just humor bud. Find some.


Ok, bud. Always trying to find humor, pal. I guess this thread is the wrong place to look. Mopeds in pisgah IS pretty damn funny though. Thanks.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> We are all guessing. There is a distinct difference in behavior here between those who are pro ebike and those who aren't.


These may well be the first truthful words you've spoken, mr. mouthpiece.


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

ALimon said:


> We are all guessing. Predicting anything is a guess. The only difference is I'm not throwing a tantrum and getting all pissy when I hear things I don't agree with. There is a distinct difference in behavior here between those who are pro ebike and those who aren't.


There's really not. You didn't address what my comment was about. There's no need to though. I am shooting arrows at a stone wall.


----------



## FerrouSS (Oct 24, 2007)

I think they are a touchy subject because they are motorcycles. And they can destroy trail access for those of us who use human power only. The other issue is that "new" riders can end up in situations they aren't prepared for, from a skills standpoint. Going faster everywhere isn't always good.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

J.B. Weld said:


> You don't think? Where are they going to sell all those Specialized, Giant, Trek, etc, electric bikes then?


There not. I don't think customers are going to be looking to buy ebikes from brands that primarily make bicycles. Only 16% of ebike customers buy their ebike from a traditional bicycle shop. Two thirds buy their ebikes online or at a ebike specific shop.



J.B. Weld said:


> I have no idea about the 250 watt deal.


Well, Giant's Embt has a 500watt motor, so that makes the 250watt max talk irrelevant.

How long before trek and spec follow to keep up?

https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/full-eplus-0-sx-2017


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> We are all guessing. Predicting anything is a guess. The only difference is I'm not throwing a tantrum and getting all pissy when I hear things I don't agree with. There is a distinct difference in behavior here between those who are pro ebike and those who aren't.


Originally posted by ALimon-
"You don't know ****! Stop acting like you do. Your guess is as good as anyone else's. Only thing laughable is your narrow mind."

Seems you are full of it again


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

tfinator said:


> There's really not. You didn't address what my comment was about. There's no need to though. I am shooting arrows at a stone wall.


And I'm administering medicine to the dead..


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> We are all guessing. Predicting anything is a guess. The only difference is I'm not throwing a tantrum and getting all pissy when I hear things I don't agree with. There is a distinct difference in behavior here between those who are pro ebike and those who aren't.


It's funny that you're trying to imply that you're on the moral high ground here.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

ALimon said:


> And I'm administering medicine to the dead..


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> You don't know ****! Stop acting like you do. Your guess is as good as anyone else's. Only thing laughable is your narrow mind.





ALimon said:


> I'm not sure what bike a noob will start out on. The noobs that start out on ebikes will probably be those who want to go ride with their friends and family but are physically challenged or just not active folks. I could see guys buying eMTB's for their significants, parents, friends, family members in order to share their riding adventures. So yes, some new riders will start out on a eMTB just because they think they're cool.
> 
> But regardless, I do think eMTB will dominate in time. I can guarantee you that the guys here knocking them will most definitely buy one when the the time comes where that will be their only option to continue riding.


Now this is just comical. You have really made an ass of yourself for all to see. Congrats!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> Now this is just comical. You have really made an ass of yourself for all to see. Congrats!


It just gets more and more comical. We are all guessing yet he can offer a guarantee.



ALimon said:


> I can guarantee you that the guys here knocking them will most definitely buy one when the the time comes where that will be their only option to continue riding.





ALimon said:


> We are all guessing. Predicting anything is a guess. The only difference is I'm not throwing a tantrum and getting all pissy when I hear things I don't agree with. There is a distinct difference in behavior here between those who are pro ebike and those who aren't.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

tfinator said:


> It's extremely ironic that you said this. In this and most other threads I have seen you participate in, most of the time you're predicting the future and claiming it's inevitable.


Are you trying to argue the future is not inevitable?

I applaud anyone who stands up for the rights to free our children, and our children's children, and our children's children's children from the terrible shackles of the future.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I'm not sure what bike a noob will start out on. The noobs that start out on ebikes will probably be those who want to go ride with their friends and family but are physically challenged or just not active folks. I could see guys buying eMTB's for their significants, parents, friends, family members in order to share their riding adventures. So yes, some new riders will start out on a eMTB just because they think they're cool.
> 
> But regardless, I do think eMTB will dominate in time. I can guarantee you that the guys here knocking them will most definitely buy one when the the time comes where that will be their only option to continue riding.


 The only option? Is a motor? Ughh. Ever hear of master division in say running? 55 here. At 60 I just become feeble and a couch potato? I'd rather do coffee runs on my beach cruiser than buy a frigin" e bike. What about all the 65 and 75 year old people mt biking now? Maybe I will age out of mt biking, I can always go for a walk with the dog. Or the wife, Or both. Cynical much?


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALemon said:


> I can guarantee you that the guys here knocking them will most definitely buy one when the the time comes where that will be their only option to continue riding.


How _did _you get the green squares?


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

chazpat said:


> Ironically, you have those lyrics wrong, they are actually the speaker talking in first person, so the correct lyrics are quite fitting in your post. What they actually are:
> 
> And if I claim to be a wise man,
> Well, it surely means that I don't know


Thank you so much...I couldn't remember it exactly..glad you are a wise man..I am not.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

chazpat said:


> It just gets more and more comical. We are all guessing yet he can offer a guarantee.


No, we're guessing, he's knowing. Omnipotent, I guess.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

1niceride said:


> Thank you so much...I couldn't remember it exactly..glad you are a wise man..I am not.


Captain obvious.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Zowie said:


> Are you trying to argue the future is not inevitable?
> 
> I applaud anyone who stands up for the rights to free our children, and our children's children, and our children's children's children from the terrible shackles of the future.


What he is trying to say is that it is NOT inevitable that the future will bring more eBike sales than pedal bike sales in the Mountain Biking Genre, something that many proponents of eBikes insist will happen.

They might take over as the standard, but they also may not take over. They might stay a small niche, they might grow. To say one or the other will happen as fact is unrealistic.

No one can predict the future.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Klurejr said:


> No one can predict the future.


Willing to bet I and everyone else here can predict 10 out of the next 15 posts in this thread.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

Klurejr said:


> What he is trying to say is that it is NOT inevitable that the future will bring more eBike sales than pedal bike sales in the Mountain Biking Genre, something that many proponents of eBikes insist will happen.
> 
> They might take over as the standard, but they also may not take over. They might stay a small niche, they might grow. To say one or the other will happen as fact is unrealistic.
> 
> No one can predict the future.


Everyone predicts the future, most are just really bad at the details.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

mbmb65 said:


> Ok, bud. Always trying to find humor, pal. I guess this thread is the wrong place to look. Mopeds in pisgah IS pretty damn funny though. Thanks.


It was a green Puch moped and he cleared Farlow Gap, no ****..


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> It was a green Puch moped and he cleared Farlow Gap, no ****..


Up, or down. Lol.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

mbmb65 said:


> Up, or down. Lol.


It was up, traveling at 8mph instead of 4. No hike a bike needed.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> ...yet. I believe they will be but like most posts here that's just conjecture.


Sondors sold $12 million in $700 ebikes in his first Kickstarter attempt and hasn't slowed down since.....

https://sondors.com/collections/north-america

Pedego is even bigger. I've yet to see a Levo outside of a showroom, yet see Pedegos around town. 
https://pedegoelectricbikes.com/

Selling direct is the model that has been most successful so far for most ebike companies, Pedego has sold dealerships as well. I'd wager that either of those two sold more ebikes last year than all of the bike companies combined.


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

Zowie said:


> Are you trying to argue the future is not inevitable?
> 
> I applaud anyone who stands up for the rights to free our children, and our children's children, and our children's children's children from the terrible shackles of the future.


That's definitely what I was saying!!!:thumbsup:


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Harryman said:


> Sondors sold $12 million in $700 ebikes in his first Kickstarter attempt and hasn't slowed down since.....
> 
> https://sondors.com/collections/north-america
> 
> ...


yes, but how many of those eBikes sold are full suspension MTB rigs?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Klurejr said:


> yes, but how many of those eBikes sold are full suspension MTB rigs?


That's a question that I wasn't answering.

There aren't many high level full suspension emtbs selling in the US since it's very limited where you can ride them, most of the growth is for bikepath ebikes.

Huge Increase in Number of US E-Bike Importers

Maybe sales expectations aren't turning out to be so rosy here? Hard telling, not knowing.

https://businessden.com/2018/01/11/riding-reverse-bike-company-leaves-denver-one-year/

http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/haibike-overstock-1068453.html


----------



## tealy (Mar 7, 2013)

tealy said:


> Mountain bikers hate e-bikes because mountain bikers are elitist.
> 
> End of thread.





life behind bars said:


> Purist, not elitist.


Actually it's the same thing.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

tealy said:


> Actually it's the same thing.


The definition of not winning.

pur·ist
ˈpyo͝orəst/Submit
noun
1.
a person who insists on absolute adherence to traditional rules or structures, especially in language or style.

e·lit·ist
əˈlēdəst,āˈlēdəst/Submit
adjective
adjective: elitist
1.
relating to or supporting the view that a society or system should be led by an elite.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> It was up, traveling at 8mph instead of 4. No hike a bike needed.


Liar.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## LargeMan (May 20, 2017)

I am not pro or against ebike but bought a Giant Full E and rode it for the first time today. Rode with 2 pros and cruised past them on every climb and had to wait for them. I had so much fun and I could not stop laughing the whole time, they usually all are waiting for me. Used to race Pro myself years ago and now I am into powerlifting which I did previously in the military. Did not really get a workout and it felt like riding a moto at times but definitely did not ride like a regular bike. Don't really know now where they belong, but people that keep saying they are only a little faster are lying. I averaged 14mph on a technical switchback climb that the best previous was 7 mph and never shifted the bike. Crashed uphill when the bike shot out from under me when I did not expect the motor to kick in so strong. The last big difference was not being able to get the bike over rocks and logs, by picking up the the front or back, due to its weight, you end up just plowing through everything like a moto. For what is it worth, not sure if I will keep it or not but now believe they are dangerous if you do not have the skill to match the speed, I was at speeds that were not possible even by the best riders in the world. Flat, rooty, rocky sections at 18-20mph and dirt flying everywhere in the corners, glad it had 203mm rotors.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> What he is trying to say is that it is NOT inevitable that the future will bring more eBike sales than pedal bike sales in the Mountain Biking Genre, something that many proponents of eBikes insist will happen.
> 
> They might take over as the standard, but they also may not take over. They might stay a small niche, they might grow. To say one or the other will happen as fact is unrealistic.
> 
> No one can predict the future.


Wowa! That's way too sensible for the anti's to understand.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

LargeMan said:


> I am not pro or against ebike but bought a Giant Full E and rode it for the first time today. Rode with 2 pros and cruised past them on every climb and had to wait for them. I had so much fun and I could not stop laughing the whole time, they usually all are waiting for me. Used to race Pro myself years ago and now I am into powerlifting which I did previously in the military. Did not really get a workout and it felt like riding a moto at times but definitely did not ride like a regular bike. Don't really know now where they belong, but people that keep saying they are only a little faster are lying. I averaged 14mph on a technical switchback climb that the best previous was 7 mph and never shifted the bike. Crashed uphill when the bike shot out from under me when I did not expect the motor to kick in so strong. The last big difference was not being able to get the bike over rocks and logs, by picking up the the front or back, due to its weight, you end up just plowing through everything like a moto. For what is it worth, not sure if I will keep it or not but now believe they are dangerous if you do not have the skill to match the speed, I was at speeds that were not possible even by the best riders in the world. Flat, rooty, rocky sections at 18-20mph and dirt flying everywhere in the corners, glad it had 203mm rotors.


How many watts is your ebike? Is that riding in full on mode? If it's 250w and you used to be a "pro" but couldn't handle uphill or over obstacles, I find that hard to believe. Dirt flying EVERYWHERE in the corners? Skid much? My Levo is glued to the ground. Are you running very skinny tires? Like old school 1.9?


----------



## LargeMan (May 20, 2017)

Gutch said:


> How many watts is your ebike? Is that riding in full on mode? If it's 250w and you used to be a "pro" but couldn't handle uphill or over obstacles, I find that hard to believe. Dirt flying EVERYWHERE in the corners? Skid much? My Levo is glued to the ground. Are you running very skinny tires? Like old school 1.9?


Where did I say I could not handle uphill or going over obstacles? On the ebike is was a huge challenge, usually can do an easy 18" bunny hop, but on this could hardly get the wheels off the ground, So instead I just plowed through the obstacles without trying to pick up the wheels. 500w Giant, yep, was skidding everywhere on purpose. At 20 mph going into a corner you have to get that 51lb bike to whip around. Running Maxxis High Rollers 27.5 x 3.0.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Wowa! That's way too sensible for the anti's to understand.


Also way too sensible to be in any way construed as validating the nonsense you've been spewing. The fact that you seem to see it as such only adds to the comedy in here.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

LargeMan said:


> I am not pro or against ebike but bought a Giant Full E and rode it for the first time today. Rode with 2 pros and cruised past them on every climb and had to wait for them. I had so much fun and I could not stop laughing the whole time, they usually all are waiting for me. Used to race Pro myself years ago and now I am into powerlifting which I did previously in the military. Did not really get a workout and it felt like riding a moto at times but definitely did not ride like a regular bike. Don't really know now where they belong, but people that keep saying they are only a little faster are lying. I averaged 14mph on a technical switchback climb that the best previous was 7 mph and never shifted the bike. Crashed uphill when the bike shot out from under me when I did not expect the motor to kick in so strong. The last big difference was not being able to get the bike over rocks and logs, by picking up the the front or back, due to its weight, you end up just plowing through everything like a moto. For what is it worth, not sure if I will keep it or not but now believe they are dangerous if you do not have the skill to match the speed, I was at speeds that were not possible even by the best riders in the world. Flat, rooty, rocky sections at 18-20mph and dirt flying everywhere in the corners, glad it had 203mm rotors.


^ this is why eBikes are such a touchy subject in the USA.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

LargeMan said:


> Where did I say I could not handle uphill or going over obstacles? On the ebike is was a huge challenge, usually can do an easy 18" bunny hop, but on this could hardly get the wheels off the ground, So instead I just plowed through the obstacles without trying to pick up the wheels. 500w Giant, yep, was skidding everywhere on purpose. At 20 mph going into a corner you have to get that 51lb bike to whip around. Running Maxxis High Rollers 27.5 x 3.0.


I call bs! I demo'd that bike and it rides nothing like you say it does. Ex pro here as well. Being you were an ex pro you feel like you need to skid into a corner? Why? Skilled riders rail corners, they don't skid. Skidding kills your momentum, pros don't like to give up momentum, they like to keep it. Saying you need to whip a bike around in a corner, skidding everywhere tells me you were no pro. Your original review of the bike tells me you are more of a beginner.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I call bs! I demo'd that bike and it rides nothing like you say it does. Ex pro here as well. Being you were an ex pro you feel like you need to skid into a corner? Why? Skilled riders rail corners, they don't skid. Skidding kills your momentum, pros don't like to give up momentum, they like to keep it. Saying you need to whip a bike around in a corner, skidding everywhere tells me you were no pro. Your original review of the bike tells me you are more of a beginner.


Enough already, we get it. You know everything, no one else knows anything. Anyone with any sense is only reading your posts for a quick laugh at this point.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

TheDwayyo said:


> Enough already, we get it. You know everything, no one else knows anything. Anyone with any sense is only reading your posts for a quick laugh at this point.


Yup, sadly this is true. This thread is little more than entertainment.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

LargeMan said:


> Crashed uphill when the bike shot out from under me when I did not expect the motor to kick in so strong.


The old guy who almost ran into me was clearly panicking and not in control. The bike was running away from him. After apologizing and saying he might be too old for this he ran straight up a banking and fell off!

I believe the lure of powered cycling will attract a lot of people who do not have the skills or maybe even the strength to ride mountain bikes safely. It seems pretty obvious that they will crash into stuff, including other people.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Mr Pig said:


> The old guy who almost ran into me was clearly panicking and not in control. The bike was running away from him. After apologizing and saying he might be too old for this he ran straight up a banking and fell off!
> 
> I believe the lure of powered cycling will attract a lot of people who do not have the skills or maybe even the strength to ride mountain bikes safely. It seems pretty obvious that they will crash into stuff, including other people.


True this.

An honest 250 watt system with torque sensing PAS it's pretty hard to get into trouble on ST trails; cadence sensing PAS or throttle get the popcorn out.

Getting into the upper end of the legal limit (750 watt most of the USA) get the first aid kit out. Especially Class 2 if the rider has no moto experience. (Which way do you twist this thing???)


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

ALimon said:


> I call bs! I demo'd that bike and it rides nothing like you say it does. Ex pro here as well. Being you were an ex pro you feel like you need to skid into a corner? Why? Skilled riders rail corners, they don't skid. Skidding kills your momentum, pros don't like to give up momentum, they like to keep it. Saying you need to whip a bike around in a corner, skidding everywhere tells me you were no pro. Your original review of the bike tells me you are more of a beginner.


I usually don't comment on these threads.. but! Doing a food drive ride a couple of months ago, we had winds of up to 45mph if not more, where guys were getting thrown off their bikes. Suddenly, this guy goes by flying! by everyone up hill.. and yes he was flying compared to all of us pushing up. I was actually in shock as to how easy he was climbing.

I don't think there is any BS on his review.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

jcd46 said:


> I usually don't comment on these threads.. but! Doing a food drive ride a couple of months ago, we had winds of up to 45mph if not more, where guys were getting thrown off their bikes. Suddenly, this guy goes by flying! by everyone up hill.. and yes he was flying compared to all of us pushing up. I was actually in shock as to how easy he was climbing.
> 
> Sounds like a positive to me...The person was not in your way were they?


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ALimon said:


> I call bs! I demo'd that bike and it rides nothing like you say it does. Ex pro here as well. Being you were an ex pro you feel like you need to skid into a corner? Why? Skilled riders rail corners, they don't skid. Skidding kills your momentum, pros don't like to give up momentum, they like to keep it. Saying you need to whip a bike around in a corner, skidding everywhere tells me you were no pro. Your original review of the bike tells me you are more of a beginner.


ALimon has inadvertently called attention to another of e-biking's reasons for condemnation, because losing momentum is no big deal (the motor kicks you back up to speed) even the pro's ride sloppily when they think nobody's watching. We can always tell when the Spesh factory riders have been out to Henry Coe SP on a lunch break quickie by the number of skids they've left behind.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

1niceride said:


> jcd46 said:
> 
> 
> > I usually don't comment on these threads.. but! Doing a food drive ride a couple of months ago, we had winds of up to 45mph if not more, where guys were getting thrown off their bikes. Suddenly, this guy goes by flying! by everyone up hill.. and yes he was flying compared to all of us pushing up. I was actually in shock as to how easy he was climbing.
> ...


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

jcd46 said:


> 1niceride said:
> 
> 
> > Positive if you are riding the e-bike, kind of a WTF moment when you are fighting wind, and tough conditions on your own.
> ...


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

1niceride said:


> So how did that ebiker influence or affect your life..other than being annoyed? I took your post as a negative but I could have misinterpret you post..
> 
> Unless one is an authoritarian type and likes to control others who gives a rats ass what happened there?
> 
> Purists often clear away mother natures work on trails to make riding easier so...


Please re-read his post in the context he provided by quoting another user's post... And stop wasting our time with your lack of basic reading comprehension skills.

He even provided you with a summary, which you seem to have ignored:



jcd46 said:


> I don't think there is any BS on his review.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I call bs! I demo'd that bike and it rides nothing like you say it does. Ex pro here as well. Being you were an ex pro you feel like you need to skid into a corner? Why? Skilled riders rail corners, they don't skid. Skidding kills your momentum, pros don't like to give up momentum, they like to keep it. Saying you need to whip a bike around in a corner, skidding everywhere tells me you were no pro. Your original review of the bike tells me you are more of a beginner.


Ever watch an EWS race? There's an awful lot of skidding going on among the top racers..... Just like ski racing, sometimes you have to skid the first part of the turn to set you up to rail the rest.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

TheDwayyo said:


> Please re-read his post in the context he provided by quoting another user's post... And stop wasting our time with your lack of basic reading comprehension skills.
> 
> He even provided you with a summary, which you seem to have ignored:


Thank you!


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

jcd46 said:


> Thank you!


I bet you remembered why you don't usually post in these threads...


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

..,still no answer on how that ebiker person negatively affected others on the trail by passing them uphill...

..besides ya'all use way too many words to describe the obvious...it confuses the issue for us reading comprehension disabled...


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

1niceride said:


> ..,still no answer on how that ebiker person negatively affected others on the trail by passing them uphill...
> 
> ..besides ya'all use way too many words to describe the obvious...it confuses the issue for us reading comprehension disabled...


That's because no one was talking about that. Joking aside, if you're really that daft that you can't follow a conversation maybe arguing online isn't for you.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

TheDwayyo said:


> I bet you remembered why you don't usually post in these threads...


Lol, almost posted that exact thing. Sorry can't rep you.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

TheDwayyo said:


> That's because no one was talking about that. Joking aside, if you're really that daft that you can't follow a conversation maybe arguing online isn't for you.


Actually its a lot of fun...I don't like to argue but I try to cut through all the useless words to get to the point...

On the food drive fellow and the person passing by up hill on an ebike..still don't get the issue..help me..

I think you young fellows enjoy the verbal bantering and really don't care about talking about a fix.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

1niceride said:


> ..,still no answer on how that ebiker person negatively affected others on the trail by passing them uphill...
> 
> ..besides ya'all use way too many words to describe the obvious...it confuses the issue for us reading comprehension disabled...


Because I never said that at all! As mentioned, I quoted someone that called someone else's review as being BS. I disagree, because of my experience. The other stuff you mentioned is kind of irrelevant to my point.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Oh...didn't read far enough back to get the point..got it now...gollygeewhizz..

I understood you were confirming the story and was not bs by your experience that day. For you was that a positive experience or not? That's my curiosity..


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

jcd46 said:


> Lol, almost posted that exact thing. Sorry can't rep you.


I rep'ed him.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

ALimon said:


> I call bs!


Fair enough, the bullshit is yours.
Do with it what you will.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Thanx guys for helping me understand my communication error. I realize now Its like having a discussion with my wife...its not about actually finding an answer or common ground..ya just like to read your own words or flexing the wordsmithing muscles for others. Wifey loves to keep the discussion going..just like here. 

I find it hard to talk my feelings just for fun..just the facts please...need to put in a call to Dr.Phil

What is the real issue here..trail congestion, trail damage, the jocks and motorhead thing, someone not working as hard as another, the law or something else like perceved personalitys of ebikers or what..all the talk about LM and such does not answer or help find common ground. A lot of posts that are personal attacts without getting to the point. 

Has anybody actually explained their fear about ebikers or ebiking? If so please point to the post.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

1niceride said:


> What is the real issue here.


