# To get around the e-bikes on non motorized trail



## outlaws (Aug 26, 2008)

Just occurred to me someone should make them so we can use the motor to climb on fireroad and have a "quick release" to take out the motor while descending. That should make ebikes legal then  How feasible would that be?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

It's already been done






https://www.ego-kits.com/portfolio/doubleego/


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

I think they are going to need to add trails to existing networks to accommodate the in-flux of e-bikers and make one-way single-tracks. Trails should be specifically designed for up and down. This is better for all trail users in general. If anyone has been to Dirtiest at Pennsylvania's tight and fast Allegrippis trails they know the importance of using one-way trails to avoid problems with riders of vastly different abilities riding at the same time. 
Its the easiest solution - more trails.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ddockray said:


> I think they are going to need to add trails to existing networks to accommodate the in-flux of e-bikers and make one-way single-tracks. Trails should be specifically designed for up and down. This is better for all trail users in general. If anyone has been to Dirtiest at Pennsylvania's tight and fast Allegrippis trails they know the importance of using one-way trails to avoid problems with riders of vastly different abilities riding at the same time.
> Its the easiest solution - more trails.


Who is "they"?


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

They -would be anyone who designs trail networks. 
BLM, IMBA, the people that wrote the GQTE. 
This e-bike thing needs to be addressed from the top down with viable solutions.
The simplest win win for everyone is just more trails. you got any better ideas? 
Trying to keep pedal assist bikes off the MTB trails is not going to work.

Have another cup off coffee and think about the whole snowboarding skiing thing and how it took 15 years for everyone to integrate and how the skiers are now thanking the snowboarders for without them the core sport of skiing would be never be where it is today. Same goes for surfing and windsurfing then windsurfing and kitesurfing. What I have come to realize is that the new sports are making the old sports even stronger. E-bikes should help the MTB industry stay strong through what is decidedly a middle/lower class depression- at least here in the US.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

1). Nobody is responsible for accomodating e-bikes except e-bikers and e-bike manufacturers.

2). It's the motor on the climbs that is the main concern, and motors aren't necessary on the descents, so a quick-release motor solves a non-issue. 

3) More trails would be great, but e-bikes just aren't popular enough for most places to add new trails with e-bikes in mind. Unless they are already considering adding more trails.

4) One way trails would be worth considering for many trails, even without e-bikes. I could get on board with that one on some trails. However, limiting riding options for everyone for the sake of a few e-bikers is not an acceptable response on trails that can be appreciated both ways. Alternating directions every other day could be a decent compromise.


----------



## Loch (Apr 29, 2011)

outlaws said:


> Just occurred to me someone should make them so we can use the motor to climb on fireroad and have a "quick release" to take out the motor while descending. That should make ebikes legal then  How feasible would that be?


Nope. The solution is E-Shorts.

Think about it.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ddockray said:


> They -would be anyone who designs trail networks.
> BLM, IMBA, the people that wrote the GQTE.
> This e-bike thing needs to be addressed from the top down with viable solutions.
> The simplest win win for everyone is just more trails. you got any better ideas?
> ...


 What? Motorized vehicles are already classified on almost all trail systems. E bikes are not mt bikes. They are something different. And need to treated as such. More trails? Start digging.


----------



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

While they're at it they should probably build some more forests too.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

^^^ I got a map of the forest.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

So WTF happens to those of us not lazy people who actually enjoy climbing technical single track, not everyone is a lazy fockerwho only sees the ups as ways to get to the downs, if you want that, go to a frikin bike park and use the lifts.



ddockray said:


> I think they are going to need to add trails to existing networks to accommodate the in-flux of e-bikers and make one-way single-tracks. Trails should be specifically designed for up and down. This is better for all trail users in general. If anyone has been to Dirtiest at Pennsylvania's tight and fast Allegrippis trails they know the importance of using one-way trails to avoid problems with riders of vastly different abilities riding at the same time.
> Its the easiest solution - more trails.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Harryman said:


> Who is "they"?


"Someone besides me", of course.
If wishes were e-bikes, beggars would ride.

ddockray - how about YOU get some e-bike folks together and build all these new trails? Why do you expect others to do your work for you?

Ski analogy is silly - you've got no motors in your equation.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

leeboh said:


> ^^^ I got a map of the forest.


But is it of the "whole" forest?


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ddockray said:


> They -would be anyone who designs trail networks.
> BLM, IMBA, the people that wrote the GQTE.
> This e-bike thing needs to be addressed from the top down with viable solutions.
> The simplest win win for everyone is just more trails. you got any better ideas?
> ...


I've glanced through the GQTE; I'm pretty sure there's no mention of e-bikes.

So far, the BLM classifies e-bikes as motorized vehicles. If they're smart they'll leave it that way.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

leeboh said:


> What? Motorized vehicles are already classified on almost all trail systems. E bikes are not mt bikes. They are something different. And need to treated as such. *More trails? Start writing letters.*


fify


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

LyNx said:


> So WTF happens to those of us not lazy people who actually enjoy climbing technical single track, not everyone is a lazy fockerwho only sees