One word, MOTOR.



1niceride said:


> Has anybody actually explained their fear about ebikers or ebiking? If so please point to the post.


No fear, valid concerns about opening trails to "Motors".


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

life behind bars said:


> One word, MOTOR.
> 
> No fear, valid concerns about opening trails to "Motors".


Good..now we will get somewhere...what about the motor that bugs you? How does the motor affect you in a negative way? You seem to be a reasonable person so your input is important.

I'll go away soon..just help me with this..

I bet ebikers are more blue collar, fix their own stiff when it breaks, does own maintenance on their autos and so forth.

I bet purist are more white collar, pay others to maintain their autos and has to hire a plumber for household repairs and have higher incomes.

thoughts ?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

1niceride said:


> Thanx guys for helping me understand my communication error. I realize now Its like having a discussion with my wife...its not about actually finding an answer or common ground..ya just like to read your own words or flexing the wordsmithing muscles for others. Wifey loves to keep the discussion going..just like here.
> 
> I find it hard to talk my feelings just for fun..just the facts please...need to put in a call to Dr.Phil
> 
> ...


So you haven't read the thread, but I'm supposed to give you the Clif's Notes? That's not really how this works.

I'm not trying to offend, but you seem to readily admit that you're having trouble keeping up so why so combative when called on it?


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

1niceride said:


> What is the real issue here..trail congestion, trail damage, the jocks and motorhead thing, someone not working as hard as another, the law or something else like perceved personalitys of ebikers or what...
> 
> Has anybody actually explained their fear about ebikers or ebiking? If so please point to the post.j


I don't have any issues with ebikes. I have issues with allowing vehicles with motors on trails that ban motorized vehicles. Do you think we should allow vehicles with motors on trails that ban motors?


----------



## Turd (Jul 21, 2005)

Ski lift, shuttle outfits and lame flow brown carpet paths disappoint me more. Lift access has destroyed more then I can imagine e-bikes will ever impact.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

Turd said:


> Ski lift, shuttle outfits and lame flow brown carpet paths disappoint me more. Lift access has destroyed more then I can imagine e-bikes will ever impact.


So no more skiing and snowboarding?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

1niceride said:


> Good..now we will get somewhere...what about the motor that bugs you? How does the motor affect you in a negative way? You seem to be a reasonable person so your input is important.
> 
> I'll go away soon..just help me with this..
> 
> ...


You'd lose money if you bet any.


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

1niceride said:


> I bet ebikers are more blue collar, fix their own stiff when it breaks, does own maintenance on their autos and so forth.
> 
> I bet purist are more white collar, pay others to maintain their autos and has to hire a plumber for household repairs and have higher incomes.
> 
> thoughts ?


Yeah, you need to call your oddsmaker and ask for a refund.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> Ever watch an EWS race? There's an awful lot of skidding going on among the top racers..... Just like ski racing, sometimes you have to skid the first part of the turn to set you up to rail the rest.


I've raced the EWS series in Colorado and Whistler. Well aware of the riding style. But this guys story was ridiculous, dirt flying everywhere. Have to skid it around because of its weight. Bike riding away.... and that's a pros take? LMAO


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

TheDwayyo said:


> So you haven't read the thread, but I'm supposed to give you the Clif's Notes? That's not really how this works.
> 
> I'm not trying to offend, but you seem to readily admit that you're having trouble keeping up so why so combative when called on it?


I've read the thread from the beginning as evidenced by my posts further back..its probably not noticeable.

Golly I'm not combative at all..never make any personal attacts...

It seems as though if one says its the trail congestion there is an answer to this so ebikers will be accommodated.

If one says its trail wear there is an answer or fix that would allow ebikers.

If one says its speed there is an answer or fix that would allow ebikers.

If one actually describes the bare bones issue and there is a fix so ebikers can fit, that would still not be acceptable to the purists.

see my point..its about the perceived personalities of ebikers and how they cheat on the trails. All other issues there is a fix but it would mean the purists to give something up.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

singletrackmack said:


> I don't have any issues with ebikes. I have issues with allowing vehicles with motors on trails that ban motorized vehicles. Do you think we should allow vehicles with motors on trails that ban motors?


Outdated laws and regs that the non ebikers count on to keep the trails for themselves.


----------



## IPunchCholla (Dec 8, 2013)

1niceride said:


> I've read the thread from the beginning as evidenced by my posts further back..its probably not noticeable.
> 
> Golly I'm not combative at all..never make any personal attacts...
> 
> ...


Isn't the fix for every single issue for ebikers to ride Moto allowed trails?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

life behind bars said:


> You'd lose money if you bet any.


I have never even bought a lotto ticket...really..


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

IPunchCholla said:


> Isn't the fix for every single issue for ebikers to ride Moto allowed trails...and no mtbers...
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


As long as it happens without discrimination against ebikers that's fine...not holding breath though.

Like designating the crap trails to them.

I think most ebikers would be open to motos also...maybe not..


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

1niceride said:


> Outdated laws and regs that the non ebikers count on to keep the trails for themselves.


There not outdated at all. The intention of those regs is to keep motorized vehicles out of certain areas. The fact that the regs are able to be applied to all types of motors regardless of how their powered just shows how good the regs are at doing what they are intended to do even years after they were written.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

singletrackmack said:


> There not outdated at all. The intention of those regs is to keep motorized vehicles out of certain areas. The fact that the regs are able to be applied to all types of motors regardless of how their powered just shows how good the regs are at doing what they are intended to do even years after they were written.


Okay..those regs mostly had to do with noise and trail damage from gas powered stuff...before quiet and low powered electric motors and real batteries were in use.

The existing regs are good at keeping trail use down and the non's like that..

its okay to feel that way...just say so..

...and I am not a constitutional conventionist either...leave the constitution alone..


----------



## IPunchCholla (Dec 8, 2013)

1niceride said:


> As long as it happens without discrimination against ebikers that's fine...not holding breath though.
> 
> Like designating the crap trails to them.
> 
> I think most ebikers would be open to motos also...maybe not..


Nice way to misquote me. I ride my MTB on Moto legal trails. We coexist just fine. We even do trail work together. Around here there are hundreds of miles of single track open to motorized bikes. I have yet to see an ebike on a ride. Probably because if they are Moto legal why would you take your underpowered pretend motorcycle on them instead of an actual Moto?

The heavily walked trails on the edge of town are not open to motorized vehicles. Never seen an ebike or ICE bike poach them. Probably because there are all those Moto accessible trails right around the corner.

It seems to work well. Keeps user conflict down and everyone has access.

I guess I just don't understand why ebikers don't advocate for and build Moto accessible trails rather than trying to get motorized bikes access to non motorized trails.

I also don't understand why they being PAS or electronic makes a difference. Kinda makes me want to build a low power ICE PAS bike and insist I be let on non-motorized trails.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

1niceride said:


> Okay..those regs mostly had to do with noise and trail damage from gas powered stuff...


Those regs are there to protect nature and reduce human impact.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

1niceride said:


> Good..now we will get somewhere...what about the motor that bugs you? How does the motor affect you in a negative way? You seem to be a reasonable person so your input is important.
> 
> I'll go away soon..just help me with this..
> 
> ...


It's posts like this that get me worked up. You don't know me and I doubt you know many, if any, of the other posters on here. But yet you want to make lots of assumptions about who we are and how we think.

As far as your "bet", you're about half right and half wrong on me. But what does any of that matter? I ride with white collar and blue collar riders, none of us care. Some of the blue collar riders have a lot more expensive bikes than I do. A decent ebike is a lot more expensive than my main bike.

I also have no problem with most of the ebikers on here. They are the ones that realize that ebiking is something different, it's not just "modern bicycle riding" and they don't call us "purist" just because we ride actual bicycles. Most of them recognize that, though ebikes may be fine on a lot of trails, that does not mean they are fine on all mtb trails. And they understand our concern with ebikes causing issues for mountain bikes and our desire that therefore, ebikers stand as their own user group and not try to force their way into being included as bicycles.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

1niceride said:


> I bet ebikers are more blue collar, fix their own stiff when it breaks, does own maintenance on their autos and so forth.
> 
> I bet purist are more white collar, pay others to maintain their autos and has to hire a plumber for household repairs and have higher incomes.
> 
> thoughts ?


First of all, what does it mater? Also, are you saying one is better?

You think ebikes like a 6k Levo is a toy blue collar workers are buying?

A toy that expensive that can only be used in a very limited number of places is made for those with disposable income working in places like silicon valley. Mountain bikes are made for all, the very rich to the flat broke 13 old looking for a good deal on a used mtb on Craigslist.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

1niceride said:


> I've read the thread from the beginning as evidenced by my posts further back..its probably not noticeable.
> 
> Golly I'm not combative at all..never make any personal attacts...
> 
> ...


Nope, you're missing the point. I have no patience for your admitted inability to follow a basic discussion coupled with your combative attitude.

Ever considered that the same way you misunderstood a post above, while aggressively arguing that you were correct about it, may be a recurring theme for you?

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

Washington state is leading the way in common sense!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Nope, you're missing the point. I have no patience for your admitted inability to follow a basic discussion coupled with your combative attitude.
> 
> Ever considered that the same way you misunderstood a post above, while aggressively arguing that you were correct about it, may be a recurring theme for you?
> 
> "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."


Ignorance is thinking YOU don't have a combative attitude. Losing your patience in any scenario is ridiculous, losing it on the internet is asinine.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Turd said:


> Ski lift, shuttle outfits and lame flow brown carpet paths disappoint me more. Lift access has destroyed more then I can imagine e-bikes will ever impact.


Have you never been to whistler? Hands down the Mecca of mountain biking.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

1niceride said:


> What is the real issue here..trail congestion, trail damage...


I can post it as many times as you like?

High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.

It is inevitable that some selfish people will either modify lower powered eBikes to exceed safe limits, or simply buy powerful bikes, and ride them in inappropriate places.

Those charged with regulating and policing trails, parks and paths cannot be expected to differentiate between a low-powered eBike and modified or higher powered bikes at the side of the trail/road. As the technology improves, and eBikes get more stealthy, this task will only become harder.

As it is necessary to keep powerful machines off of the routes in question, there is no option but to blanket ban all electric bikes from them.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

ALimon said:


> Ignorance is thinking YOU don't have a combative attitude. Losing your patience in any scenario is ridiculous, losing it on the internet is asinine.


Sorry, but I think ignorance is labeling people by the collar of their shirt! Those statements make any reasonable person combative.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

IPunchCholla said:


> I guess I just don't understand why ebikers don't advocate for and build Moto accessible trails rather than trying to get motorized bikes access to non motorized trails.


Sounds like work to me.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> I can post it as many times as you like?
> 
> High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.
> 
> ...


Why are you guys always using the argument of modified bikes? Is it because the eMTB that the big manufacturers are selling are actually well designed with an acceptable power output? Or do you need to look elsewhere to find an argument as to why they should not be allowed? Stop comparing a bike that will never see access to a bike that most likely will gain access.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> Why are you guys always using the argument of modified bikes? Is it because the eMTB that the big manufacturers are selling are actually well designed with an acceptable power output? Or do you need to look elsewhere to find an argument as to why they should not be allowed? Stop comparing a bike that will never see access to a bike that most likely will gain access.


I have yet to see an eBike advocate demonstrate that they understand the problem, or admit they understand the problem, and you are no exception.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Ignorance is thinking YOU don't have a combative attitude. Losing your patience in any scenario is ridiculous, losing it on the internet is asinine.


Never said I didn't. I am combative when people who admit they don't understand the argument at hand are still brazen enough to push their opinion as fact.

Losing patience is not ridiculous or asinine. I enjoy discussing bike related topics in my down time (mostly on the can), that's what I am here to do... Not give lessons on reading comprehension to people careless enough to argue about something they don't understand. Sorry, that's just how it is.

As for you, you simply see your opinion as fact and any opinions that contradict it as farce. On some subjects that might be reasonable (at least if you are some kind of expert), but considering much of what we're discussing here is pure conjecture it just makes it clear you're full of it.

You don't (and can't) know half the things you've stated as fact (or with 'guarantees') in here. That actually is a fact and it includes your latest post about which e-bikes will and will not make it out onto the trails... The only reason you believe that is because it fits your narrative.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

Mr Pig said:


> I have yet to see an eBike advocate demonstrate that they understand the problem, or admit they understand the problem, and you are no exception.


Well said. I was an e-bike supporter a month ago. Hearing how e-bikers avoid the issues at hand and instead argue the semantics to try and gain blanket equal access has changed my opinion on the subject.

I guess maybe that means I hope ALimon keeps it up... I can't possibly do as much damage to his cause as he is already.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

TheDwayyo said:


> Well said. I was an e-bike supporter a month ago. Hearing how e-bikers avoid the issues at hand and instead argue the semantics to try and gain blanket equal access has changed my opinion on the subject.


If they admit the problem their cause is lost so they have no choice but to be obtuse, devious and evasive. If they were straight I could talk to them but I hate people who behave like that. I wish they would just go away and grow their own forum where they could be as sneaky as they liked.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Mr Pig said:


> I have yet to see an eBike advocate demonstrate that they understand the problem, or admit they understand the problem, and you are no exception.


There are a few that get it, but not enough to actually work towards solving the problems. Which could be solved IMO with effort and money, but land managers or mtb orgs aren't going to take that on.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Never said I didn't. I am combative when people who admit they don't understand the argument at hand are still brazen enough to push their opinion as fact.
> 
> Losing patience is not ridiculous or asinine. I enjoy discussing bike related topics in my down time (mostly on the can), that's what I am here to do... Not give lessons on reading comprehension to people careless enough to argue about something they don't understand. Sorry, that's just how it is.
> 
> ...


I never said my opinion was fact. You all said that on your own. This topic is a matter of opinion. I merely stated what I believe is going to happen. Apparently some have trouble when others express their opinion, which makes me wonder why the hell they they would ever enter a public forum if they can't digest others opinions without losing their self confidence.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

ALimon said:


> Why are you guys always using the argument of modified bikes? Is it because the eMTB that the big manufacturers are selling are actually well designed with an acceptable power output? Or do you need to look elsewhere to find an argument as to why they should not be allowed? Stop comparing a bike that will never see access to a bike that most likely will gain access.


Serious?? Where do you live? You don't have Jacked up trucks, slammed chevy's, choppers, dirt bikes with loud pipes in your neighborhood? Have you ever been to Moab, Sedona or any of the outdoor tourist areas. Look at the side by sides. The accessory and modification market is huge. Why would you buy a bike with a motor and not mod it to rip? Hell most people mod their mountain bike, why would a assist bike be any different? Why would you own a assist bike unless it could blow roost? You might as well get a old man 4 wheel chair and hang out at the mall.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Am I just going to keep posting it? The selective blindness on the part of the eBikers is amusing. Please, could someone give an honest, straightforward answer to the following problem?

High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails. 

It is inevitable that some selfish people will either modify lower powered eBikes to exceed safe limits, or simply buy powerful bikes, and ride them in inappropriate places.

Those charged with regulating and policing trails, parks and paths cannot be expected to differentiate between a low-powered eBike and modified or higher powered bikes at the side of the trail/road. As the technology improves, and eBikes get more stealthy, this task will only become harder.

As it is necessary to keep powerful machines off of the routes in question, there is no option but to blanket ban all electric bikes from them.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Weight and trail damage is BS. Heavily congested riding areas, I can see, but why would you want to ride an emtb there anyway? Stop every 100’? The REALITY is that some will be allowed in certain areas. Blanket ban on all imo,will never happen. Nor will access to ALL singletrack. My friends and I ride both all the time and couldn’t be happier. Again, if you’re really against Ebikes and their components, ban them. That’s the ultimate stance. The industry dictates what we are going to ride and wear. Don’t hate the player, hate the game.


----------



## XJman (Mar 5, 2018)

Mr Pig said:


> Am I just going to keep posting it? The selective blindness on the part of the eBikers is amusing. Please, could someone give an honest, straightforward answer to the following problem?
> 
> High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.
> 
> ...


So basically like modifying your non ebike to go faster down a trail? Or like bmx bikers riding in inappropriate places? Or mountain bikers riding through private property.

Your argument is completely insane. If you are genuinely afraid someone may modify something to be faster on a trail I genuinely hope you advocate unsprung street bikes with knobby tires for mountain biking.

Legitimate issues like fire would be a better angle than being afraid they may go fast.


----------



## jim c (Dec 5, 2014)

XJman said:


> Legitimate issues like fire would be a better angle than being afraid they may go fast.


Good example of talking past one another. Seems like two different realities. 
My understanding (and I believe it is widely seen this way) the concerns of speed and trail damage are the main reasons for the e-bike ban.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

XJman said:


> So basically like modifying your non ebike to go faster down a trail?


How do you do that?



> Or like bmx bikers riding in inappropriate places? Or mountain bikers riding through private property.


These things are banned. Are you saying eBikes should be in the same category?


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

XJman said:


> So basically like modifying your non ebike to go faster down a trail?


The speed issue has to do with ebikes going at downhill speeds everywhere on the trail, not just downhill. Same reason motos are banned for speed. Mtbs can only accelerate and go as fast as a human can pedal on the flats an up hill so it is naturally limited. Ebikes will accelerate and go as fast on the flats and uphills as the motor can put out which can be significantly faster than a mtb.

However, I am not so concerned with speed, but damage and not just trial damage. Humans can do a lot more damage than just some noise and skids on a trail.

For me, it's that I find areas that don't allow vehicles with motors to be special. And one of the reasons these trails are special to me is because they seem to be more wild and unspoiled than other areas that allow vehicles with motors.

I beleive this is because it can take a lot of effort and determination to use the trails in these areas without the aid of a motor. Being able to use a vehicle with a motor will make these trails a lot easier, so a lot less effort and perseverance will be needed to get to these areas. This means the masses will be able to purchase a suitable vehicle with a motor and now be more likely to get to these areas more often since the trails would be a lot easier with that vehicle. So more people will be going to these areas increasing the usage and they will be traveling faster with the aid of a motor increasing range and the usage even more. This will make these areas less wild and pristine and ultimately less special. This is why I do not think vehicls with motors should be allowed on non-motorized vehicle trails.

Ebikes on non-moto trails means that anyone can just pay to get to areas that once required hard work and effort. Didn't matter how much money you had, we all had to put out the same effort when trying to get to the top.

Also, the class of the motor irrelevant since any class motor would make non-moto areas less special since it would greatly reduce the effort needed for people to access those areas..


----------



## Thustlewhumber (Nov 25, 2011)

Mr Pig said:


> High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.


I'm pretty sure most mountain bikers can easily put down 750 watts when climbing, which is equal to 1 hp. There is nothing high powered or dangerous about that at all. You are having an over-reaction to something that simply just doesn't exist, especially since most ebikes don't put down anywhere near as much power as a human.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> Am I just going to keep posting it? The selective blindness on the part of the eBikers is amusing. Please, could someone give an honest, straightforward answer to the following problem?
> 
> High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.
> 
> ...


Blanket ban? You like communism? Imagine if we solved every problem with a blanket ban? Nothing would ever get accomplished.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Blanket ban? You like communism? Imagine if we solved every problem with a blanket ban? Nothing would ever get accomplished.


What exactly is it that gets accomplished by opening non motorized trails to motorcycles?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Thustlewhumber said:


> I'm pretty sure most mountain bikers can easily put down 750 watts when climbing, which is equal to 1 hp. There is nothing high powered or dangerous about that at all.


You are not answering my question at all. If you allow low-powered eBikes to use shared paths, how do you stop high-powered ones accessing them?

Anyone who's shared a trail with an eBike know that they can go a LOT faster than a human, even low-powered ones.



ALimon said:


> Blanket ban? You like communism? Imagine if we solved every problem with a blanket ban? Nothing would ever get accomplished.


Typical eBike advocate diversion and character attack. So we're Communists if we don't just let eBikers do whatever they want?

What is your answer to the question then? If high-powered eBikes are dangerous on shared trail, how do you keep them off without a ban?

What are eBikers going to 'accomplish' by the way? Just wondering what great humanitarian leap we're getting in the way of here.


----------



## ironhippy (Nov 21, 2017)

This thread seems to be a perfect example of why they are a such a touchy subject.

When people can't even agree on what "non motorized" means, it's going to lead to issues.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> You are not answering my question at all. If you allow low-powered eBikes to use shared paths, how do you stop high-powered ones accessing them?
> 
> Anyone who's shared a trail with an eBike know that they can go a LOT faster than a human, even low-powered ones.
> 
> ...


Maybe we should call for a blanket ban of alcohol, guns, cars and any other item that has the potential for abuse. Blanket bans are for dictators and non thinkers


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I never said my opinion was fact. You all said that on your own. This topic is a matter of opinion. I merely stated what I believe is going to happen.


You're full of it:



ALimon said:


> When I refer to bikes like the Levo I'm referring to 250w PAS eMTB. Those will be the bikes you see on the trails, not the bikes you depicted. Guys that want to get into an ebike will learn what's legal at their LBS. I'm going to guess 80% of eMTB sales will be to guys that already ride mtb.





ALimon said:


> I disagree. But I see you're point. I think when the regs change to PAS bikes like the Levo then riders will be purchasing ebikes that will follow along with the regs and allow them to ride designated trails. Yes, there will always be a few morons, but 99% will follow along.





ALimon said:


> I just realized all you e bike haters really are at the discretion of the land managers. When they give in, and they eventually will, you all are **** out of luck.





ALimon said:


> That will only last so long. If that's what you're banking on you're in big trouble! Lol.





ALimon said:


> All ebikes ever needed was a chance. Once they get their chance, the rest will be history. I've tried to tell ya all... they're coming!





ALimon said:


> Who cares when. But eventually it will. The writing is on the wall. Anyone who isn't illiterate can see that.
> 
> You mad bro? You seem rather angry.





ALimon said:


> But to answer your spin, access is coming to PAS bikes wether you like it or not.





ALimon said:


> I can guarantee you that the guys here knocking them will most definitely buy one when the the time comes where that will be their only option to continue riding.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

Gutch said:


> The REALITY is that some will be allowed in certain areas. Blanket ban on all imo,will never happen. Nor will access to ALL singletrack.


Truth.



Gutch said:


> Don't hate the player, hate the game.


When the player is vehemently defending the game while ignoring the reality (which you seem to grasp given your post above) then I hate both. (Well hate is too strong a word, but how about disagree with and will do so vocally.  )


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALemon said:


> Maybe we should call for a blanket ban of alcohol, guns, cars and any other item that has the potential for abuse.


Is that your answer? The best practical, rational, reasonable answer you could come up with?


----------



## ironhippy (Nov 21, 2017)

ALimon said:


> Maybe we should call for a blanket ban of alcohol, guns, cars and any other item that has the potential for abuse. Blanket bans are for dictators and non thinkers


Those things are allowed on the trails that you ride?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

Thustlewhumber said:


> I'm pretty sure most mountain bikers can easily put down 750 watts when climbing, which is equal to 1 hp. There is nothing high powered or dangerous about that at all. You are having an over-reaction to something that simply just doesn't exist, especially since most ebikes don't put down anywhere near as much power as a human.


Let's see you sustain 750 watts please. I'll wait for the youtube post. (Spoiler alert; there's no way in hell you're going to do that. Why are you posting about a topic you clearly don't know anything about?)


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

singletrackmack said:


> The speed issue has to do with ebikes going at downhill speeds everywhere on the trail, not just downhill. Same reason motos are banned for speed. Mtbs can only accelerate and go as fast as a human can pedal on the flats an up hill so it is naturally limited. Ebikes will accelerate and go as fast on the flats and uphills as the motor can put out which can be significantly faster than a mtb.
> 
> However, I am not so concerned with speed, but damage and not just trial damage. Humans can do a lot more damage than just some noise and skids on a trail.
> 
> ...


Pretty much mirrors arguments I've heard against allowing mountain bikes on trails.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Blanket ban? You like communism? Imagine if we solved every problem with a blanket ban? Nothing would ever get accomplished.


Really? Because there's a blanket ban on a whole lot of things... Like motors on non-motorized only trails.

(To be clear, no one is saying a blanket ban on e-bikes, but a blanket ban on e-bikes on non-motorized trails. Seems common sense to me.)


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Maybe we should call for a blanket ban of alcohol, guns, cars and any other item that has the potential for abuse. Blanket bans are for dictators and non thinkers


Again, we have blanket bans on tons of stuff... I don't really see why or how you're jumping to communism and dictatorships over this issue.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

ironhippy said:


> This thread seems to be a perfect example of why they are a such a touchy subject.
> 
> When people can't even agree on what "non motorized" means, it's going to lead to issues.


Because when the law was written it was referring to motorcycles. Ebikes did not exist. Now that they do, the laws need to be re-evaluated. Laws constantly change with the times, nothing new here.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Pretty much mirrors arguments I've heard against allowing mountain bikes on trails.


Also mirrors arguments I've heard against motos on trails, are those arguments invalid as well? I understand what you're getting at, but I don't think it matters. We have to draw a line somewhere and motors is a logical place to do it.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Truth.
> 
> When the player is vehemently defending the game while ignoring the reality (which you seem to grasp given your post above) then I hate both. (Well hate is too strong a word, but how about disagree with and will do so vocally.  )


Wow! Looks like I'm living in your head, I should pay you rent! Lol.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Wow! Looks like I'm living in your head, I should pay you rent! Lol.


Nah, just having some fun and wondering if you'll ever respond to one of my posts rationally... If nothing else my rep is going through the roof from this thread (not sure why that matters, but I'll take it!)


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Because when the law was written it was referring to motorcycles. Ebikes did not exist. Now that they do, the laws need to be re-evaluated. Laws constantly change with the times, nothing new here.


Nope, the law was referring to motors... That's why they said motors.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> Is that your answer? The best practical, rational, reasonable answer you could come up with?


Are you saying a blanket ban is practical, rational and reasonable?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Are you saying a blanket ban is practical, rational and reasonable?


Nope, but clearly you can't tell that!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Nope, the law was referring to motors... That's why they said motors.


Please tell me your smarter than that..... wow


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Please tell me your smarter than that..... wow


When you try to insult someone's intelligence you should check the post for grammar before posting.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> Also mirrors arguments I've heard against motos on trails, are those arguments invalid as well? I understand what you're getting at, but I don't think it matters. We have to draw a line somewhere and motors is a logical place to do it.


Didn't say they were invalid, but they are hypocritical when employed by a mountain biker. Unless you agree that they should be accepted as valid arguments for excluding mountain bikers as well.

"We" don't have to draw any line, no do we have the power to, unless you happen to be some sort of LM. I'm not, nor am I a wannabe. The only concerns I have about e-bikes is that they're not considered the same thing as mountain bikes, and it seems that aside from in the minds of some very confused e-bikers, they're not. So what's the BFD, really?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Because when the law was written it was referring to motorcycles. Ebikes did not exist. Now that they do, the laws need to be re-evaluated. Laws constantly change with the times, nothing new here.


 Motorized = motorized.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

TheDwayyo said:


> When you try to insult someone's intelligence you should check the post for grammar before posting.


You're attention to detail is outstanding.

(It's OK if it's a compliment)


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> Motorized = motorized.


The 'cuz they said so' argument.

"Hiking trail = hiking trail"

If we had accepted that, we would have nowhere to ride MTBs.

As someone who has successfully beaten the majority of the types of arguments people are throwing up against e-bikes in the name of mountain bike access, I'm gonna tell you all right now, you'll need to do a lot better if e-bike advocacy picks up and gets a few experienced people involved. Much of what you guys are putting out there is taken straight from the tired HOH manual, and it's really easy to knock a bunch of holes in, or even worse, to be turned around and used against mountain bikes.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> When you try to insult someone's intelligence you should check the post for grammar before posting.


I can't insult someone's intelligence that doesn't have any to begin with.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Didn't say they were invalid, but they are hypocritical when employed by a mountain biker. Unless you agree that they should be accepted as valid arguments for excluding mountain bikers as well.
> 
> "We" don't have to draw any line, no do we have the power to, unless you happen to be some sort of LM. I'm not, nor am I a wannabe. The only concerns I have about e-bikes is that they're not considered the same thing as mountain bikes, and it seems that aside from in the minds of some very confused e-bikers, they're not. So what's the BFD, really?


I disagree with your conclusion here. If there is a difference between a mountain bike and a dirt bike (or e-bike) then it is not hypocritical to be against their access while supporting mountain bike access. The way your logic reads I cannot advocate for going into the backcountry at all, while denying any type of access. That's ludicrous. Of course we can draw a line and as one of the active user groups in any trail advocacy efforts I think we should...

We've discussed this before and I recall we agreed to disagree. I think it would be more damaging to our cause to use our access to expand access to motors, since that's exactly what we were told would happen when we were fighting for access in the first place. I brought that up before and you glossed over it. Why does that not concern you equally? You seem to be arguing to ban ALL mountain bikes more than anything... Which I know is not your intention.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I can't insult someone's intelligence that doesn't have any to begin with.


That's rich. I'd suggest you do a little more reading on intelligence, you don't seem to understand the concept.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

ALimon said:


> Are you saying a blanket ban is practical, rational and reasonable?


I say it is. The reason being that a lot of trails in the US are volunteer built, and getting any kind of enforcement agency to enforce rules on them is next to impossible. If you say ebikes of a certain size are allowed, whos there to enforce it?

This is a big reason people are not on board with ebikes. No one cares that it's easier for them to pedal, good for them. The problem is the speeds they can reach and how easily those speeds can be obtained.

A perfect correlation is downhill one way trails. There is a reason they are one way, because riders coming down that trail are traveling at excessive speeds. They can't stop quickly enough to avoid other bikers, which makes the potential for serious injury that much more present. If you allow ebikes on the trails where people can easily reach 25mph with a few pedal strokes, you have just turned every blind corner into a potential one way downhill trail style collision.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Hmmmmm. Maybe becoming a land manager is in my future


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> I say it is. The reason being that a lot of trails in the US are volunteer built, and getting any kind of enforcement agency to enforce rules on them is next to impossible. If you say ebikes of a certain size are allowed, whos there to enforce it?
> 
> This is a big reason people are not on board with ebikes. No one cares that it's easier for them to pedal, good for them. The problem is the speeds they can reach and how easily those speeds can be obtained.
> 
> A perfect correlation is downhill one way trails. There is a reason they are one way, because riders coming down that trail are traveling at excessive speeds. They can't stop quickly enough to avoid other bikers, which makes the potential for serious injury that much more present. If you allow ebikes on the trails where people can easily reach 25mph with a few pedal strokes, you have just turned every blind corner into a potential one way downhill trail style collision.


So you would prefer a blanket ban vs a pilot program where we learn in real time the issues with allowing access to ebikes?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> That's rich. I'd suggest you do a little more reading on intelligence, you don't seem to understand the concept.


I believe you suffer from a severe case of myopia. You should get that checked out.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

TheDwayyo said:


> .. If nothing else my rep is going through the roof from this thread..


Someone else's might not be though eh?



ALemon said:


> Are you saying a blanket ban is practical, rational and reasonable?


On non-motorized trails, I think it is. I've been walking on a cycle path with my young children when two teenagers flew past (illegally) on dirt bikes, probably doing about thirty. It's a nasty, high-risk situation and it has to be avoided.

Do you think that passing young children at high speed on bikes is acceptable?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I can't insult someone's intelligence that doesn't have any to begin with.


You still need to work on your grammar I see. Pretty funny.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I believe you suffer from a severe case of myopia. You should get that checked out.


Are you seriously this butt hurt?

I'd tell you what I think about you, but it's against forum rules not to mention common decency... Our posts speak for themselves my friend.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

This forum is faulty. Why can't I neg-rep ALemon again? 

I could do that all day and not get bored.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> I think it would be more damaging to our cause to use our access to expand access to motors, since that's exactly what we were told would happen when we were fighting for access in the first place. I brought that up before and you glossed over it. Why does that not concern you equally?


I've never said anything at all to the effect that we should be involved in working towards expanding e-bike access. Quite the opposite actually, on many, many occasions. I do NOT want to be involved with e-bike advocacy one little bit, nor do I want them confused/conflated with mountain bikes in any way.

But, I see a lot of blatant hypocrisy in the arguments being made against e-bikes here and I personally try my best not to be a hypocrite. If these arguments are valid against e-bikes, then they're valid against mountain bikes unless someone can come up with some actual data that shows differently.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> There is a distinct difference in behavior here between those who are pro ebike and those who aren't.


We agree on one thing! Plenty of thinly-veiled ad hominems in here, only a few blatant ones...



ALimon said:


> I can't insult someone's intelligence that doesn't have any to begin with.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> I've never said anything at all to the effect that we should be involved in working towards expanding e-bike access. Quite the opposite actually, on many, many occasions. I do NOT want to be involved with e-bike advocacy one little bit, nor do I want them confused/conflated with mountain bikes in any way.
> 
> But, I see a lot of blatant hypocrisy in the arguments being made against e-bikes here and I personally try my best not to be a hypocrite. If these arguments are valid against e-bikes, then they're valid against mountain bikes unless someone can come up with some actual data that shows differently.


Here's some data; e-bikes have a motor.

Can you show me data showing a dirt bike shouldn't be on a trail? Maybe if I see that I'll be able to wrap my head around what it is you want. I don't think data was used to ban dirt bikes though, I think it was common sense based on the fact that they have a motor.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Guys, you are starting to hurl personal insults. 

stop that or I will just shut the thread down. i am not going to waste time going back and pruning out all the personal attacks.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Klurejr said:


> ..stop that or I will just shut the thread down.


Well ok, but can I neg-rep ALemon some more? Come on, you know he deserves it?


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

slapheadmofo said:


> Pretty much mirrors arguments I've heard against allowing mountain bikes on trails.


The argument is not whether humans cause damage, it's how to best limit that damage. As Dwayyo points out the same argument can be made against motos and I would add can also be made for restricting everyone's access no mater of how you travel (think wildlife restoration areas).

Allowing the aid of a motor, regardless of power or how the throttle works, will increase human activity beyond where we are currently at in areas that ban motors. How will that work out when E-revolution (as predicted in this thread) comes to fruition?



TheDwayyo said:


> Also mirrors arguments I've heard against motos on trails, are those arguments invalid as well? I understand what you're getting at, but I don't think it matters. We have to draw a line somewhere and motors is a logical place to do it.


Motors are the line. I often end up riding no faster than one can hike, jog or horseback due to rough terrain, steep incline, exhaustion or combination of all 3. This natural limit is what keeps humans in check in non-motorized areas. Once a motor is added, the check on that limit disappears.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> The 'cuz they said so' argument.
> 
> "Hiking trail = hiking trail"
> 
> ...


 OK, point taken. If the law bans motorized vehicles. Ice, steam, battery etc, it's still a motor. The " e bikes were not around" then argument is going nowhere. IMHO.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> Here's some data; e-bikes have a motor.
> 
> Can you show me data showing a dirt bike shouldn't be on a trail? Maybe if I see that I'll be able to wrap my head around what it is you want. I don't think data was used to ban dirt bikes though, I think it was common sense based on the fact that they have a motor.


Do you have much first hand advocacy experience?

Actual data IS used in the real world of trail access, and I've used it very effectively myself in order to get MTB trails approved. I could punch holes through most of these arguments in my sleep if I were so inclined, as they are precisely the same ones we've already done that with.

Being upset about motors isn't a valid argument. If you guys are serious about fighting e-bike access for whatever reason, you'll need to step up your game.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> OK, point taken. If the law bans motorized vehicles. Ice, steam, battery etc, it's still a motor. The " e bikes were not around" then argument is going nowhere. IMHO.


It worked for mountain bikes.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

ALimon said:


> So you would prefer a blanket ban vs a pilot program where we learn in real time the issues with allowing access to ebikes?


So you're proposing we open up a situation for people to get seriously hurt in order to "test the waters" on allowing ebikes onto the trails? I have ridden an ebike before when I worked part time at the bike shop, and I can tell you right now that I would run into a whole host of issues taking one onto the trails. Quite honestly I don't know how anyone would think they were fun on the trails, if you have any legs at all and the trails are even somewhat busy you are just going to end up tire sucking people all day until they move out of your way.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> Do you have much first hand advocacy experience?
> 
> Actual data IS used in the real world of trail access, and I've used it very effectively myself in order to get MTB trails approved. I could punch holes through most of these arguments in my sleep if I were so inclined, as they are precisely the same ones we've already done that with.
> 
> Being upset about motors isn't a valid argument. If you guys are serious about fighting e-bike access for whatever reason, you'll need to step up your game.


'Much' is debatable. Certainly not as much as you seem to have. I do regularly interact with the local land managers in an official capacity though.

I wasn't being rhetorical. What data was used to ban dirt bikes? You don't even have to provide me with the data itself, just tell me what types of data were used... I have a hard time believing it'll be of a variety that I can't provide similar data for e-bikes. At the end of the day it was the motor that was the issue, so the data will simply be showing how a motor increases damage, user conflicts, etc.

I'm asking you to help me step up my game, I thought I made that clear.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> 'Much' is debatable. Certainly not as much as you seem to have. I do regularly interact with the local land managers in an official capacity though.
> 
> I wasn't being rhetorical. What data was used to ban dirt bikes? You don't even have to provide me with the data itself, just tell me what types of data were used... I have a hard time believing it'll be of a variety that I can't provide similar data for e-bikes. At the end of the day it was the motor that was the issue, so the data will simply be showing how a motor increases damage, user conflicts, etc.
> 
> I'm asking you to help me step up my game, I thought I made that clear.


There are numerous in-depth studies regarding the various effects of motorized, non-motorized, wheeled, hoofed and pedestrian on trail systems, both physical and non-physical. Google is your friend.

Some examples of the type of things I'm talking about:

https://www.lib.washington.edu/msd/norestriction/b67566091.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3ae8/ffe079a86149bb7ffb7951bff435dd9bf4f6.pdf

https://parks.state.wa.us/DocumentCenter/Home/View/1485


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> Do you have much first hand advocacy experience?
> 
> Actual data IS used in the real world of trail access, and I've used it very effectively myself in order to get MTB trails approved. I could punch holes through most of these arguments in my sleep if I were so inclined, as they are precisely the same ones we've already done that with.
> 
> Being upset about motors isn't a valid argument. If you guys are serious about fighting e-bike access for whatever reason, you'll need to step up your game.


 Upset isn't the word. As the law currently stands, in lots of places, MA included, no motorized vehicles allowed on multi use off road trails. The DCR ( MA land agency for state parks) rules and regs clearly state the ban on motorized vehicles. Seeing that changing anytime soon? Add in the conservation areas that ban them. I think the onus is on the ebikers to show cause and get support. Seems like there is not that much support, at least in MA.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> There are numerous in-depth studies regarding the various effects of motorized, non-motorized, wheeled, hoofed and pedestrian on trail systems, both physical and non-physical. Google is your friend.
> 
> Some examples of the type of things I'm talking about:
> 
> ...


Google can't give me direct knowledge that those were used to convince land managers, for that you are my friend.

I wonder if similar studies are being conducted with e-bikes, or if they are not necessary as one can to some degree extrapolate that data to fit with the power ranges e-bikes are capable of producing.

Do you think such data for e-bikes will not be found, or that it simply hasn't yet?

Also, I note that none of those seem to address user conflicts. Is data used for that as well, or does it simply pertain to ecological studies and user conflicts are more anecdotal and 'common sense' based with land managers?

I can tell you that I can and do bring up literature when applicable with my land managers... But they aren't asking for it and rarely use it to combat our ideas. Typically we just discuss what 'makes sense' and go from there.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

TheDwayyo said:


> Google can't give me direct knowledge that those were used to convince land managers, for that you are my friend.
> 
> I wonder if similar studies are being conducted with e-bikes, or if they are not necessary as one can to some degree extrapolate that data to fit with the power ranges e-bikes are capable of producing.
> 
> ...


These were the types of studies I used when confronted with HOHs simply throwing out loads of crap that boiled down to 'we don't like bikes', similar to the 'we don't like motors' mindset that most opposition to them here seems based in. In the end, data proved that they simply had no idea what they were talking about, as they had never thought past the idea of throwing a tantrum and whining about people being run down and nature being 'destroyed', when really it was all about them just not wanting to share.

I don't believe you'll find much in the way of studies specifically regarding e-bikes as of yet. Extrapolating based on power output will tend to show that e-bikes are far, far more similar to MTBs than they are to motos. Noise, speed and exhaust likewise.

There are numerous studies regarding user experience and conflict out there also; if you check the reference lists on the articles I linked, you should find some specific examples.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> Upset isn't the word. As the law currently stands, in lots of places, MA included, no motorized vehicles allowed on multi use off road trails. The DCR ( MA land agency for state parks) rules and regs clearly state the ban on motorized vehicles. Seeing that changing anytime soon? Add in the conservation areas that ban them. I think the onus is on the ebikers to show cause and get support. Seems like there is not that much support, at least in MA.


I don't see it changing around here simply because there isn't much interest and our singletrack trails don't tend work well to heavier, faster machines.

But simply repeating 'they're not allowed because they're not allowed' over and over isn't really much of a cogent argument against them.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

slapheadmofo said:


> I don't see it changing around here simply because there isn't much interest and our singletrack trails don't tend work well to heavier, faster machines.
> 
> But simply repeating 'they're not allowed because they're not allowed' over and over isn't really much of a cogent argument against them.


In all fairness, the only arguments I have seen for ebikes in this thread can be boiled down to "there isn't enough scientific data" and "ebikes are closer to mtbs than motos"... I haven't seen anyone give any good insight as to how we deal with excessive speeds and trail damage.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

slapheadmofo said:


> Do you have much first hand advocacy experience?
> 
> Actual data IS used in the real world of trail access, and I've used it very effectively myself in order to get MTB trails approved. I could punch holes through most of these arguments in my sleep if I were so inclined, as they are precisely the same ones we've already done that with.
> 
> Being upset about motors isn't a valid argument. If you guys are serious about fighting e-bike access for whatever reason, you'll need to step up your game.


Honest question: Do you think mountain bikes should be allowed on all hiking trails?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

chazpat said:


> Honest question: Do you think mountain bikes should be allowed on all hiking trails?


I know it wasn't addressed to me, but I'd be curious to hear a response from all the regular posters in this thread so I'll start...

Hell no! I appreciate that some trails are hiker only and think, at least in my area, the distinction between the two is handled well. I spend a good amount of time on the AT and appreciate that it is hiker only.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> In all fairness, the only arguments I have seen for ebikes in this thread can be boiled down to "there isn't enough scientific data" and "ebikes are closer to mtbs than motos"... I haven't seen anyone give any good insight as to how we deal with excessive speeds and trail damage.


Personally, I'm neither arguing for them nor against them.

I don't own one and definitely don't believe they should be considered the same thing as a mountain bike as far as acess, with the motor being the obvious difference. Mainly my reasoning is that I don't want to have to get stuck advocating for them by default. I also don't think they'd be a big problem on most MTB trails in my area, so I can't find myself getting worked up about whether some people try to get them allowed.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> I don't see it changing around here simply because there isn't much interest and our singletrack trails don't tend work well to heavier, faster machines.
> 
> But simply repeating 'they're not allowed because they're not allowed' over and over isn't really much of a cogent argument against them.


 Got to start somewhere. It's what the rules are as they stand now. How is that any different as to any other DCR rules? No drones, tree cutting, paintball, camping off site etc?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

chazpat said:


> Honest question: Do you think mountain bikes should be allowed on all hiking trails?


Nope. There are definitely trails that aren't suited for MTB use IMHO.
I think that determination should depend on the physical characteristics of the trail though, not on whether some people will get their panties in a bunch if they happen to see a bike in the woods.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> Got to start somewhere. It's what the rules are as they stand now. How is that any different as to any other DCR rules? No drones, tree cutting, paintball, camping off site etc?


I get that the rules on most MA public lands say no motors, but I don't understand what your point is regarding what actual issue(s) you see with e-bikes that makes you feel the rules are justified. If the rules end up changing to allow full access to them, will you then be a supporter because 'the rules are the rules'?

At one point not so long ago, mountain bikes were not allowed on any singletrack in the nearest large state forest to me. Do you believe that we simply should have accepted that, because 'rules'? Same with my local stash; some eco-warrior managed to get on the local board and convinced folks to change the rules to disallow bikes. So the simple fact that somebody wrote it on a piece of paper would be enough for you to accept it? I know you better than that, so I don't buy it for a second.


----------



## XJman (Mar 5, 2018)

Mr Pig said:


> How do you do that?
> 
> These things are banned. Are you saying eBikes should be in the same category?


No, not everywhere.

By adding suspensions, lighter components, more aggressive head angles, better brakes, tires etc allow for you to go faster down hill than what would have been imagined decades before.

So they go faster everywhere. Go back to the 80s and take a modern bike with you and watch them complain about how it's not safe. It's a bunk argument.

I've seen numerous lithium cells explode. That's the only angle you have in banning them.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Are you seriously this butt hurt?
> 
> I'd tell you what I think about you, but it's against forum rules not to mention common decency... Our posts speak for themselves my friend.


Apparently you take this ebike talk wayyyyyyyy to seriously. If you're that angry that you feel the need to tell me how you really feel then you might want to take a break from this conversation. I'm not butt hurt one bit, in fact I enjoy the discussion with everyone here regardless of their position.

Robert frost said it best, "Education is the ability to listen to just about anything without losing your patience or your self confidence". You should remember that. You lose your patience continually with anyone who argues against you.

Send me a pm and vent away if that helps. .


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> This forum is faulty. Why can't I neg-rep ALemon again?
> 
> I could do that all day and not get bored.


Really? Grow up.


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

singletrackmack said:


> The speed issue has to do with ebikes going at downhill speeds everywhere on the trail, not just downhill. Same reason motos are banned for speed. Mtbs can only accelerate and go as fast as a human can pedal on the flats an up hill so it is naturally limited. Ebikes will accelerate and go as fast on the flats and uphills as the motor can put out which can be significantly faster than a mtb.
> 
> However, I am not so concerned with speed, but damage and not just trial damage. Humans can do a lot more damage than just some noise and skids on a trail.
> 
> ...


Sounds a lot like the same argument to keep bicycles out of Wilderness areas.................


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> I can post it as many times as you like?
> 
> High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.
> 
> ...


The solution to this problem, as you've presented it, is to enforce a speed limit. That means a ranger holding a radar gun. They've been doing it in Northern California for decades.

No doubt that's a very unpopular idea, which is why folks need to be careful about how they argue against e-bikes.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

EricTheDood said:


> The solution to this problem, as you've presented it, is to enforce a speed limit. That means a ranger holding a radar gun. They've been doing it in Northern California for decades.
> 
> No doubt that's a very unpopular idea, which is why folks need to be careful about how they argue against e-bikes.


That is part of the argument, the additional cost of the what would then be necessary for policing because of e-motorized bikes, especially higher powered ones. The 250 watt fairy tale is a myth.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

chazpat said:


> Do you think mountain bikes should be allowed on all hiking trails?


No.

In Scotland we have superb access rights and tremendous cycling freedom. However, there are certain areas and routes that you are not allowed to cycle on without permission due to the sensitive nature of the environment. If you let people just do whatever they want they'll eventually make a mess of everywhere they go.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> Someone else's might not be though eh?
> 
> On non-motorized trails, I think it is. I've been walking on a cycle path with my young children when two teenagers flew past (illegally) on dirt bikes, probably doing about thirty. It's a nasty, high-risk situation and it has to be avoided.
> 
> Do you think that passing young children at high speed on bikes is acceptable?


I hike many paths with my little boy and guess what, guys on regular mountain bikes hauling the mail ride on by. Riding way faster than they should be on an all use trail hitting speeds over 30 without a doubt.

Do you think guys on mtb passing young children at that speed is acceptable?


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

EricTheDood said:


> The solution to this problem, as you've presented it, is to enforce a speed limit. That means a ranger holding a radar gun. They've been doing it in Northern California for decades.
> 
> No doubt that's a very unpopular idea, which is why folks need to be careful about how they argue against e-bikes.


My problem with them is the uphill/flats speeds they can reach. I do not want to be riding down a single track that I busted my ass climbing and then have some joker on a bike going 12 uphill when the average is 6-8mph. No one will be breaking the speed limit but the people that put the work in will have to suffer. Especially because most people riding moped are lazy and just want be faster without working for it. Stay on the couch.

I also live in Marin, if we allow motors on trails here, the HOHA's are gonna ****.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

tom erb said:


> Sounds a lot like the same argument to keep bicycles out of Wilderness areas.................


Same comment was made on the last page.

The argument is not whether humans cause damage, it's how to best limit that damage. As Dwayyo points out the same argument can be made against motos and I would add can also be made for restricting everyone's access no mater of how you travel (think wildlife sanctuary/restoration areas).

Allowing the aid of a motor, regardless of power or how the throttle works, will increase human activity beyond where we are currently at in areas that ban motors. How will that work out when *E-revolution* (as predicted in this thread) comes to fruition?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> My problem with them is the uphill/flats speeds they can reach. I do not want to be riding down a single track that I busted my ass climbing and then have some joker on a bike going 12 uphill when the average is 6-8mph. No one will be breaking the speed limit but the people that put the work in will have to suffer. Especially because most people riding moped are lazy and just want be faster without working for it. Stay on the couch.
> 
> I also live in Marin, if we allow motors on trails here, the HOHA's are gonna ****.


We all ride for different reasons. You like busting your ass, then go bust your ass. If no one is breaking the speed limit then what do you care how fast they choose to ride?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> So you're proposing we open up a situation for people to get seriously hurt in order to "test the waters" on allowing ebikes onto the trails? I have ridden an ebike before when I worked part time at the bike shop, and I can tell you right now that I would run into a whole host of issues taking one onto the trails. Quite honestly I don't know how anyone would think they were fun on the trails, if you have any legs at all and the trails are even somewhat busy you are just going to end up tire sucking people all day until they move out of your way.


I can tell you first hand that Ebikes on singletrack and beach are extremely fun! Let's spend my hour ride climbing at 4 mph for half of the ride? Exciting? maybe to some. After a while it's fun to mix it up a bit. Ever been burnt out riding mtbs?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

sfgiantsfan said:


> My problem with them is the uphill/flats speeds they can reach. I do not want to be riding down a single track that I busted my ass climbing and then have some joker on a bike going 12 uphill when the average is 6-8mph. No one will be breaking the speed limit but the people that put the work in will have to suffer. Especially because most people riding moped are lazy and just want be faster without working for it. Stay on the couch.
> 
> I also live in Marin, if we allow motors on trails here, the HOHA's are gonna ****.


I'm lazy as crap. What's wrong with speed?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

It's been hinted at here and some have come close to nailing it. I've also said this before but it apparently needs to keep being explained.

First, ebikes are only going to get better. I think that's a fact we can all agree with. It's a free market, consumer driven product. The only way for companies to keep beating their competitors is to improve their product. Better batteries, lighter weight, faster acceleration, higher top speed, more power, more torque.

Second, ebikes are getting better at camoflaging that they are ebikes. As enthusiasts, we are all pretty good at being able to tell the difference but to Joe Public, they often can't. Lump Rangers and Law enforcement into that group that can't. 

Third, ebikes CAN be modified. Sure, not everyone will modify them but a good portion may. They aren't modifying them to be slower, or to have less power.

So, because of these issues, land managers typically do a blanket ban on ALL ebikes. They don't care what "class" it's in because that can be so easily changed and is arbitrary anyway. In order to try to allow one class over another, it takes people, money and time. None of which land managers have in ample supply. They are not going to pay someone to sit at a trailhead or patrol a trail system in order to regulate classes of ebikes. It just isn't going to happen. 

Fourth, those advocating against bicycles on trails are already using ebikes as fodder to continue banning bikes. They use the argument I presented above, that you can't tell the difference. They know that closing speeds on trails is a factor. They also know that there isn't a visible, enforceable difference between a 250w and 1kw ebike.

This is all why traditional bikers are so against ebikes. We ARE being lumped together. We WILL begin losing access if we are continued to be lumped together. We need to create a definitive line between non motorized and motorized bicycles. 

As someone who works very closely with the BLM and State access agencies, I can positively assert that these are the exact reasons that they do not entertain the idea of opening up non motorized trails to ebikes.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

That’s a great post Silentfoe. I think it’s important not to lump class 1 ebikes with regular mtb’s. They need their own identity and set of regulations. Even though I’ve ridden the Levo and don’t see any issues with that type of bike blending in with nature and pedal bikes. I’ve said this before, I think class 1 bikes need a test pilot trail. Grant them access to select trails for x amount of time. Observe them in real time, get trail users feedback and go from there. In all honesty, any arguments pro or against are merely speculation without an experimental pilot trail. Without an experiment, we have no real conclusion. Just speculation.


----------



## Mt.Biker E (Mar 25, 2006)

One could argue that Americans are more prone to modify ebikes because its intrinsic to our culture. I think this is what you Europeans don't understand. What seems like common sense as far as trail usage to you is lost on many Americans unfortunately.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mt.Biker E said:


> One could argue that Americans are more prone to modify ebikes because its intrinsic to our culture. I think this is what you Europeans don't understand. What seems like common sense as far as trail usage to you is lost on many Americans unfortunately.


I lived in Europe for many years racing bikes. Europeans are no different than anyone else.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> I'm lazy as crap. What's wrong with speed?


Nothing when it is done appropriately. I'd venture a guess and say that most of the e-Barney's aren't going to use it very appropriately though.


----------



## Doomanic (Oct 11, 2011)




----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

The new UCI president is taking a hard stand against mechanical doping. Is it okay to get hopped up on EPO if your not racing? How about a racing class for dopers only, we can call it "XCO Top Fuel".
Sorry, off topic, lol.


----------



## XJman (Mar 5, 2018)

life behind bars said:


> Nothing when it is done appropriately. I'd venture a guess and say that most of the e-Barney's aren't going to use it very appropriately though.


An appropriate use of speed? Can you give an objective definition of that?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> Nothing when it is done appropriately. I'd venture a guess and say that most of the e-Barney's aren't going to use it very appropriately though.


Most mtbrs that I know and ride with turn every ride into a testosterone slugfest and therefore ride every section of trail full gas and will ride as fast as the trail and other users allow. And yes, idc if that was a run on sentence! This is why I enjoy farting around on the Levo, a bunch of guys together on emtbs does not turn in to a hammerfest, rather a relax and chill ride.


----------



## foresterLV (Dec 25, 2016)

the problem in US I guess is that offroad/forests is private owned land, with state land already busy with existing trail users? so everyone is greedy and there is alot of heat to get that trail access lol.

I cannot say for all EU, but here plenty of land is stated owned - seashore, river shores, natural preservations cannot be privately owned here unless there is specific rare exception. because there is alot of such land its not really feasible to guard it and frankly its ridden on fully motorized vehicles (motocross bikes, atv) even if being forbidden by law. fines are drasric but rarely anyone get caught. trying to ban emtbs here would be laughable, to say atleast. 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

foresterLV said:


> the problem in US I guess is that offroad/forests is private owned land, with state land already busy with existing trail users? so everyone is greedy and there is alot of heat to get that trail access lol.
> 
> I cannot say for all EU, but here plenty of land is stated owned - seashore, river shores, natural preservations cannot be privately owned here unless there is specific rare exception. because there is alot of such land its not really feasible to guard it and frankly its ridden on fully motorized vehicles (motocross bikes, atv) even if being forbidden by law. fines are drasric but rarely anyone get caught. trying to ban emtbs here would be laughable, to say atleast.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


So you are advocating poaching?


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Most mtbrs that I know and ride with turn every ride into a testosterone slugfest and therefore ride every section of trail full gas and will ride as fast as the trail and other users allow. And yes, idc if that was a run on sentence! This is why I enjoy farting around on the Levo, a bunch of guys together on emtbs does not turn in to a hammerfest, rather a relax and chill ride.


Where are these groups riding their e-motorbikes?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I don’t own an emotorbike. That would be an Alta motors dirtbike.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

We enjoy riding around the Sierra club meetings, particularly when they are putting on a birdhouse making class for 4th graders. We circle them like sharks, then bunny hop the last spotted one eyed owl.


----------



## foresterLV (Dec 25, 2016)

life behind bars said:


> So you are advocating poaching?


nah, I just trying to see why it such a big deal in US. if you search for enduro moto "adventures" on youtube its mostly will be EU, riding state land and having fun in groups literally shredding trails/woods on 35kw motocross bikes. polish enduro kex and associated "kurwas" comes to mind. 
yet "first world problem" seems to ban 250w bicycles... dont get it. maybe when woods are so scarce it makes sense. here you can ride 100km+ route on state land and meet no one.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

tom erb said:


> Sounds a lot like the same argument to keep bicycles out of Wilderness areas.................


Yes, and maybe they are sometimes right.



Silentfoe said:


> It's been hinted at here and some have come close to nailing it. I've also said this before but it apparently needs to keep being explained.
> 
> First, ebikes are only going to get better. I think that's a fact we can all agree with. It's a free market, consumer driven product. The only way for companies to keep beating their competitors is to improve their product. Better batteries, lighter weight, faster acceleration, higher top speed, more power, more torque.
> 
> ...


Tough to argue with that. I guess that means it will be basically be ignored.



Gutch said:


> We enjoy riding around the Sierra club meetings, particularly when they are putting on a birdhouse making class for 4th graders. We circle them like sharks, then bunny hop the last spotted one eyed owl.


Don't lie. It's tough to bunnyhop much of anything on a 50 pound e-bike.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Gutch said:


> We enjoy riding around the Sierra club meetings, particularly when they are putting on a birdhouse making class for 4th graders. We circle them like sharks, then bunny hop the last spotted one eyed owl.


That was hilarious! I'm sure the 4th graders were thinking this birdhouse building blows, I wanna eMTB!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> So you are advocating poaching?


Nice spin! He wasn't even close to advocating poaching. How did you come to that conclusion?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

I've dropped out of these discussions because the majority of people arguing against ebikes have never even ridden one, and their main complaint is the butthurt they would feel if they were passed on a climb by someone who didn't "earn" it. LMAO. Meanwhile they ride 28 lb, 6" travel enduro bikes on trails I used to ride on a 35 lb fully rigid bike with crappy cantilever brakes and 1.9" tires, and they can't see that they aren't "earning" it.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

honkinunit said:


> I've dropped out of these discussions because the majority of people arguing against ebikes have never even ridden one, and their main complaint is the butthurt they would feel if they were passed on a climb by someone who didn't "earn" it. LMAO. Meanwhile they ride 28 lb, 6" travel enduro bikes on trails I used to ride on a 35 lb fully rigid bike with crappy cantilever brakes and 1.9" tires, and they can't see that they aren't "earning" it.


LMAO! That was all time!!! I couldn't have said that better myself. They have no idea what earning it is. LOL.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

honkinunit said:


> I've dropped out of these discussions because the majority of people arguing against ebikes have never even ridden one, and their main complaint is the butthurt they would feel if they were passed on a climb..


Sorry, but that's total nonsense. The majority of the people who are worried about ebikes have legitimate reasons to be. As for never having ridden an ebike, I've never had rabies either but it's not always necessary to experience something to know it's not a good idea.


----------



## XJman (Mar 5, 2018)

Mr Pig said:


> Sorry, but that's total nonsense. The majority of the people who are worried about ebikes have legitimate reasons to be. As for never having ridden an ebike, I've never had rabies either but it's not always necessary to experience something to know it's not a good idea.


I'm concerned about these guys on these new super fast mountain bikes. I think they need to go back to the 60s geometry and designs so it keeps them at a safe speed for everyone else


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

honkinunit said:


> I've dropped out of these discussions because the majority of people arguing against ebikes have never even ridden one, and their main complaint is the butthurt they would feel if they were passed on a climb by someone who didn't "earn" it. LMAO. Meanwhile they ride 28 lb, 6" travel enduro bikes on trails I used to ride on a 35 lb fully rigid bike with crappy cantilever brakes and 1.9" tires, and they can't see that they aren't "earning" it.


1. You didn't drop out, you're here.
2. I own an ebike. Go read my reason ebikes will never be allowed. Try to refute it.
3. That is no ones main complaint.
4. Unless you rode a clunker, no you didn't. A steel frame with a rigid fork and cantilevers will weigh much less than 35lbs.
5. No such thing as fully rigid. It's either rigid or it's not.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

honkinunit said:


> I've dropped out of these discussions because the majority of people arguing against ebikes have never even ridden one, and their main complaint is the butthurt they would feel if they were passed on a climb by someone who didn't "earn" it. LMAO. Meanwhile they ride 28 lb, 6" travel enduro bikes on trails I used to ride on a 35 lb fully rigid bike with crappy cantilever brakes and 1.9" tires, and they can't see that they aren't "earning" it.


I don't need a poke in the eye with a sharp stick to know I don't want one either. By the way, I've ridden the Levo, sold a few too.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

honkinunit said:


> I've dropped out of these discussions because the majority of people arguing against ebikes have never even ridden one...


So what? There are a lot of different types of motorized vehicles that I have never been on. I have never been on a full fledged motorcross bike, so does that mean I shouldn't have an opinion on whether or not they should be allowed on non-motorized trails?


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

honkinunit said:


> I've dropped out of these discussions because the majority of people arguing against ebikes have never even ridden one, and their main complaint is the butthurt they would feel if they were passed on a climb by someone who didn't "earn" it. LMAO. Meanwhile they ride 28 lb, 6" travel enduro bikes on trails I used to ride on a 35 lb fully rigid bike with crappy cantilever brakes and 1.9" tires, and they can't see that they aren't "earning" it.


So wrong, Mancy.


----------



## tealy (Mar 7, 2013)

If your argument is that e-bikes shouldn't be allowed on mtb trails because the extra power tears up the dirt, then shouldn't we ban people who are really good riders and tear up the dirt from cranking up climbs and slaying corners and allow only riders who take it easy?

Would you ban me because I shred gnar?

Also in defense of e-bikes, I'd love to see more normal people on trail like for instance a middle aged couple talking about how psyched they are to go to applebees after their ride. I don't know about you but I like normal people way more than anyone in a kit drinking from a water bottle.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

tealy said:


> If your argument is that e-bikes shouldn't be allowed on mtb trails because the extra power tears up the dirt, then shouldn't we ban people who are really good riders and tear up the dirt from cranking up climbs and slaying corners and allow only riders who take it easy?
> 
> Would you ban me because I shred gnar?
> 
> Also in defense of e-bikes, I'd love to see more normal people on trail like for instance a middle aged couple talking about how psyched they are to go to applebees after their ride. I don't know about you but I like normal people way more than anyone in a kit drinking from a water bottle.


None of the reasons listed is why they should be given an exemption from being prohibited on most non-motorized trails.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

mountainbiker24 said:


> Yes, and maybe they are sometimes right.
> 
> Tough to argue with that. I guess that means it will be basically be ignored.
> 
> Don't lie. It's tough to bunnyhop much of anything on a 50 pound e-bike.


Caught me. Poor owl!


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

tealy said:


> Would you ban me because I shred gnar?
> 
> Also in defense of e-bikes, I'd love to see more normal people on trail like for instance a middle aged couple talking about how psyched they are to go to applebees after their ride. I don't know about you but I like normal people way more than anyone in a kit drinking from a water bottle.


I would ban you because you are prejudiced against spandex and water bottles..and because you get psyched to go to applebees.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Silentfoe said:


> 3. That is no ones main complaint.
> 4. Unless you rode a clunker, no you didn't. A steel frame with a rigid fork and cantilevers will weigh much less than 35lbs.
> 5. No such thing as fully rigid. It's either rigid or it's not.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Well, as for 3., just scroll up about 10 posts:

"My problem with them is the uphill/flats speeds they can reach. I do not want to be riding down a single track that I busted my ass climbing and then have some joker on a bike going 12 uphill when the average is 6-8mph. No one will be breaking the speed limit but the people that put the work in will have to suffer. Especially because most people riding moped are lazy and just want be faster without working for it. Stay on the couch."

As for 4., I hate to break it to you, but my '85 Rockhopper did weigh 35lb. You apparently weren't around then.

And for 5., let's have a semantic argument, shall we? People will call a hardtail "rigid" even if it has a 5" suspension fork on it.


----------



## tealy (Mar 7, 2013)

mileslong said:


> I would ban you because you are prejudiced against spandex and water bottles..and because you get psyched to go to applebees.


Hmm. I always thought those things made me a pretty cool guy.

I'll smoke you up climbs in jorts on a cheap steel mountain bike and then do burnouts on your most precious trail on an e-bike. Deal.


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

tealy said:


> Hmm. I always thought those things made me a pretty cool guy.
> 
> I'll smoke you up climbs in jorts on a cheap steel mountain bike and then do burnouts on your most precious trail on an e-bike. Deal.


To honor your right to ride whatever you want (where ever it's legal and allowed) and wear your Daisy Dukes while doing so, I will ride through the woods to the nearest applebees to fill my water bottle and buy anyone wearing e-bike kit a large dessert of their choice. Ride on brother!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

This thread has been particularly funny today, especially the Applebees remark, made me laugh.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> I don't need a poke in the eye with a sharp stick to know I don't want one either. By the way, I've ridden the Levo, sold a few too.


If you've ridden the Levo and in your honest opinion think that bike, as is off the shelf is a detriment to our trail system I'd be shocked.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

tealy said:


> If your argument is that e-bikes shouldn't be allowed on mtb trails because the extra power tears up the dirt, then shouldn't we ban people who are really good riders and tear up the dirt from cranking up climbs and slaying corners and allow only riders who take it easy?
> 
> Would you ban me because I shred gnar?
> 
> Also in defense of e-bikes, I'd love to see more normal people on trail like for instance a middle aged couple talking about how psyched they are to go to applebees after their ride. I don't know about you but I like normal people way more than anyone in a kit drinking from a water bottle.


I've been posting that argument forever. A shredder will do way more damage to a trail system than a noooob will ever do on a PAS eMTB.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> If you've ridden the Levo and in your honest opinion think that bike, as is off the shelf is a detriment to our trail system I'd be shocked.


It is not a bicycle.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> It is not a bicycle.


You didn't answer the question, you skirted it like many do


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> You didn't answer the question, you skirted it like many do


It doesn't matter, that's why. Another straw man burning.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> I don't own an emotorbike. That would be an Alta motors dirtbike.


Whatever. It has an electric motor. Call it whatever makes you feel good. Seriously though, where do you ride your machine?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> That was hilarious! I'm sure the 4th graders were thinking this birdhouse building blows, I wanna eMTB!


I'm thinking young children are more prone to exercise, so probably just prefer a non motorized bicycle.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> LMAO! That was all time!!! I couldn't have said that better myself. They have no idea what earning it is. LOL.


OMG!!!! LMFAO!!!! Dude, sweeping generalization much? You know nothing about anyone here. OMG!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> Well, as for 3., just scroll up about 10 posts:
> 
> "My problem with them is the uphill/flats speeds they can reach. I do not want to be riding down a single track that I busted my ass climbing and then have some joker on a bike going 12 uphill when the average is 6-8mph. No one will be breaking the speed limit but the people that put the work in will have to suffer. Especially because most people riding moped are lazy and just want be faster without working for it. Stay on the couch."
> 
> ...


It is closing speed, me coming down, them coming up. Not passing me, I could care less about people passing me on climbs. My problem is uphill speed and speeds on the flats. 
No one calls a hard tail a rigid, except people that say ebikes don't have motors.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALemon said:


> You didn't answer the question, you skirted it like many do





> Pot Calling the Kettle Black
> 
> Many years ago, people used to cook over an open flame using copper kettles and iron pots. The copper kettles were usually polished after every use whereas the iron pots were not and remained blackened from the soot from previous cookings. Well someone got the idea that if the iron pot were alive and it looked at a nearby copper kettle, it would see a black image. The iron pot believes it sees the image of the copper kettle when in reality, because the copper kettle was polished, what the iron pot was seeing was a reflection of itself. This symbolic phrase became associated with hypocrisy. An accuser blames someone else for having a fault when the accuser has the same fault.


Do you realize you are doing an excellent job of making people dislike eBike advocates?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> I'm thinking young children are more prone to exercise, so probably just prefer a non motorized bicycle.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


And your thinking is wrong as usual. 4th graders prefer to play video games vs exercising. There's a reason kids are fat as hell.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

mbmb65 said:


> Whatever. It has an electric motor. Call it whatever makes you feel good. Seriously though, where do you ride your machine?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


It doesn't get ridden much really. When I do ride it, it's on legal trails or the beach. I ride my Evil 95% of the time. If more trails were legal, I'd ride the emtb more. Where I live they are not accepted on singletrack yet.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> And your thinking is wrong as usual. 4th graders prefer to play video games vs exercising. There's a reason kids are fat as hell.


You're mighty judgmental, and again, making sweeping generalizations. Or you're obtuse, or something. My son is in fourth grade, as are many of his friends. Video games are not on their radar. For an omnipotent being, you know so very little, yet presume to know so much.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> You're mighty judgmental, and again, making sweeping generalizations. Or you're obtuse, or something. My son is in fourth grade, as are many of his friends. Video games are not on their radar. For an omnipotent being, you know so very little, yet presume to know so much.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


This country has a diabetes epidemic for a reason. 50% of the population is obese. That's not a generalization, that's a fact. So your kids and his friends don't play video games, nor are they fat. That's a rarity. Consider yourself lucky. But that's not the norm. Kids sports are at an all time low as far as participation. It's pretty well documented.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

My kid loves video games. Motors too. Always has. Me too, actually.
BFD.

Think he was in 4th grade here.


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

^"Hold my juice box."


----------



## IPunchCholla (Dec 8, 2013)

ALimon said:


> This country has a diabetes epidemic for a reason. 50% of the population is obese. That's not a generalization, that's a fact. So your kids and his friends don't play video games, nor are they fat. That's a rarity. Consider yourself lucky. But that's not the norm. Kids sports are at an all time low as far as participation. It's pretty well documented.


All the stats I can find say state obesity averages range from 37.7 (West Virginia) to 22.3% (Colorado) (stateofobesity.org). 20 percent for school age children. This is according to the CDC as of January.

You do know the machine you are using to type posts can check facts too, right?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> This country has a diabetes epidemic for a reason. 50% of the population is obese. That's not a generalization, that's a fact. So your kids and his friends don't play video games, nor are they fat. That's a rarity. Consider yourself lucky. But that's not the norm. Kids sports are at an all time low as far as participation. It's pretty well documented.


Wait a minute, now you're arguing against ebikes? Or is this a lead in to "ebikes will get people off the couch at least getting some exercise"?


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> This country has a diabetes epidemic for a reason. 50% of the population is obese. That's not a generalization, that's a fact. So your kids and his friends don't play video games, nor are they fat. That's a rarity. Consider yourself lucky. But that's not the norm. Kids sports are at an all time low as far as participation. It's pretty well documented.


That's how we raised him. And the situation you describe, while I realize the scope of it, is not always the case. So, how are ebikes going to help the cause?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> This country has a diabetes epidemic for a reason. 50% of the population is obese. That's not a generalization, that's a fact. So your kids and his friends don't play video games, nor are they fat. That's a rarity. Consider yourself lucky. But that's not the norm. Kids sports are at an all time low as far as participation. It's pretty well documented.


You said "fourth graders want to play video games". Not most, or even some, but all. That's a gross generalization.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

the one ring said:


> ^"Hold my juice box."


That's exactly what I'd hear right before getting shown up by a dude in hand-me-down Power Ranger pajamas. 
Lot of good times. Pretty sure he learned how to work transitions from playing Downhill Domination on the ye olde PS2.

1st grade. :thumbsup:


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> That's how we raised him. And the situation you describe, while I realize the scope of it, is not always the case. So, how are ebikes going to help the cause?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Which is more exercise? Riding an ebike or playing video games? If an eMTB is what it takes to get a kid to go outside and exercise then so be it. Beats eating chips and playing video games.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> You said "fourth graders want to play video games". Not most, or even some, but all. That's a gross generalization.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Oh please. I'll give you a dollar for each fourth grader that doesn't want to play video games. You give me a dollar for each one that does.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

My son is in 4th grade. I have bought him a new bike every year and last year I bought him a Specialized ebike Turbo for the road. He won’t touch any of them, and it pisses me off! I’m a bike fanatic and always have been. Hell, I was doing intervals in the 6th grade on my BMX bike. Anyrate, he is not obese but glued to mindcraft and other video games. Maybe it’s just not in him, that’s cool. Maybe later in life. Now my 13yr old daughter shreds!!


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> My kid loves video games. Motors too. Always has. Me too, actually.
> BFD.
> 
> Think he was in 4th grade here.
> View attachment 1187104


Your son is rad! His bike skills must be advanced. A lot of kids that shred BMX turn into awesome motocross racers and/or mtbrs. A little Atari, never hurt anyone! ??


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Which is more exercise? Riding an ebike or playing video games? If an eMTB is what it takes to get a kid to go outside and exercise then so be it. Beats eating chips and playing video games.


Right, because every fat kid needs a 50 pound, multi thousand dollar electric motorbike. Especially when you look at the relationship between poverty and obesity. Ebikes are not gonna save the world. Sorry.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Oh please. I'll give you a dollar for each fourth grader that doesn't want to play video games. You give me a dollar for each one that does.


Ok. I talked to all the kids at my sons school. The results are in and you owe me $350. PayPal is fine. Thanks.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

the one ring said:


> ^"Hold my juice box."


That is the best photo caption ever!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> Right, because every fat kid needs a 50 pound, multi thousand dollar electric motorbike. Especially when you look at the relationship between poverty and obesity. Ebikes are not gonna save the world. Sorry.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Ebikes aren't going to save the world, they will dominate the world.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> Ok. I talked to all the kids at my sons school. The results are in and you owe me $350. PayPal is fine. Thanks.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


My poll results tell me you owe me 29,863,421. I'll gladly deduct your $350.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Ebikes aren't going to save the world, they will dominate the world.


 Nice, the whole world or just the affluent 20%? Check out Kona and the buffalo bikes, those will take over the world. Really.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Nice, the whole world or just the affluent 20%? Check out Kona and the buffalo bikes, those will take over the world. Really.


Yes! Ebikes will dominate the world!

The case for bicycles' inevitable triumph over cars - May. 5, 2017


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

:thumbsup:


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Yes! Ebikes will dominate the world!
> 
> The case for bicycles' inevitable triumph over cars - May. 5, 2017


Or they won't. But even if they do, it ain't going to happen in our lifetime.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-bikes-can-never-replace-cars


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

tahoebeau said:


> Or they won't. But even if they do, it ain't going to happen in our lifetime.
> 
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-bikes-can-never-replace-cars


That just depends on how old you are. California has a bill that will ban all gas automobiles by 2040. As I've said, the E revolution is happening. It won't be long before practically everything is electric. E car racing, e motorcycle racing, and yes e bike racing, oh wait, we already have that lol.

So it really doesn't matter if it happens in your lifetime or not, the fact is, it is going to happen.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

127.0.0.1 said:


> :thumbsup:


If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards.

Checkmate.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> As I've said, the E revolution is happening. It won't be long before practically everything is electric.


What about an electric chair, do you fancy one of those?


----------



## Doomanic (Oct 11, 2011)

I'm so glad I live in the UK; none of your access issues and the clockwork riders here are nowhere near as antagonistic as you colonials.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> What about an electric chair, do you fancy one of those?


I have an adjustable bed... it's fantastic. If an e chair came along that was just as comfortable I'd fancy one of those too.

Since your so anti electric, you might want to toss your phone and computer in the trash and go back to writing letters like a purist.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

Zowie said:


> If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards.
> 
> Checkmate.


checkmate what ? I do not understand. e-bikes suck, are banned where motors are banned, and to my dying day I will give no quarter to an e-bike(r) clogging up my singletrack. that's how I roll. I ride 99.99% where no motorized vehicles are allowed, so I am not gonna run into any e-bikers anyway. I also won't actually do anything...much like seeing a dirtbiker or ATV illegally rollin...I just ignore them, as arguing on trail, at the time of the incident, is futile.

this thread is sad

e-bikes are sad

e-bike defenders are sad

e-bikes exist but if you ebike fans want access, don't argue it here,
get off your couch-potato arse and lobby the fed/state/local legislation, not us actual old-school human-power-only bikers here who will only give you a ration of poop about it.

on MY trails (the ones I ride all the time), if the laws are changed to allow ebikes, fine, I am fine with it. until then, stay the hell out, and outta my way


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

127.0.0.1 said:


> checkmate what ? I do not understand. e-bikes suck, are banned where motors are banned, and to my dying day I will give no quarter to an e-bike(r) clogging up my singletrack. that's how I roll. I ride 99.99% where no motorized vehicles are allowed, so I am not gonna run into any e-bikers anyway.
> 
> this thread is sad
> 
> ...


LMAO. That was awesome! Clogging up my singletrack? That's how I roll? This sucks , that sucks.... what a melt down. LOL.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> That just depends on how old you are. California has a bill that will ban all gas automobiles by 2040.


LOL at California.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

ALimon said:


> LMAO. That was awesome! Clogging up my singletrack? That's how I roll? This sucks , that sucks.... what a melt down. LOL.


I did not say 'this sucks, that sucks'.

I said e-bikes suck. get it right, clown.


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

Mr Pig said:


> Do you realize you are doing an excellent job of making people dislike eBike advocates?


e-bike advocates be like


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

127.0.0.1 said:


> checkmate what ? I do not understand. e-bikes suck, are banned where motors are banned, and to my dying day I will give no quarter to an e-bike(r) clogging up my singletrack. that's how I roll. I ride 99.99% where no motorized vehicles are allowed, so I am not gonna run into any e-bikers anyway. I also won't actually do anything...much like seeing a dirtbiker or ATV illegally rollin...I just ignore them, as arguing on trail, at the time of the incident, is futile.
> 
> this thread is sad
> 
> ...


For clarification, it's the gentleman in the picture you posted.
He reminds me of many arguments here.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

When ebikes gain access!


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

When ebikes gain access.


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

127.0.0.1 said:


> When ebikes gain access.


And


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> That just depends on how old you are. California has a bill that will ban all gas automobiles by 2040. As I've said, the E revolution is happening. It won't be long before practically everything is electric. E car racing, e motorcycle racing, and yes e bike racing, oh wait, we already have that lol.
> 
> So it really doesn't matter if it happens in your lifetime or not, the fact is, it is going to happen.


You're logic is convoluted. Things that will likely eventually happen are shifts from internal combustion to electric. What is NOT going to happen is adding a motor to things that don't have motors, ie bicycles. They are different animals. Do you also expect electric motors on shoes for runners? E motors on baby strollers? The majority of people will continue to prefer pedaling a bicycle, if they didn't, they'd just get a motorbike.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> View attachment 1187220
> 
> 
> When ebikes gain access!


Dream on Nancy.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

mbmb65 said:


> You're logic is convoluted. Things that will likely eventually happen are shifts from internal combustion to electric. What is NOT going to happen is adding a motor to things that don't have motors, ie bicycles. They are different animals. Do you also expect electric motors on shoes for runners? E motors on baby strollers? The majority of people will continue to prefer pedaling a bicycle, if they didn't, they'd just get a motorbike.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Are you discussing his joke with him?
It's not as funny when you lay it out like that.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> You're logic is convoluted. Things that will likely eventually happen are shifts from internal combustion to electric. What is NOT going to happen is adding a motor to things that don't have motors, ie bicycles. They are different animals. Do you also expect electric motors on shoes for runners? E motors on baby strollers? The majority of people will continue to prefer pedaling a bicycle, if they didn't, they'd just get a motorbike.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Or could it be your logic is con

Really? So how did a E motor end up on a scooter? Or a skateboard? Or a wheel chair?

And yes, there is an E stroller! I'm sure the shoes won't be long... lol.

And I'm the convoluted one? LMAO


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Well that didn't take long.... It appears E shoes already exist.

Smart shoe devices generate power from walking - BBC News

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ould-help-you-perfect-your-running-technique/


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> View attachment 1187255
> 
> 
> Or could it be your logic is con
> ...


This is available as well. 









It doesn't mean it's going to dominate the potted meat market. It just means a few freaks will buy it and admire it and talk about how cool it is v


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> This is available as well.


I just destroyed your theory and that's all you got?

Btw. You can add e roller skates to the list of things you said would never see a motor. Hehe


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

lol, "Excellent Source of Sparkles"


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> This country has a diabetes epidemic for a reason. 50% of the population is obese. That's not a generalization, that's a fact.





ALimon said:


> That just depends on how old you are. California has a bill that will ban all gas automobiles by 2040. As I've said, the E revolution is happening. It won't be long before practically everything is electric. E car racing, e motorcycle racing, and yes e bike racing, oh wait, we already have that lol.
> 
> So it really doesn't matter if it happens in your lifetime or not, the fact is, it is going to happen.





ALimon said:


> View attachment 1187255
> 
> 
> Or could it be your logic is con
> ...


Yes, yes you are.


----------



## Wacha Wacha Wacha (Sep 27, 2017)

To answer the question in a single post:










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

bbarry404 said:


> To answer the question in a single post:


Because they are not bicycles, they are motorized conveyances.


----------



## Wacha Wacha Wacha (Sep 27, 2017)

^^ DING DING DING!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

"the walmart cheer" interesting segment name


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Well that didn't take long.... It appears E shoes already exist.
> 
> Smart shoe devices generate power from walking - BBC News


So you are equating shoes that create electricity by the motion of the wearer walking with shoes that use an electric motor to do the walking for the wearer?

You seem to be arguing that electronics in general will be added to everything in the future. I think that's fairly clear. The example in bikes would be Garmins, power meters, cadence sensors, etc.

What isn't clear is that things that have never had motors will have electric motors added. Two very different concepts, but you don't care about the details... Just as long as it seems like it's supporting your argument in some way.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> So how did a E motor end up on a scooter? Or a skateboard?


Excellent examples! Both are considered novelty (typically Chinese made junk) and not taken seriously by users of their more traditional counterparts... Just like e-bikes!


----------



## JamesPM (Apr 8, 2009)

Electric motor, 2 stroke screamer or 4 stroke thumper, adding power to a bike makes it a motorcycle... if it has a throttle, or not, totally irrelevant.

I ran into this guy at Lord Hill in Seattle once, this motor was on an older Intense DH bike. It was, for all intents and purposes, a fully electric motorcycle.. enough torque to wheelie at will at 35mph... These should be on the same trail as a mountain bike. I would wager a decent some of money, this will out accelerate a current CR 450R motocrosser...

tangent motor company


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

JamesPM said:


> Electric motor, 2 stroke screamer or 4 stroke thumper, adding power to a bike makes it a motorcycle... if it has a throttle, or not, totally irrelevant.
> 
> I ran into this guy at Lord Hill in Seattle once, this motor was on an older Intense DH bike. It was, for all intents and purposes, a fully electric motorcycle.. enough torque to wheelie at will at 35mph... These should be on the same trail as a mountain bike. I would wager a decent some of money, this will out accelerate a current CR 450R motocrosser...
> 
> tangent motor company


My arguments refer to class 1 pas bikes like the levo. Bikes like you mentioned don't belong on mtb only trails nor am I arguing for them.

Line that intense up next to my Ktm 450 and watch your decent some of money disappear.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> I just destroyed your theory and that's all you got?


The only thing you are destroying is your own forum reputation.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> My arguments refer to class 1 pas bikes like the levo.


Fortunately no one would ever ride anything more powerful on mtb trails, right?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> So you are equating shoes that create electricity by the motion of the wearer walking with shoes that use an electric motor to do the walking for the wearer?
> 
> You seem to be arguing that electronics in general will be added to everything in the future. I think that's fairly clear. The example in bikes would be Garmins, power meters, cadence sensors, etc.
> 
> What isn't clear is that things that have never had motors will have electric motors added. Two very different concepts, but you don't care about the details... Just as long as it seems like it's supporting your argument in some way.


My point about the shoes was merely to dispute his comment that electricity wouldn't make it into shoes. Regardless of why or how, electricity found its way into a shoe.

I think we can all agree e technology will spread just about everywhere. Why do bikes have electronic shifters? How long have we shifted manually? Because it works better that's why. E tech enhances many of the things we already enjoy.

Everyone here enhances their arguments to support their views. Please tell me you're not that naive?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> Fortunately no one would ever ride anything more powerful on mtb trails, right?


That's what regulations and law enforcement are for.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> My arguments refer to class 1 pas bikes like the levo. Bikes like you mentioned don't belong on mtb only trails nor am I arguing for them.


And what about legal 750w Class 1 PAS emtbs? Cool? Verboten? I'd much rather have 1500w on tap and twice the torque than 530w if it was me.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> That's what regulations and law enforcement are for.


We already have the regulations. Are you going to pay for the extra law enforcement? And no, no one will pay a fee or sticker tax to get extra law enforcement.

We already have poaching by all classes of ebikes in our area. They know the regulations. Fortunately they ARE being given serious fines.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> The only thing you are destroying is your own forum reputation.


First off, I could care less. Secondly, Do you have a problem with others that don't share your opinions or beliefs? If so, that's frightening.

"Care about what other people think and you will always be their prisoner"

~ Lao Tzu


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> We already have the regulations. Are you going to pay for the extra law enforcement? And no, no one will pay a fee or sticker tax to get extra law enforcement.
> 
> We already have poaching by all classes of ebikes in our area. They know the regulations. Fortunately they ARE being given serious fines.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Serious fines and bike impoundment would be a good start. In order to deter anyone from breaking the law there must be a strong penalty. For the same reason you speed going down the highway, you know you can go to traffic school or pay a small fine. Now if the penalty was subsatantial and they impounded your car would you still speed?


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

ALimon said:


> First off, I could care less. Secondly, Do you have a problem with others that don't share your opinions or beliefs? If so, that's frightening.
> 
> "Care about what other people think and you will always be their prisoner"
> 
> ~ Lao Tzu


Thirty spokes share the wheel's hub; It is the center hole that makes it useful. Shape clay into a vessel; It is the space within that makes it useful. Cut doors and windows for a room; It is the holes which make it useful. Therefore profit comes from what is there; Usefulness from what is not...


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

Zowie said:


> Thirty spokes share the wheel's hub; It is the center hole that makes it useful. Shape clay into a vessel; It is the space within that makes it useful. Cut doors and windows for a room; It is the holes which make it useful. Therefore profit comes from what is there; Usefulness from what is not...


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

So quick story:

I caught an ebiker about to ride out onto one of our most popular, human powered only trails. We had a twenty minute back and forth. Consisted of me explaining why he couldn't ride there and him being belligerent and telling me why he was going to ride anyway. I took a picture of him and of his license plate. He even called the LBS to ask if he could ride there and they also told him no. He was later caught riding in another area, two days later. Also not allowed there.

Fast forward to me passing on the pictures and details to BLM Law enforcement. He has now been sent two tickets with fines in the mail. His info has also apparently been sent on to the special prosecutor in case he decides not to pay. 

Guess that didn't go the way he thought it would.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> Secondly, Do you have a problem with others that don't share your opinions or beliefs?


Stop trying to divert and twist everything that everyone is saying. I've been around here for years and so people understand perfectly well what kind of person I am.



> That's what regulations and law enforcement are for.


Let's see if you can give a straight, reasonable and honest answer concerning the regulation of trails, I doubt that you can. Please begin by explaining how enforcement officers are supposed to tell the difference between low-powered eBikes and higher-powered or modified ones?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Mr Pig said:


> Let's see if you can give a straight, reasonable and honest answer concerning the regulation of trails, I doubt that you can. Please begin by explaining how enforcement officers are supposed to tell the difference between low-powered eBikes and higher-powered or modified ones?


What enforcement officers?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> So quick story:
> 
> I caught an ebiker about to ride out onto one of our most popular, human powered only trails. We had a twenty minute back and forth. Consisted of me explaining why he couldn't ride there and him being belligerent and telling me why he was going to ride anyway. I took a picture of him and of his license plate. He even called the LBS to ask if he could ride there and they also told him no. He was later caught riding in another area, two days later. Also not allowed there.
> 
> ...


Self policeing apparently is an effective tool. Guys that would ride appropriate e bikes would have no issues doing exact what you did against those who were not following the regulations.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALimon said:


> Guys that would ride appropriate e bikes would have no issues doing exact what you did against those who were not following the regulations.


Know them all personally do you?

Are you going to explain how enforcement officers are supposed to tell the difference between low-powered eBikes and higher-powered or modified ones?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> Know them all personally do you?
> 
> Are you going to explain how enforcement officers are supposed to tell the difference between low-powered eBikes and higher-powered or modified ones?


I'm no ebike expert but the high powered ebikes I've seen were pretty obvious.

How about education? If your going to manage land you should be educated about the regulations and what to look for.

I don't expect for that to make any sense to you.... nothing really does anyhow.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> How about education? If your going to manage land you should be educated about the regulations and what to look for.


Education costs money.

The land managers found an easy way to draw an enforceable line. If it has a motor, it's banned. They are not interested in classes of ebikes.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALemon said:


> I'm no ebike expert but the high powered ebikes I've seen were pretty obvious.


But advances in battery and motor technology will make the difference less obvious. A bike that's on the legal limit and the same bike modified to be faster, how can someone tell them apart at the side of the trail? Could you?


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

Mr Pig said:


> But advances in battery and motor technology will make the difference less obvious. A bike that's on the legal limit and the same bike modified to be faster, how can someone tell them apart at the side of the trail? Could you?


The elephant in the room here being that they have already made their way to amateur road racing, with the excuse 'whoops, totally wasn't my bike in the pit'.

And besides, why did you think they were hydroforming those goofy huge AL downtubes all these years? I mean the logo space was nice, but we all know the real reason.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Yes! Ebikes will dominate the world!
> 
> The case for bicycles' inevitable triumph over cars - May. 5, 2017


You keep claiming that is a fact, when it is really speculation.

Also of note is this article and any news you read about eBikes sales does not parse out Road eBikes vs MTB eBikes.

If any eBikes really start to supplant pedal bike sales, it will be with commuter bikes and beach cruisers, not with MTB's, and MTB's are all the users on this site are concerned about.

My personal prediction, eBikes will continue to drop in price and become very popular for Commuters, mildly popular for beach cruisers and remain Niche for MTB use.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Commuter duty and motorized trails is the best case ending for e-motors. Blanket access to mtb trails is a non-starter.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> Education costs money.
> 
> The land managers found an easy way to draw an enforceable line. If it has a motor, it's banned. They are not interested in classes of ebikes.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


In other words, land managers are a bunch of blithering idiots.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

EricTheDood said:


> In other words, land managers are a bunch of blithering idiots.


Are you stating the obvious? Lol. When eMTB gain access they will come with a set of regulations. As a land manager, shouldn't your knowledge be up to date with all of the rules n regs for the land they manage? One would think so. Otherwise hand the job over to someone more willing


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

See Mr. Enforcement Officer, legal to ride eBike! Ok, thanks, see ya!
Pedal, pedal, pedal.
Stop. Plug in dongle.
Wheeeee!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I'm no ebike expert but the high powered ebikes I've seen were pretty obvious.


Sure, moving forward, it'll be easy to tell them apart.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/evnerd...na-cycles-apollo-ebike-from-usa/?amp_markup=1

2500w, looks like half of the emtbs out there.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> In other words, land managers are a bunch of blithering idiots.


No, they have better things to do. There isn't any plus side of emtbs for a land manager, it's just more work. If you think asking a land manager, who actually might not have enforcement capabilities, as in, they are not LEO's and can't write tickets, to catch, impound ebikes and fine people riding the "wrong" class of ebike, when they have more work on their plate than they can already deal with, and not having them laugh you off is possible, then you need to learn about the reality of the situation.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Harryman said:


> No, they have better things to do. There isn't any plus side of emtbs for a land manager, it's just more work. If you think asking a land manager, who actually might not have enforcement capabilities, as in, they are not LEO's and can't write tickets, to catch, impound ebikes and fine people riding the "wrong" class of ebike, when they have more work on their plate than they can already deal with, and not having them laugh you off is possible, then you need to learn about the reality of the situation.


Yup.

On top of that, coming at them with a crappy attitude probably isn't going to help your cause much either.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> First off, I could care less. Secondly, Do you have a problem with others that don't share your opinions or beliefs? If so, that's frightening.
> 
> "Care about what other people think and you will always be their prisoner"
> 
> ~ Lao Tzu


So who's prisoner are you? All the mountain bikers? Since you care what we think.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> So who's prisoner are you? All the mountain bikers? Since you care what we think.


I'm no ones prisoner. My comments state that very clearly.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> ...the high powered ebikes I've seen were pretty obvious.
> How about education? If your going to manage land you should be educated about the regulations and what to look for....


Since you seem to think it's so easy... how's about you do some educating?

Which of these ebikes is legal and which are not?


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

tahoebeau said:


> Since you seem to think it's so easy... how's about you do some educating?
> 
> Which of these ebikes is legal and which are not?
> 
> ...


none of the above.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> I'm no ones prisoner. My comments state that very clearly.


What you were clear about is saying that you care about what others think of you. At least a little. When you say "I could care less", it means you do care some, or else you couldn't possibly care any less. Or can't you wrap your head around that logic? I reckon you ain't so sharp.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

mbmb65 said:


> What you were clear about is saying that you care about what others think of you. At least a little. When you say "I could care less", it means you do care some, or else you couldn't possibly care any less. Or can't you wrap your head around that logic? I reckon you ain't so sharp.


I also have attempted to educated ALimon of the proper use of that phrase... you're right; he ain't that sharp.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

tahoebeau said:


> Since you seem to think it's so easy... how's about you do some educating?
> 
> Which of these ebikes is legal and which are not?
> 
> ...


I share the same sentiment and have stated the same thing in the past. Regardless of how the bike industry lobby intends on "classifying" these bikes there will be absolutely no way of enforcing such classifications in a real world sense. So if a land manager is intending on letting these "bikes" on the trails they should be prepared to get the whole gamut. With that said, there's also the real possibility of mountain bikes as a whole being grouped together with embts if there isn't a clear line of demarcation between the groups. When and if that happens mountain bike access will be threatened as the rules regarding motorized transportation will suddenly and explicitly apply every mountain bike.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

tahoebeau said:


> Since you seem to think it's so easy... how's about you do some educating?
> 
> Which of these ebikes is legal and which are not?
> 
> ...


Some of the above. Maybe.

Of the 2 obviously sold by Luna; #'s 3 and 4; #3 is definitely in the moped range and #4 is legal in the base model format but Luna is happy to upgrade to 2.5 kW for $250.

The others? Can't tell; that's probably the point of the post.


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

ALimon said:


> I'm no ones prisoner. My comments state that very clearly.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> What you were clear about is saying that you care about what others think of you. At least a little. When you say "I could care less", it means you do care some, or else you couldn't possibly care any less. Or can't you wrap your head around that logic? I reckon you ain't so sharp.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


No, it means I really don't care. Your interpretation of my comment is wrong... as usual. You do know this is the internet? Or the internothing if you will. Lol. You all are so serious and get so butt hurt...... I get a chuckle out of it.

Ever hear of a guy called Martin Luther King? Do you think he cared about what others thought?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> No, it means I really don't care. Your interpretation of my comment is wrong... as usual. You do know this is the internet? Or the internothing if you will. Lol. You all are so serious and get so butt hurt...... I get a chuckle out of it.
> 
> Ever hear of a guy called Martin Luther King? Do you think he cared about what others thought?


The phrase that is so elusive to you is "I couldn't care less".


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

And your insistence that you are correct, even in the face of examples of the correct wording is what makes you appear to be the village idiot.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> No, it means I really don't care. Your interpretation of my comment is wrong... as usual. You do know this is the internet? Or the internothing if you will. Lol. You all are so serious and get so butt hurt...... I get a chuckle out of it.
> 
> Ever hear of a guy called Martin Luther King? Do you think he cared about what others thought?


Do you hear yourself? How am I supposed to interpret your comment, other than it's literal meaning? You just don't get it. You're either thick, or obtuse. And wtf does MLK have to do with this? Seriously.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Ever hear of a guy called Martin Luther King? Do you think he cared about what others thought?


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

ALemon said:


> Ever hear of a guy called Martin Luther King? Do you think he cared about what others thought?


So, you're the Martin Luther king of the eBike world, is that it? Fighting against oppression and injustice in the name of all that is right?


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

I don't know if those bikes ^^ are legal or not, but they are Fugly!


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

tahoebeau said:


> Since you seem to think it's so easy... how's about you do some educating?
> 
> Which of these ebikes is legal and which are not?
> 
> ...


Can't tell from a standstill.

The illegal ones are going 20+ mph on flat ground or uphill.

If there is to be any enforcement, enforce by pointing a radar gun at the ebiker. If he breaks the speed limit, write him a ticket and inspect the bike. If it is determined that the bike is a Class 4, write him a second ticket and/or impound the bike.

If there isn't enforcement, then what's the point of the law?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> What is it with you?
> 
> Hey moderators, can I _please_ give this guy more neg-rep?


What part don't you understand that we don't have to agree? Your need for validation is amusing.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

EricTheDood said:


> Can't tell from a standstill.
> 
> The illegal ones are going 20+ mph on flat ground or uphill.
> 
> ...


 I have seen a ranger on some of our trail days, and once in a while in a parking lot. Never on a trail, and there are no speed limits where I ride( MA) let alone radar guns. Speed limits around here are usually defined by common sense and desire to remain healthy.


----------



## JamesPM (Apr 8, 2009)

Or make your own. Hide the battery in your back pack, and hide the motor behind a hacked up plastic waterbottle...

tangent motor company

BAN THEM ALL


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> You're either stupid or just being a smart ass. Probably both. Not going to waste my time stating the obvious. If you can't put things together go back to your pen


He just destroyed your theories, and everything you've said and done here, and that's all you've got to say?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

EricTheDood said:


> Can't tell from a standstill.
> 
> The illegal ones are going 20+ mph on flat ground or uphill.
> 
> ...


Prohibiting them entirely costs less than enforcement, which is the path of least resistance?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

life behind bars said:


> Prohibiting them entirely costs less than enforcement, which is the path of least resistance?


Yep. Having a speed limit of any kind punishes legal trail users. I think it's fun to go fast. I don't want to see any speed limits on my local trails.

Once again, any kind of additional limitations requires people, money and time to enforce.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



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

EricTheDood said:


> Can't tell from a standstill.
> 
> The illegal ones are going 20+ mph on flat ground or uphill.
> 
> ...


For lots of people, including me, hitting the trails is means of escaping people, congestion, noise and authority. Introducing something that requires radar guns and cops is much worse than any of the other issues they might cause.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> Nice job Nancy. You just summed up your entire personality in one post.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Wow! Pretty bold statement considering you don't know anything about this gentleman.

One sentence and and here come the judgements. You have to be the most judge mental lad on mtbr hands down! What a cupcake!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

life behind bars said:


> Prohibiting them entirely costs less than enforcement, which is the path of least resistance?


Yep. I've yet to see anyone in the pro-ebike camp, or in the industry work on actually supporting land managers in enforcing ebike policy, which if there are any old timers here, mtb orgs used to do similar things in the old days. We had a local mtb patrol out there riding around telling riders not to be asshats, helping out people with mechanicals, saying hello to the hikers and being good ambassadors of the sprort.

Like it or not, if you want ebike access to expand, there are issues to be dealt with, otherwise, other people will make those decisions for you, to your detriment.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Wow! Pretty bold statement considering you don't know anything about this gentleman.
> 
> One sentence and and here come the judgements. You have to be the most judge mental lad on mtbr hands down! What a cupcake!


Actually, I do know something about this "gentleman". He thinks that anybody disagreeing with another's (his?) views, is a "whiner". And now I know you love him, and want to protect him. Or her, or whatever. And I know that you are sheltered and new.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> Actually, I do know something about this "gentleman". He thinks that anybody disagreeing with another's (his?) views, is a "whiner". And now I know you love him, and want to protect him. Or her, or whatever. And I know that you are sheltered and new.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


How many times did you say "I know?" I bet you like hearing yourself say that over n over. Lol.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> How many times did you say "I know?" I bet you like hearing yourself say that over n over. Lol.


Yap yap yap yap yap...

How about answering my question below?



tahoebeau said:


> Since you seem to think it's so easy... how's about you do some educating?
> 
> Which of these ebikes is legal and which are not?
> 
> ...


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

tahoebeau said:


> Yap yap yap yap yap...
> 
> How about answering my question below?


Without seeing the bike in person it's pointless. Send me a 360 view where I can see every angle and zoom... then I can tell ya what ya got.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Without seeing the bike in person it's pointless. Send me a 360 view where I can see every angle and zoom... then I can tell ya what ya got.


In other words, he can't tell. The other side looks just like the other side.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> In other words, he can't tell. The other side looks just like the other side.


Wrong again. Bikes do not look the same from both sides. Do you even ride man?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Harryman said:


> Yep. I've yet to see anyone in the pro-ebike camp, or in the industry work on actually supporting land managers in enforcing ebike policy, which if there are any old timers here, mtb orgs used to do similar things in the old days. We had a local mtb patrol out there riding around telling riders not to be asshats, helping out people with mechanicals, saying hello to the hikers and being good ambassadors of the sprort.
> 
> Like it or not, if you want ebike access to expand, there are issues to be dealt with, otherwise, other people will make those decisions for you, to your detriment.


Nailed it.

There are still groups of mtbr's out there working as ambassadors.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## sml-2727 (Nov 16, 2013)

Ride more, worry less and have fun. This is another 23+ page thread on how evil ebikes are. No wonder people in Europe think Americans are a bunch of ass hats. 

And if you really need to know a little about me, I belong to a small bike group with as of now 370 members and growing, a good bit of us volunteer our time to help build and maintain the trails,part of a subgroup called trail Pittsburgh (look them up on facebook). To us its all about getting out and having fun, and if any guy went out and showed up on a Ebike we would have no problem with it.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

mbmb65 said:


> In other words, he can't tell. The other side looks just like the other side.





ALimon said:


> Wrong again. Bikes do not look the same from both sides. Do you even ride man?


Surprised you need to see the other side. You said in your own words that "it's pretty obvious".

Well here is the other side of each. So what's what?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

sml-2727 said:


> Ride more, worry less and have fun. This is another 23+ page thread on how evil ebikes are. No wonder people in Europe think Americans are a bunch of ass hats.
> 
> And if you really need to know a little about me, I belong to a small bike group with as of now 370 members and growing, a good bit of us volunteer our time to help build and maintain the trails,part of a subgroup called trail Pittsburgh (look them up on facebook). To us its all about getting out and having fun, and if any guy went out and showed up on a Ebike we would have no problem with it.


Post of the year!


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Post of the year!


You appear to have very low standards for content. Most people here wouldn't object to anyone that showed up with an e-motorized vehicle as long as they weren't poaching or being an asshat.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

This thread jumped the shark way back; ALimon is just trolling at this point.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> This thread jumped the shark way back; ALimon is just trolling at this point.


Oh please. The anti crowd trolls on a daily basis.


----------



## Boulder Pilot (Jan 23, 2004)

Kinda disappointed to see civil discussion, for the most part, abandoned, replaced with personal insults and outright disrespect. One could read pages of this thread and have no idea what the title is. 

Unfortunately for electric motor bike riders in San Diego County, this is not a touchy subject. SD County DPR has banned electric motor bikes from all County trails. The reason given is that "all County trails are non-motorized use only." When I asked if this included pedal-assist electric motor bikes, their answer was, "If it has a motor, it is not allowed on non-motorized use trails." 

I asked if they met with any electric motor bike advocates. Their response was,"contacted manufacturers. One told us we should follow State Law, ha ha."

I thought Cal. State law was going to be the model. My county thought otherwise. There are people on this forum that obviously are passionate about electric motor biking. If you are lucky enough to not face trail access issues in your area you may want to help others in different areas that may not be so lucky. 

One last thing: One sure fire way to create negative public opinion is to have a local electric motor bike rental/sales company also provide group rides the day after a rain event, especially in socal. I wouldn't call the riders electric motor bike riders, they were simply a55holes. The tour leader, we'll call him lucky.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

chazpat said:


> This thread jumped the shark way back; ALimon is just trolling at this point.


Something tells me thinking isn't a hobby of his.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Oh please. The anti crowd trolls on a daily basis.


Yap, yap, yap, yap, yap, yap again. Your like a chiwawa.

How about answering the questions below now? You know, talking about something that pertains to the thread title.

Well?



tahoebeau said:


> Surprised you need to see the other side. You said in your own words that "it's pretty obvious".
> 
> Well here is the other side of each. So what's what?
> 
> ...


----------



## IPunchCholla (Dec 8, 2013)

Ok. I'm actually moderately pro-ebike. And wouldn't have an issue if advocates approached it like this:

1 ebikes are motorized bikes and should not be treated the same as non-motorized bikes.
2 however, 250watt PAS bikes do not damage trails or cause excessive speeds. 
3. We recognize, even though 250 watt ebikes are essentially the same power wise as very fit humans, there may be unintended consequences to letting them on the trail: significantly more users causing damage, increased closing speeds uphill, the introduction of unskilled riders to backcountry areas, increased congestion. However none of these are insurmountable or even likely to occur. 
4. We propose opening one trail system in the area (around here I would suggest south Foothills) to 250 watt PAS. On a time limited basis of one year. After one year. This access will automatically be revoked unless explicitly extended by the land manager after an open comment and meeting session. During this year the local ebike club (there isn't one here) will meet with the land manager to address concerns. 

Of course the problem is all these 750 watt bikes that ARE significantly different from people powered vehicles. So enforcement would be an issue. Gotta say the industry should have gone with the European standards. 

And the ebike advocates on here insisting it isn't a motorized vehicle and other weird nonsense. 

Like I said I'm kinda for them. But I have no interest in them myself (yes I have ridden them). And no interest in advocating for them.

And after I read the pro people on here. I kinda want to go out and get them banned from the trails where they can legally ride them. You guys (generally speaking) are doing yourself very few favors here. 

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Oh brother :0( What a mess. Time to unsubscribe methinks. 

Considering the animosity that eBike discussions cause, why is it that they are given a whole forum while politics and religion are banned?


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

^Yeah, non-binary FTW. Maybe "hexapersonoid."


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Carbon based lifeform is probably going to piss someone off.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> What part don't you understand that we don't have to agree? Your need for validation is amusing.


Says the guy who has been responding to nearly every post in this thread for four pages.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Silentfoe said:


> Actually it isn't. Try to keep up with popular culture references. You don't need to be offended with everything.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


He could care less about popular culture.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

ALimon said:


> Wow! Pretty bold statement considering you don't know anything about this gentleman.
> 
> One sentence and and here come the judgements. You have to be the most judge mental lad on mtbr hands down! What a cupcake!


Ha! Him?

No way. I'm far, far more judgmental than he is and most likely moreso than anyone else on this forum.

I'm going to blow up this whole thread with my judgements. You just wait and see.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Curveball said:


> Ha! Him?
> 
> No way. I'm far, far more judgmental than he is and most likely moreso than anyone else on this forum.
> 
> I'm going to blow up this whole thread with my judgements. You just wait and see.


Word.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

I'm going to have few beers when I get home from work just to really get the judginess going.

Then, look out!


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Actually it is. He was referring to the "white cowboy" as a particular superior race. That's racism by the very definition. Nice try too!


Still avoiding my questions huh? I am starting to think that you really don't know much about ebikes at all and are just here trolling.

How about you show us what you know or just admit your trolling?



tahoebeau said:


> Surprised you need to see the other side. You said in your own words that "it's pretty obvious".
> 
> Well here is the other side of each. So what's what?


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)




----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Wow, bunch of 40-50 yr old dudes getting pretty excited over electric bicycles. I’m scared to think how everyone would react over a serious topic. They are friggin bicycles or not. Who gives a s**t?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Wow, bunch of 40-50 yr old dudes getting pretty excited over electric bicycles. I'm scared to think how everyone would react over a serious topic. They are friggin bicycles or not. Who gives a s**t?


Apparently your posts indicate that you don't?


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

Gutch said:


> Wow, bunch of 40-50 yr old dudes getting pretty excited over electric bicycles. I'm scared to think how everyone would react over a serious topic. They are friggin bicycles or not. Who gives a s**t?


You must have missed the REI/Camelback/AR15 thread.....


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> Apparently your posts indicate that you don't?


I don't really care either way. I'm going to be on 2 wheels either way. I see both sides and just gonna let it play out. My Levo hasn't moved in two months. Bigger fish to fry...


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

mileslong said:


> You must have missed the REI/Camelback/AR15 thread.....


Yes, and glad I did.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

ALimon said:


> Wtf? A lil angry are ya? Lol.
> 
> "I would think he meant?" I'd rather not assume.
> 
> Dip ****? That's a nice big word for a 3rd grader


If I wasn't clear I meant to say "white cowboy" as in the guy wearing the white cowboy hat, boots, and outfit and comes into town on a white horse ready to save the day. It's a metaphor which shares the same meaning as "white Knight" as you know this is a topic about why ebikes are a touchy subject in the US. Here we don't have knights, we got cowboys.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Gutch said:


> Wow, bunch of 40-50 yr old dudes getting pretty excited over electric bicycles. I'm scared to think how everyone would react over a serious topic. They are friggin bicycles or not. Who gives a s**t?


From the horses mouth....


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Holy Crap people. STOP THE PERSONAL ATTACKS.

I just trimmed a bunch of the garbage posts out, If this keeps up the entire thread is getting binned.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> Oh brother :0( What a mess. Time to unsubscribe methinks.
> 
> Considering the animosity that eBike discussions cause, why is it that they are given a whole forum while politics and religion are banned?


Don't threaten me with a good time. Do it!! Unsubscribe. I dare ya.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

Klurejr said:


> Holy Crap people. STOP THE PERSONAL ATTACKS.
> 
> I just trimmed a bunch of the garbage posts out, If this keeps up the entire thread is getting binned.


You're being awfully hard on the bin. 
Does it really deserve this thread?

I'd burn it, or cut it up into little pieces or something.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Zowie said:


> You're being awfully hard on the bin.
> Does it really deserve this thread?
> 
> I'd burn it, or cut it up into little pieces or something.


I agree, the anti crowd has proven they can't talk about this subject without throwing in personal attacks. Burn it!


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

ALimon said:


> I agree, the anti crowd has proven they can't talk about this subject without throwing in personal attacks. Burn it!


Agreeing with one realistic assessment doesn't make you credible.


----------



## Gallo (Nov 17, 2013)

I personally dont have a n issue with them. There are probably more issues with pedal powered riders than e bikes as a pure number stand point. Trail cutting illegal building etc

The problem is that we are fighting to keep trails open on the horse and hiker and whatever other force align against mtb folks will point to this and put us in the motorcycle class again and restrict access again to all off road cycles.

If it gets you out there I am fine with it myself. I do not see one in my future


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I agree, the anti crowd has proven they can't talk about this subject without throwing in personal attacks. Burn it!


Now you're just trying to waste more of my time going back and quoting all the personal attacks you've thrown out... Not gonna bother, but you and I know both know there's at least a half dozen in the last couple pages.

You might consider taking some time to read back through the last few pages. I'm not sure you fully grasp the way you've presented yourself here, in fact this latest post makes it clear you don't.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Zowie said:


> Agreeing with one realistic assessment doesn't make you credible.


So you're saying I don't have any credibility with a bunch whiners? Lol. I'm more than ok with that. Never did care for those kind anyway


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I agree, the anti crowd has proven they can't talk about this subject without throwing in personal attacks. Burn it!


Trying to get the thread closed to avoid answering my question huh?

*I am calling you out ALimon... You are not creditable.*

You not being able to answer the simple question below is showing all who look at this thread that I just *blew up your entire argument for ebikes on non-moto trails* and you have absolutely no rebuttal.



tahoebeau said:


> Surprised you need to see the other side. You said in your own words that "it's pretty obvious".
> 
> Well here is the other side of each. So which of these ebikes is legal and which are not?


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

ALimon said:


> So you're saying I don't have any credibility with a bunch whiners? Lol. I'm more than ok with that. Never did care for those kind anyway


Oh, you have credibility with the whiners. Give yourself some credit, you're an incredible whiner.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

tahoebeau said:


> Trying to get the thread closed to avoid answering my question huh?
> 
> *I am calling you out ALimon... You are not creditable.*
> 
> ...


I already responded. No need to ask again.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I already responded. No need to ask again.


Typical response from someone that has lost any legitimate footing in a discussion. Carry on.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

ALimon said:


> I already responded. No need to ask again.


So you admit that you can't tell the difference.

*Good, glad it got cleared up that it is not, in any way obvious how much power an ebike has just by looking at it.*

And this is just another of many reasons why ebikes should not be allowed on the majority of non-motorized trails. Thank you for making that point obvious to everyone on this forum.

Also, all of us "anti-ebikes" here on this forum appreciate your efforts at helping us to reinforce that ebikes should not be allowed on non-motorized trails. Keep it up:thumbsup:


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I already responded. No need to ask again.


Right...



ALimon said:


> Without seeing the bike in person it's pointless. Send me a 360 view where I can see every angle and zoom... then I can tell ya what ya got.


Well, I already posted the opposite side of each. Luckily there are many pictures of each of these bikes from different angles and close ups of things like the motor.

How about we stay focused on the thread topic which is ebikes and you *tell us all what you are looking for that will enable you to identify how much power each bike has.
*I mean you said that all we need to do is a little educating with Park ranger and the like so a simple explanation of what they need to look for to tell how much power each has shouldn't be to hard for you, right?

Because here is the thing, if you can't tell by looking at those pictures, then how's it going to work out when the "revolution" (as you say it) comes and everyone's riding ebikes everywhere?

*Are rangers going to have to set up check points so they can get a close 360 degree look at the entire bikes to see how much power it has? *

You really haven't thought out your argument very well at all.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

tahoebeau said:


> You really haven't thought out your argument very well at all.


Sure he has, it's simply 'I'm right and everyone else is wrong.' Seems like he's been perfecting it for years. Who cares about your 'facts,' those can be misleading. 'Only a dead fish swims with the current' and all.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

ALimon said:


> So you're saying I don't have any credibility with a bunch whiners? Lol. I'm more than ok with that. Never did care for those kind anyway


Here's a lesson in comprehension:

You said that.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Sure he has, it's simply 'I'm right and everyone else is wrong.' Seems like he's been perfecting it for years. Who cares about your 'facts,' those can be misleading. 'Only a dead fish swims with the current' and all.


Actually it's more like you whiners don't know what to do with an honest conversation. You only want to hear what you want to hear. This is the internet, a forum where anyone can share their opinion or beliefs. If you can't appreciate honesty in a conversation, regardless if you agree or not, then the internet isn't for you.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> This is the internet, a forum where anyone can share their opinion or beliefs.


As long as you agree with it, right? Not whining, just asking.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> I agree, the anti crowd has proven they can't talk about this subject without throwing in personal attacks. Burn it!


That's special.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Actually it's more like you whiners don't know what to do with an honest conversation. You only want to hear what you want to hear. This is the internet, a forum where anyone can share their opinion or beliefs. If you can't appreciate honesty in a conversation, regardless if you agree or not, then the internet isn't for you.


Perhaps stop calling those who disagree with your point of view "Whiners", you are not building any bridges by making that sort of comment.

I have repeated contradicted your assertion that eBikes *WILL* become the norm without whining once. I have yet to see you reply to my comments in this thread disputing anyone's ability to accurately predict the future.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> Perhaps stop calling those who disagree with your point of view "Whiners", you are not building any bridges by making that sort of comment.
> 
> I have repeated contradicted your assertion that eBikes *WILL* become the norm without whining once. I have yet to see you reply to my comments in this thread disputing anyone's ability to accurately predict the future.


That's great. I appreciate that... that's how it should be. But it you have followed along. You would have noticed that anyone with a pro ebike opinion has been met with hostility and name calling.


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

ALimon said:


> That's great. I appreciate that... that's how it should be. But it you have followed along. You would have noticed that anyone with a pro ebike opinion has been met with hostility and name calling.


You're right, I believe I can speak for all of the non-motorized Mountain Bike Riders here when I say; we are sorry MLK.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> has been met with hostility and name calling.


This cuts two ways. But by all means keep it up, you're making getting e-motors banned so much easier.


----------



## @[email protected] (Aug 25, 2017)

Lemonaid said:


> https://www.vitalmtb.com/features/Why-Are-E-Bikes-Such-a-Touchy-Subject-in-the-U-S,2089
> 
> First of all, comparing the EU to the US is like comparing apples to oranges. The US has vastly more wilderness and a larger park system. And people aren't crammed in a small space. _Michael Ferrentino's_ comments in the audio miss the whole point calling emtb opponents selfish and uninformed, and the (5:30) "Americans have a cultural problem with sharing". *No, it's not about sharing*. It's about opening the door to more and more powerful mopeds on the trails. That's the bottom line... Once the door is open for the simplest of motors, gradually more and more powerful bikes will be introduced. If we've learned anything from the bike industry is that they love to introduce newer and better "technology" every year to pique the rider's wallets. The "classification" of motor bikes is a fallacy since there's no way for anyone to police or enforce these mythical standards on the trails and was created for political reasons. What will end up happening is "other interests" will end up grouping regular mountain bikes with emtb and base trail access decision on the merits of both groups as a single entity.


I agree 100%


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> That's great. I appreciate that... that's how it should be. But it you have followed along. You would have noticed that anyone with a pro ebike opinion has been met with hostility and name calling.


You were the first and only person here to call another poster a racist.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Klurejr said:


> Perhaps stop calling those who disagree with your point of view "Whiners", you are not building any bridges by making that sort of comment.
> 
> I have repeated contradicted your assertion that eBikes *WILL* become the norm without whining once. I have yet to see you reply to my comments in this thread disputing anyone's ability to accurately predict the future.





ALimon said:


> That's great. I appreciate that... that's how it should be. But it you have followed along. You would have noticed that anyone with a pro ebike opinion has been met with hostility and name calling.


This was addressed to you and your reply makes no sense.

And there have been plenty of pro ebike opinions expressed on here that were not met with hostility and name calling, because those members weren't saying that ebikes are bicycles, should be allowed everywhere mtbs are allowed and that it is a fact that ebikes are going to take over. My guess is that a lot of those posters don't like where you've taken this thread so they are avoiding it.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> This was addressed to you and your reply makes no sense.
> 
> And there have been plenty of pro ebike opinions expressed on here that were not met with hostility and name calling, because those members weren't saying that ebikes are bicycles, should be allowed everywhere mtbs are allowed and that it is a fact that ebikes are going to take over. My guess is that a lot of those posters don't like where you've taken this thread so they are avoiding it.


Thanks for serving up my point on a silver platter. So you say 
"there have been plenty of pro ebike opinions expressed on here that were not met with hostility and name calling, because those members weren't saying that ebikes are bicycles, should be allowed everywhere mtbs are allowed and that it is a fact that ebikes are going to take over". So since their opinion met your agenda they weren't met with hostility and name calling? Some think they're bicycles, some don't. You believe they aren't bicycles. But If you do, then it's ok to bash someone with name calling and hostility because you don't agree with them? That's BS man! Total bs!


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

mileslong said:


> I believe I can speak for all of the non-motorized Mountain Bike Riders here when I say; we are sorry MLK.


No you can't!

I'm not sorry. I meant everything I said. I don't like ALemon, what he stands for or how he expresses it. I've seen his type on forums many times and the results are not good. He'll be a destructive and divisive influence and I'm not apologizing for saying that.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

ALimon said:


> Thanks for serving up my point on a silver platter. So you say
> "there have been plenty of pro ebike opinions expressed on here that were not met with hostility and name calling, because those members weren't saying that ebikes are bicycles, should be allowed everywhere mtbs are allowed and that it is a fact that ebikes are going to take over". So since their opinion met your agenda they weren't met with hostility and name calling? Some think they're bicycles, some don't. You believe they aren't bicycles. But If you do, then it's ok to bash someone with name calling and hostility because you don't agree with them? That's BS man! Total bs!


You know what? I respect you for standing by your beliefs and fighting for what you think is right, despite the abundance of opposition.

That said, to me and many other posters, e-bikes are not bicycles for the simple, undeniable, factual reason that they have a motor. That isn't debatable, defensible, or arguable. I can be as brash and stubborn as anybody, so I get where you're coming from. However, you need to take a step back and realize that you are not going to win this battle here. You need to make nice with land-managers, trail maintenance groups, and your local community. That's how you are going to gain respect and e-bike trail access.

P.s. Martin Luther King cared about what people thought as much as just about anybody ever. Why else would he go through all that ridicule and ultimately risk his life to change people's minds? Both as a preacher and as a visionary, his main objective was to guide people religiously and culturally. At least that's what history says about him.


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

Mr Pig said:


> No you can't!
> 
> I'm not sorry. I meant everything I said. I don't like ALemon, what he stands for or how he expresses it. I've seen his type on forums many times and the results are not good. He'll be a destructive and divisive influence and I'm not apologizing for saying that.


I will try to find the sarcasm emoji - FYI- I neg repped him for disrespecting MLK.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

mileslong said:


> I will try to find the sarcasm emoji..


Oh yeah, my bad. I didn't understand what MLK on the end of the post mean! A bit slow on the uptake there.


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

mountainbiker24 said:


> You know what? I respect you for standing by your beliefs and fighting for what you think is right, despite the abundance of opposition.
> 
> That said, to me and many other posters, e-bikes are not bicycles for the simple, undeniable, factual reason that they have a motor.


Sounds reasonable then you go in to say ....



> That isn't debatable, defensible, or arguable.


What isn't debatable, defensible, or arguable?
1) That ebikes have a motor
2) that ebikes are not bikes
3) that ebikes are not bikes BECAUSE they have a motor.
4) that your belief will not change

Point 1 is mostly non debatable though to be pedantic it is... is an ebike with no battery a bike?

Point 2 -3 are certainly debatable ... though logic says it has pedals that can be used to power it so it is a bike

Most obviously whether it is legally defined as a bicycle depends where you live or is pretty much the rest of the world wrong as their opinion differs from yours?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

1). Is a car with no gas still a car?
2 & 3). A car has a gas pedal. Is it human-powered?
4). It's not my "belief" that e-bikes have motors. That's why they put the "e" in front. It's like an asterisk. If it was a bicycle, there wouldn't be a need for the "e".


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Thanks for serving up my point on a silver platter. So you say
> "there have been plenty of pro ebike opinions expressed on here that were not met with hostility and name calling, because those members weren't saying that ebikes are bicycles, should be allowed everywhere mtbs are allowed and that it is a fact that ebikes are going to take over". So since their opinion met your agenda they weren't met with hostility and name calling? Some think they're bicycles, some don't. You believe they aren't bicycles. But If you do, then it's ok to bash someone with name calling and hostility because you don't agree with them? That's BS man! Total bs!


ROTFLMAO! You've proven my point! Ebikes are going to all explode and melt down by 2020 and be gone, that's a fact! You guys are all bicycle bashers, whiners and name callers!

(thought I would try your strategy for "discussion" in this thread)


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mountainbiker24 said:


> You know what? I respect you for standing by your beliefs and fighting for what you think is right, despite the abundance of opposition.
> 
> That said, to me and many other posters, e-bikes are not bicycles for the simple, undeniable, factual reason that they have a motor. That isn't debatable, defensible, or arguable. I can be as brash and stubborn as anybody, so I get where you're coming from. However, you need to take a step back and realize that you are not going to win this battle here. You need to make nice with land-managers, trail maintenance groups, and your local community. That's how you are going to gain respect and e-bike trail access.
> 
> P.s. Martin Luther King cared about what people thought as much as just about anybody ever. Why else would he go through all that ridicule and ultimately risk his life to change people's minds? Both as a preacher and as a visionary, his main objective was to guide people religiously and culturally. At least that's what history says about him.


Thanks man, I appreciate that. I'd rather lose an argument being honest and standing by my beliefs than win an argument by abondoning them.

Regardless of ones view, right, wrong or indifferent. There's no reason for name calling and hostility.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> ROTFLMAO! You've proven my point! Ebikes are going to all explode and melt down by 2020 and be gone, that's a fact! You guys are all bicycle bashers, whiners and name callers!
> 
> (thought I would try your strategy for "discussion" in this thread)


Nice diversion from my post. Lol.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Nice diversion from my post. Lol.


It's no different than some of the tactics that you have used in past posts. Lol.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> No you can't!
> 
> I'm not sorry. I meant everything I said. I don't like ALemon, what he stands for or how he expresses it. I've seen his type on forums many times and the results are not good. He'll be a destructive and divisive influence and I'm not apologizing for saying that.


I thought you unsubscribed? Maybe you like me more than you think? Apparently you can't stay away 

Do you tell everyone you disagree with their devisive and therefor destructive? I disagree with most of your comments but I don't find you devisive one bit


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> It's no different than some of the tactics that you have used in past posts. Lol.


It's ok, He couldn't back track anyways.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> There's no reason for name calling and hostility.


Remember when you called someone a racist?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> There's no reason for name calling and hostility.


Remember when you called people whiners?


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

Obvious troll is obvious...


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Remember when you called people whiners?


Show me where I personally attacked anyone first. I'd love to see it. Good luck with that, it doesn't exist.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

life behind bars said:


> It's no different than some of the tactics that you have used in past posts. Lol.


It's like he forgets what he posted five minutes ago. Lol.


----------



## Steve-XtC (Feb 7, 2016)

mountainbiker24 said:


> 1). Is a car with no gas still a car?


Not in any functional way... unless it's a hybrid..
it's a hunk of metal... not going anywhere to all practical purposes

And

2 & 3). A car has a gas pedal. Is it human-powered?

Can pressing the gas pedal when the car has no gas make it go??? Obviously completely different to an ebike



> 4). It's not my "belief" that e-bikes have motors. That's why they put the "e" in front. It's like an asterisk. If it was a bicycle, there wouldn't be a need for the "e".


There you go again...
Of course they have motors ... that isn't the question ..

The question is whether that stops it being a bike for 90% of humanity.

I don't have a e-bike but I do have e-books and I can confirm that they are functionally books.... the whole main point of a book being to be able to read it ....
Being able to use it to steady a desk or put a cup on are subsidiary uses and don't stop the e-book being a book. 
However it's no longer a book in terms of being able to read it with a flat battery

A Smart Phone is still a smart phone etc.

I've ridden plenty of bikes and a few motorbikes and I once rode a e-bike...

You pedal it and it moves ... it's a bike. Then When you turn on the assist it becomes an assisted bike... I've no plans to buy one* but it's definitely a bike to me... it doesn't feel or handle anything like a motorbike

*well when I'm 65 and if my kid is still racing I'd definitely consider one so I can ride with him... if you think that would be even remotely like just using a motorbike then I'd really wonder how long you actually spent riding e-bikes ...


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Steve-XtC said:


> *well when I'm 65 and if my kid is still racing I'd definitely consider one so I can ride with him... if you think that would be even remotely like just using a motorbike then I'd really wonder how long you actually spent riding e-bikes ...


More than you.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Simple


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Show me where I personally attacked anyone first. I'd love to see it. Good luck with that, it doesn't exist.





ALimon said:


> I can't insult someone's intelligence that doesn't have any to begin with.


Not only is this a personal attack, it is one I have literally heard used by elementary schoolers dozens of times. It's not even funny, or based on an accurate understanding of what 'intelligence' means.

So here you go, you said something doesn't exist and I provided concrete proof it does. Do I think you'll concede that simple point? Hell no. You'll say that I attached you personally first. Care to find that for me?

I gotta find something better to do with my time on the shitter.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Steve-XtC said:


> You pedal it and it moves ... it's a bike.


Bike?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Show me where I personally attacked anyone first. I'd love to see it. Good luck with that, it doesn't exist.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> View attachment 1188133


Lol. Scroll further back and show me where I initiated the personal attacks. You won't find it. I expressed my beliefs from the beginning, and as I said before, I have no problem with anyone's opinion on any issue, everyone has a right to share their beliefs as they choose. But for some here, they couldn't reciprocate which led to them personally attacking me..... and the rest is history.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

TheDwayyo said:


> Not only is this a personal attack, it is one I have literally heard used by elementary schoolers dozens of times. It's not even funny, or based on an accurate understanding of what 'intelligence' means.
> 
> So here you go, you said something doesn't exist and I provided concrete proof it does. Do I think you'll concede that simple point? Hell no. You'll say that I attached you personally first. Care to find that for me?
> 
> I gotta find something better to do with my time on the shitter.


Scroll back to the very first personal attack on this subject. You might be surprised how many personal attacks were thrown my way before I threw some back. Quit spreading fake news.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Bike?
> 
> View attachment 1188130
> [/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> chazpat said:
> 
> 
> > Bike?
> ...


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> chazpat said:
> 
> 
> > Bike?
> ...


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

The law makers are not going to decide what a pedal assist bike is. It is a bike with a motor, no one can dispute that. What the law makers are going to decide is where you can use one. I think this is why the touchy subject originates. When someone calls it a bicycle we get wound up because we know we are right and need to educate the world. I think if ebike supporters stopped doing this and concentrated on low impact trail use it may get a little more civil.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Lol. Scroll further back and show me where I initiated the personal attacks. You won't find it. I expressed my beliefs from the beginning, and as I said before, I have no problem with anyone's opinion on any issue, everyone has a right to share their beliefs as they choose. But for some here, they couldn't reciprocate which led to them personally attacking me..... and the rest is history.


I'm not going to waste more of my time. Most of the people here have been following this somewhat and are well aware of what's been posted so I really don't need to say anything.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

rlee said:


> The law makers are not going to decide what a pedal assist bike is. It is a bike with a motor, no one can dispute that. What the law makers are going to decide is where you can use one. I think this is why the touchy subject originates. When someone calls it a bicycle we get wound up because we know we are right and need to educate the world. I think if ebike supporters stopped doing this and concentrated on low impact trail use it may get a little more civil.


Possibly but I'd go a bit further and suggest that the motorized crowd is going to have to start building trails. Cloaking emotors in benign euphemisms and outright lies isn't helping the motorized side either.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

rlee said:


> The law makers are not going to decide what a pedal assist bike is. It is a bike with a motor, no one can dispute that. What the law makers are going to decide is where you can use one. I think this is why the touchy subject originates. When someone calls it a bicycle we get wound up because we know we are right and need to educate the world. I think if ebike supporters stopped doing this and concentrated on low impact trail use it may get a little more civil.


Tell me what you see in that image?


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Steve-XtC said:


> You pedal it and it moves ... it's a bike. Then When you turn on the assist it becomes an assisted bike... I've no plans to buy one* but it's definitely a bike to me... it doesn't feel or handle anything like a motorbike


Yup, the ebikes with pedal throttles along with twist throttles that i have been on are just the same. I pedal, it moves, and then I can either use the pedal throttle or the twist-throttle to get assistance from the motor.

Not sure how much power the ebikes you've been on had, but things change when you get into the 750watt to 3000 watt range, which look just like (what i assume you have been riding) weak 250watt ones. I do have plans on buying an ebike, and from everything I have read, 250watt motors are not the way to go for anything other than light commuting.



Steve-XtC said:


> *well when I'm 65 and if my kid is still racing I'd definitely consider one so I can ride with him... if you think that would be even remotely like just using a motorbike then I'd really wonder how long you actually spent riding e-bikes ...


I think someone riding a 2500watt ebike that looks like a legal ebike is more than remotely like using a motor bike.

If your allowed to use a low powered ebike on a non-moto trail then what's going to stop someone from using a high powered 2500w ebike on that same trail?

But that's the problem with ebikes that no one on this thread has been able to dispute, and that is that *you can't easily tell how much power an ebike has by looking at it. *


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Tell me what you see in that image?


The image needs to have a 360 degree view and we need to be able to zoom in and out to see what's in that image.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

tahoebeau said:


> The image needs to have a 360 degree view and we need to be able to zoom in and out to see what's in that image.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

tahoebeau said:


> The image needs to have a 360 degree view and we need to be able to zoom in and out to see what's in that image.


And 7.1 audio


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

tahoebeau said:


> The image needs to have a 360 degree view and we need to be able to zoom in and out to see what's in that image.


Perfect response...



tahoebeau said:


> But that's the problem with ebikes that no one on this thread has been able to dispute, and that is that *you can't easily tell how much power an ebike has by looking at it. *


Good job using the posts from users like *ALimon* and *Steve-xtc* to get us back on topic and clearly demonstrate one of the main points that those for ebike access on non-motorized trails have absolutely no argument against.

Posts from members like *ALimon* make pointing out the obvious flaws with the argument that ebikes should be allowed on non-motorized trails much easier and we should be thankful they continue to respond to this thread. For example, you are 100% right about how hard it is to tell how much power an ebike has and *ALimon* did a great job of demonstrating this for all that read this thread to see.

It is not obvious how much power an ebike has, and therefore there is no realistic way to regulate ebikes by power output. Because of this indisputable fact, the best way and the way most land manager do and will control ebike access is by simply banning all motors, regardless of how much power they put out, or how the accelorator works.

That is the way it is now, and the way it will continue to be, always.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

chazpat said:


> ROTFLMAO! You've proven my point! Ebikes are going to all explode and melt down by 2020 and be gone, that's a fact! You guys are all bicycle bashers, whiners and name callers!
> 
> (thought I would try your strategy for "discussion" in this thread)


No way man, ebikes will be everywhere, you wills need one with a verification dropper to gain access to the bestest trails ever, regular mountain bikes will be banned, and world peace will ensue because unicorns!

Am I doing this right?


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

chazpat said:


> Bike?
> 
> View attachment 1188130


Looks like trendy geo to me. XD


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Zowie said:


> Looks like trendy geo to me. XD


Is that a motorized Slingshot?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

mbmb65 said:


> Is that a motorized Slingshot?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Nah, chain stays are too short.


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

mileslong said:


> And 7.1 audio


Will the volume go to 11 with or without a dongle?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

“This is the way it is now, and the way it will continue to be, always”

LMAO. Is that what your crystal ball says? 

I find it comical that you think anyone’s comments here will shape the future of ebikes. That’s very funny actually


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> "This is the way it is now, and the way it will continue to be, always"
> 
> LMAO. Is that what your crystal ball says?
> 
> I find it comical that you think anyone's comments here will shape the future of ebikes. That's very funny actually


OMG. Lol. Lmfao! Isn't that what you've been doing since you joined the site?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> "This is the way it is now, and the way it will continue to be, always"
> 
> LMAO. Is that what your crystal ball says?
> 
> I find it comical that you think anyone's comments here will shape the future of ebikes. That's very funny actually


Quite the ironic statement considering your post history in this thread.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> Quite the ironic statement considering your post history in this thread.


If you're going to give it... then be prepared to take it. Nothing ironic about it.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> That's great. I appreciate that... that's how it should be. But it you have followed along. You would have noticed that anyone with a pro ebike opinion has been met with hostility and name calling.


I have been following this thread since the OP posted it. I was one of the first to reply to it.

Anytime someone makes a personal attack that I see, I delete it. If you ever feel someone is instigating a personal attack against you, please use the report feature on the post. It is a triangular shaped icon below the Avatar.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> I have been following this thread since the OP posted it. I was one of the first to reply to it.
> 
> Anytime someone makes a personal attack that I see, I delete it. If you ever feel someone is instigating a personal attack against you, please use the report feature on the post. It is a triangular shaped icon below the Avatar.


Yeah I understand that. I don't like to report others, but maybe I should have due to the fact that I never attacked anyone until I was being ganged up on and continuesly attacked because of my views. It would be nice if everyone could share their views without some losing their self confidence and personally attacking others, but I know this isn't realistic. Some people just aren't capable, their just not mature enough. Another act of immaturity are those who give a negative reputation to those who don't share their views. What the hell is that? That's about as immature as it gets. Going forward, Ill be taking the high road, if those who don't happen to agree with my views want to go low, then go low. I really could care less, I have really thick skin and I'm not going anywhere, nor are my beliefs.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

ALimon said:


> Yeah I understand that. I don't like to report others, but maybe I should have due to the fact that I never attacked anyone until I was being ganged up on and continuesly attacked because of my views. It would be nice if everyone could share their views without some losing their self confidence and personally attacking others, but I know this isn't realistic. Some people just aren't capable, their just not mature enough. Another act of immaturity are those who give a negative reputation to those who don't share their views. What the hell is that? That's about as immature as it gets. Going forward, Ill be taking the high road, if those who don't happen to agree with my views want to go low, then go low. I really could care less, I have really thick skin and I'm not going anywhere, nor are my beliefs.


I negged you for the low of going with MLK in this thread ...then you negged me back for nothing. you are just a child and we love watching you dig a hole for yourself, but when your posts go completely sideways and you do crap like that...you are gonna get negged.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> Scroll back to the very first personal attack on this subject. You might be surprised how many personal attacks were thrown my way before I threw some back. Quit spreading fake news.


Fake news? I hope you're joking. Do you know what 'news' is? Me posting on a forum isn't it, just FYI.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> Yeah I understand that. I don't like to report others, but maybe I should have due to the fact that I never attacked anyone until I was being ganged up on and continuesly attacked because of my views. It would be nice if everyone could share their views without some losing their self confidence and personally attacking others, but I know this isn't realistic. Some people just aren't capable, their just not mature enough. Another act of immaturity are those who give a negative reputation to those who don't share their views. What the hell is that? That's about as immature as it gets. Going forward, Ill be taking the high road, if those who don't happen to agree with my views want to go low, then go low. I really could care less, I have really thick skin and I'm not going anywhere, nor are my beliefs.


Man, you really are thick. People here don't like you, not because you're an ebike advocate, but because of your shitty attitude. You're belligerent, obtuse, argumentative, condescending, and have a bizarre sense of grandeur. You joined the site, came in here preaching the virtues of electric motorcycles, and told us all how ebikes we're going to rule the world and you presented it as "fact". When called out on your bullshit, you circled around and just started over. You make claims, and then can't back them up, get called out, and again you just circle around. Your delusional, and can't see through your own ****. Half the time I don't think even you know what your saying. So yeah, it's not your views or opinions, it's your horrible attitude.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

It's obvious at this point ALimon isn't interested in dialogue, he's just trolling. 5+ pages worth so post with nothing but banter. If you stop replying to him he will eventually go away.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> Man, you really are thick. People here don't like you, not because you're an ebike advocate, but because of your shitty attitude. You're belligerent, obtuse, argumentative, condescending, and have a bizarre sense of grandeur. You joined the site, came in here preaching the virtues of electric motorcycles, and told us all how ebikes we're going to rule the world and you presented it as "fact". When called out on your bullshit, you circled around and just started over. You make claims, and then can't back them up, get called out, and again you just circle around. Your delusional, and can't see through your own ****. Half the time I don't think even you know what your saying. So yeah, it's not your views or opinions, it's your horrible attitude.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


What I can't figure out is why my opinion is such a big deal to many of you? Watching many of you lose your self confidence over a comment posted on the internet speaks volumes about your maturity. If you think my prediction of ebikes is so far fetched then why even acknowledge me? Why respond to something you don't think will ever happen.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Lemonaid said:


> It's obvious at this point ALimon isn't interested in dialogue, he's just trolling. 5+ pages worth so post with nothing but banter. If you stop replying to him he will eventually go away.
> 
> View attachment 1188357


I'll never go away..... and I'll always post my beliefs. If anyone wants to argue their point without losing their self confidence then please do so. If you can't keep your composure, then please do us all a favor and don't reply.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

^^^ Go away? Maybe? But there is always the ban hammer. And which e bike do you ride ALimon?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> What I can't figure out is why my opinion is such a big deal to many of you? Watching many of you lose your self confidence over a comment posted on the internet speaks volumes about your maturity. If you think my prediction of ebikes is so far fetched then why even acknowledge me? Why respond to something you don't think will ever happen.


You have posted more in the last few pages (maybe even the thread as a whole) than any one else, far and away. I'd say it is your self confidence that is suffering.

You are right, you know you're right and everyone who disagrees with you is attacking you personally (according to you) so why are you still posting here? That sword cuts both ways.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

I don't necessarily agree with everything ALimon has said, but he's far from being a troll. 

If he were banned, about 10-15 of you e-negatives would also be banned at the same time. 

Here's a truncated, paraphrased example of some of the stuff that has gone down in this thread:

ALimon: Ebikes are the future! Just wait! 
E-negatives: You're an idiot. 
ALimon: I'm telling you, it's gonna happen unless you live under a rock. 
E-negative: Under a rock? That was a personal attack. I think you should be banned. 
ALimon: You called me an idiot. 
E-negative: Nuh uh.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Meh, playing the martyr after everything else that has gone on isn't going to help. But by all means keep posting, you have single handedly set back emotorized access by years, if not forever.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> What I can't figure out is why my opinion is such a big deal to many of you? Watching many of you lose your self confidence over a comment posted on the internet speaks volumes about your maturity. If you think my prediction of ebikes is so far fetched then why even acknowledge me? Why respond to something you don't think will ever happen.


Again, it's not your opinion, it's that you present your opinion as fact. You can't seem to recognize that it's just that, an opinion. You're on a mountain bicycle forum, shouting the glory of emtbs and prophesying our local trails being taken over by motorized vehicles. Were you truly expecting a warm welcome? You have a terrible attitude and you're unwilling, or unable, to listen. And what's all this jib jab about self confidence?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

> self confidence


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> Again, it's not your opinion, it's that you present your opinion as fact. You can't seem to recognize that it's just that, an opinion. You're on a mountain bicycle forum, shouting the glory of emtbs and prophesying our local trails being taken over by motorized vehicles. Were you truly expecting a warm welcome? You have a terrible attitude and you're unwilling, or unable, to listen. And what's all this jib jab about self confidence?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I didn't present anything as fact, you assumed that on your own. This is a forum full of opinions. Nothing is factual. You do realize that don't ya? I am on a mountain bike forum, except you failed to realize YOU are in an ebike section of the forum!!! If you don't like talking about ebikes, or feel they don't warrant the conversation, then take it up with mtbr, attacking me in a forum you really don't belong in other than to be confrontational is asinine.

I'm not sure why you would even post in an ebike forum? You don't own an ebike nor do you intend to. For all rights and purposes you are in the wrong place buddy. I don't own a 29er, so you won't be seeing me in a niner forum criticizing anyone for riding a bike I don't own.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I'm not sure why you would even post in an ebike forum? You don't own an ebike nor do you intend to. For all rights and purposes you are in the wrong place buddy. I don't own a 29er, so you won't be seeing me in a niner forum criticizing anyone for riding a bike I don't own.


This isn't the emotorbike sub forum Einstein. The safe space is over there --------------------->. E-Bikes - Mtbr.com


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

We all know it was before klurejr moved it because of the shenanigans. Einstein huh? Always the need for a jab eh? Classy!


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I didn't present anything as fact, you assumed that on your own. This is a forum full of opinions. Nothing is factual. You do realize that don't ya? I am on a mountain bike forum, except you failed to realize YOU are in an ebike section of the forum!!! If you don't like talking about ebikes, or feel they don't warrant the conversation, then take it up with mtbr, attacking me in a forum you really don't belong in other than to be confrontational is asinine.
> 
> I'm not sure why you would even post in an ebike forum? You don't own an ebike nor do you intend to. For all rights and purposes you are in the wrong place buddy. I don't own a 29er, so you won't be seeing me in a niner forum criticizing anyone for riding a bike I don't own.


 What e bike are you currently riding?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> We all know it was before klurejr moved it because of the shenanigans. Einstein huh? Always the need for a jab eh? Classy!


Wait, because something previously was somewhere means it will always be there? Can you please inform my bank?


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Yes! *Ebikes will dominate the world*!
> 
> The case for bicycles' inevitable triumph over cars - May. 5, 2017





ALimon said:


> I didn't present anything as fact, you assumed that on your own.


To be very fair and frank. Using the word "will" in the sentence I quoted above is an example of you presenting something as a fact. If you really meant that as an opinion it might have been worded like this:

"Yes! In my opinion.... Ebikes will dominate the world!"

And then point out why the article you linked is backing up your opinion.

That said, It was pointed out that articles like the one there from CNN are speaking primarily about eBikes as a means for replacing cars and other forms of commuter transport. Not one person in this thread who has a problem with eBikes on trails has spoken out against eBikes use for commuting purposes.

If you really are just stating your opinions, post it that way and less people will jump on your opinions that are being presented as facts.....


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> We all know it was before klurejr moved it because of the shenanigans. Einstein huh? Always the need for a jab eh? Classy!


You read whatever you want into it, the fact remains that it isn't in the emotorbike sub-forum and yet here you are. Using your own words,



ALimon said:


> "For all rights and purposes you are in the wrong place buddy".


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

klurejr said:


> to be very fair and frank. Using the word "will" in the sentence i quoted above is an example of you presenting something as a fact. If you really meant that as an opinion it might have been worded like this:
> 
> "yes! In my opinion.... Ebikes will dominate the world!"
> 
> ...


qft

I am highly pro ebikes for commuting. In fact I would probably ride one myself when the time comes. The problem some people have is that they don't seem to understand the difference between ebike on the road and ebike on multi-use trail systems.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> Stick around. The E revolution is coming. You can deny it all you want. But it's still coming. It wont be long before E bikes dominate the scene, and when they do, trail access will expand. The youth and the millenials dont care what the purist think, they will have the final say in the direction mountain biking goes from here. If you haven't noticed, they do love their gadgets.


here's one


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

Zowie said:


> No way man, ebikes will be everywhere, you wills need one with a verification dropper to gain access to the bestest trails ever, regular mountain bikes will be banned, and world peace will ensue because unicorns!
> 
> Am I doing this right?


:madman::madmax:

I generally don't like to use emojis, but I'm mad as hell that I can't give you a positive reputation for this post right now.

I needed a laugh and this post made it happen in a big way!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> You read whatever you want into it, the fact remains that it isn't in the emotorbike sub-forum and yet here you are. Using your own words,


This forum originated in an ebike forum. Everyone here clicked on this topic in an ebike forum. Now go ahead and spin it however you wish.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> here's one


That comment was my opinion. I never claimed it to be fact.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> This forum originated in an ebike forum. Everyone here clicked on this topic in an ebike forum. Now go ahead and spin it however you wish.


No, they didn't. I didn't. I saw it in general. It's been in general for a long time, and it's been pointed out to you several times that it's in general, but as is typical of you, you don't get it. You're displaying your unwillingness/ inability to listen and learn, but I'm confident that you could care less. Know what I'm sayin'?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Klurejr said:


> To be very fair and frank. Using the word "will" in the sentence I quoted above is an example of you presenting something as a fact. If you really meant that as an opinion it might have been worded like this:
> 
> "Yes! In my opinion.... Ebikes will dominate the world!"
> 
> ...


Everything I post is IMO. Everything I read here I perceive as IMO. Apparently I don't take this Internet forum stuff as serious as most do. Going forward, anything I post is IMO. Keep in mind it's an opinion, nothing more. Don't take it personal. If you do, that's on you.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

ALimon said:


> I didn't present anything as fact, you assumed that on your own. This is a forum full of opinions. Nothing is factual. You do realize that don't ya? I am on a mountain bike forum, except you failed to realize YOU are in an ebike section of the forum!!! If you don't like talking about ebikes, or feel they don't warrant the conversation, then take it up with mtbr, attacking me in a forum you really don't belong in other than to be confrontational is asinine.
> 
> I'm not sure why you would even post in an ebike forum? You don't own an ebike nor do you intend to. For all rights and purposes you are in the wrong place buddy. I don't own a 29er, so you won't be seeing me in a niner forum criticizing anyone for riding a bike I don't own.


Yes, you did present your claims as fact, multiple times. Unfortunately you have failed to realize so, so much here. As far as I'm concerned, this thread started in general, where it is now, and where it's been for a LONG time. So, buddy, are they're access issues with 29" wheeled bicycles, no motors of course? That comparison is just so silly, silly boy.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

mbmb65 said:


> No, they didn't. I didn't. I saw it in general. It's been in general for a long time, and it's been pointed out to you several times that it's in general, but as is typical of you, you don't get it. You're displaying your unwillingness/ inability to listen and learn, but I'm confident that you could care less. Know what I'm sayin'?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


This thread started in Nov 2017. It was only moved two weeks ago. It's been in the ebike forum for four months. Since you didn't say IMO Are you saying that as a Fact? . I hope not, cause your facts are wrong


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> This thread started in Nov 2017. It was only moved two weeks ago. It's been in the ebike forum for four months. Since you didn't say IMO Are you saying that as a Fact? . I hope not, cause your facts are wrong


The FACT is that it's not in that forum anymore. It doesn't matter where it originated unless you think you are going to fire up the wayback machine and return it there. Stop being obtuse and you'll get along better here.


----------



## Gallo (Nov 17, 2013)

ALimon said:


> This forum originated in an ebike forum. Everyone here clicked on this topic in an ebike forum. Now go ahead and spin it however you wish.


um so i have missed much of this but it is in the general discussion. That is where I found it so...

And besides flaming everyone and anyone I did not know what your opinion was. I was too lazy and uninterested to go back on a 20 plus page thread of a subject that I could careless one way or the other.

Now I realize that you are an ebiker advocate of some kind.

You and the dude ( dude who cut trees and sabotaged a perfectly fine trail I ride) on the socal sub forum do not seem to be putting a good foot forward for the genre.

maybe think before you post or at least take a pause.

I think ebikes are cool

I dont want to buy one

I have seen them on the trail

I have no issue with them save sabotage eboy

I think that there are chill ebikers

you do not come across as one of them

i reserve to change my opinion with new information

oud


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

^IMO that tree cutting nonsense in SoCal had zero to do with having an "e" in front of "bike," and everything to do with an "e" in front of "ntitled focking douchebag." MTBers have been raping and pillaging trails to simplify their efforts and/or shave a few seconds off their PRs, long before ebikes hit the scene.


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

ALimon said:


> This forum originated in an ebike forum. Everyone here clicked on this topic in an ebike forum. Now go ahead and spin it however you wish.


Nope. I have never even looked in there. I only saw this once it was posted in general.



ALimon said:


> That comment was my opinion. I never claimed it to be fact.


You don't seem to understand what it means to state an opinion versus stating a fact. The first quote from you in this post is an example of you stating something as fact, which I know to be absolutely false beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Pretty plain to see, but I know you won't see it.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

ALimon said:


> This forum originated in an ebike forum. Everyone here clicked on this topic in an ebike forum. Now go ahead and spin it however you wish.


I didn't. I stay out of ebike forum.

you lying bag of wind you


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

I wish I could meet the mouth in person behind the keyboard. That would be interesting. For some reason I think I already know what to expect. Lol.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> The FACT is that it's not in that forum anymore. It doesn't matter where it originated unless you think you are going to fire up the wayback machine and return it there. Stop being obtuse and you'll get along better here.


So the thread is 4 1/2 months old, it was in ebikes for 4 months and that's irrelevant. Now who's being obtuse?


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

ALimon said:


> I wish I could meet the mouth in person behind the keyboard. That would be interesting. For some reason I think I already know what to expect. Lol.


keep wishing there, bromite.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> So the thread is 4 1/2 months old, it was in ebikes for 4 months and that's irrelevant. Now who's being obtuse?


You are, we're not living in past. Try and catch up will ya?


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

Why motorcycles shouldn't be allowed in MTB trails ?
Because I don't want to face a guy going uphill @ 20kmh while I'm descending my trails





(please note that these guys are going UPHILL)





Or this guy.....

Imagine you're in a twisty technical steep descent knowing that no human being is capable of climbing and you have someone on a motorcycle climbing it (without any effort I must add)

That's the reason why Motorcycles shouldn't be allowed.

PS : I saw that thread in General Discussion , I don't go over the motorcycle sub forum.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I didn't present anything as fact, you assumed that on your own. This is a forum full of opinions. Nothing is factual. You do realize that don't ya? I am on a mountain bike forum, except you failed to realize YOU are in an ebike section of the forum!!! If you don't like talking about ebikes, or feel they don't warrant the conversation, then take it up with mtbr, attacking me in a forum you really don't belong in other than to be confrontational is asinine.
> 
> I'm not sure why you would even post in an ebike forum? You don't own an ebike nor do you intend to. For all rights and purposes you are in the wrong place buddy. I don't own a 29er, so you won't be seeing me in a niner forum criticizing anyone for riding a bike I don't own.


It was pointed out to you two weeks ago that this isn't in the ebike forum:









Are you running out of troll material and having to repeat?


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

ALimon said:


> LMAO. Is that what your crystal ball says?
> I find it comical that you think anyone's comments here will shape the future of ebikes. That's very funny actually


I don't use a crystal ball, I just look at things the way they are and then post links to back up what I may say is obvious. *Your the one who has shown you can't see the things you say are obvious, so maybe a crystal ball could help you out?*

But your right, no one's comments here will change the future of ebikes, since no ones comments can change the fact that:

*-ebikes can easily be modified to bypass any speed or power restrictions*
(for example: https://www.badassebikes.com
Or https://www.electricbike.com/modified-hub-motor/ 
*people have been hotrodding ebike motors for a long time now)

*-the majority of people who buy ebikes don't buy them from shops that also sell bicycles*, but instead buy ebikes or parts like motors from places like online retailers who sell much more powerful bikes/motors than a Levo or that are not legal
(See:Why Are E-Bikes Such a Touchy Subject in the U.S.? - Page 20- Mtbr.com
and https://lunacycle.com/khs-sixfifty-680-hardtail-with-manitou-fork/
And https://reno.craigslist.org/bik/d/electric-and-gas-trikes-and/6525143974.html

*-the maximum legal power an ebike can have is 750w continuous, which can easily produce up to 1,500 watts or more* if overvolted and there are not plans at all to change this since 250w is most likely not powerful enough for us 'mericans and there are already many +250w out there in use.
https://www.electricbike.com/250-watt-hub-motor/

-and, *most importantly... it is not obvious how much power an ebike has by looking at it.* I would post a link, but it is apparent you already know that seeing how you have done a great job of proving that fact for all of us on this thread to see.

These are all facts that land managers currently use and will continue use as valid reasons to keep ebikes off the vast majority of non-motorized trails in the US.

Speaking of posting links, what links have you posted regarding ebikes off-road? Some article about ebikes vs cars for commuting that you got very excited about. *Really, that's all you got? Looks like you need to shine that crystal ball you've been using to get your information*


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

I can give you 100 reasons why ebikes will dominate the future. You can give me 100 reasons why they won’t. This conversation WILL NOT have any affect on what happens in the future. So kick and scream all you want. It’s pointless really.

Part of me gets a good chuckle listening to you guys get all worked up over a conversation on the internet.... the other part of me can’t believe how serious you take this internet crap. It’s mind boggling. Hehe.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> It was pointed out to you two weeks ago that this isn't in the ebike forum
> 
> Are you running out of troll material and having to repeat?


Then why were you in this thread when it was in an ebike forum?


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

ALimon said:


> Part of me gets a good chuckle listening to you guys get all worked up over a conversation on the internet.... the other part of me can't believe how serious you take this internet crap. It's mind boggling. Hehe.


This is exactly why many mountain bikers are hesitant/venomously opposed to allowing e-bikes on all mountain bike trails. Well, two reasons, actually. First is the increase in speeds on the up hills, and with more powerful motors, increased speed everywhere. Second is this apparent lack of comprehension from many e-bikers that this is a huge can of worms from a trail access perspective for mountain bikes. It has taken many places decades to fight for access to trails only to watch the rise of e-motorcycles threaten that hard work with unenforceable wattage limits and difficult-to-differentiate-from-real-mountain-bikes aesthetics.

Believe me, most people aren't taking you seriously. They are taking their trails seriously.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Then why were you in this thread when it was in an ebike forum?


As I mentioned before, there are other ebikers around here that are capable of having actual discussions about ebikes, some that I agree with and some I don't. Go read my posts in this thread before you entered and turned this into a PeeWee Herman "I know you are but what am I" exchange.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> As I mentioned before, there are other ebikers around here that are capable of having actual discussions about ebikes, some that I agree with and some I don't. Go read my posts in this thread before you entered and turned this into a PeeWee Herman "I know you are but what am I" exchange.


I'm perfectly capable of having a conversation about ebikes, buy some here have proven they aren't capable without losing their self confidence. One person can't turn anything into this pee wee **** show without the help of others. Most here have played a part. I've read other threads from the past and have seen the attacks and language used on other pro e bikers.... Not cool.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

ALimon said:


> I can give you 100 reasons why ebikes will dominate the future. You can give me 100 reasons why they won't. This conversation WILL NOT have any affect on what happens in the future. So kick and scream all you want. It's pointless really.
> 
> Part of me gets a good chuckle listening to you guys get all worked up over a conversation on the internet.... the other part of me can't believe how serious you take this internet crap. It's mind boggling. Hehe.


I don't have any doubts ebikes will dominate the bike commuter crowd in the future, is that what your arguing?
However, your reasons regarding ebikes on non-motorized trails only involve what you guess or believe will happen *which is why you keep getting called out by the moderators for using words like "will" without any facts to support anything you say.*
Unlike you, I state facts with links to back them up showing why ebikes are currently banned from non-motorized trails and why it will stay that way.

Here is a challenge for you, try posting facts instead of your beliefs and include links to support your facts in your next post. But, that's hard to do with your side of the argument so I understand if you can't.

As far as getting worked up over this conversation, you should go take a look at how times you have posted on this thread and the frequency. It is obvious to all that your very concerned about what other post here and that you think about this thread all day long. Also, seeing all the explanation points you have used in your posts let's us know that we are getting to you and your getting worked up over it.

Well, I am going to go ride some pow. You have fun getting all worked up thinking about this thread all day long. Seeing how many posts you have, I know it's really important to you, so I am sure you will make time to have several posts about things you want to be true, but can't find any links to support. :thumbsup:


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

ALimon said:


> I'm perfectly capable of having a conversation about ebikes, buy some here have proven they aren't capable without losing their self confidence. One person can't turn anything into this pee wee **** show without the help of others. Most here have played a part. I've read other threads from the past and have seen the attacks and language used on other pro e bikers.... Not cool.


you don't seem to get it....Alimon...

this thread is no longer about ebikes.

it stopped being about ebikes over a week ago.

This thread is now, 100% about,

what sort of thing is Alimon gonna say next.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND ???

it is now your own little private thread,

and we are all watching or simply ignoring you

as you dig deeper and deeper.....

and we all just wonder when this thread will dry up and blow away.

you can maybe make a new thread, in e-bike forum, as a platform to impress us all, on your command of all things e-bikes.

but in this thread, that time has passed.

-----------------------------

Unless you can pull a Noam Chomsky on us, and display a sure command of the english language and post up something brilliant that makes us all gasp, this thread ain't doing anyone any good.

You hijacked it, you correct it.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

127.0.0.1 said:


> This thread is now, 100% about,
> 
> what sort of thing is Alimon gonna say next.


Must be a bad bot.

Gotos gone wild, repeating himself over and over...


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I'm perfectly capable of having a conversation about ebikes, buy some here have proven they aren't capable without losing their self confidence. One person can't turn anything into this pee wee **** show without the help of others. Most here have played a part. I've read other threads from the past and have seen the attacks and language used on other pro e bikers.... Not cool.


 Which e bike do you ride? Going to skip answering this one again?


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

I think this has run its course. Thank you.


----------

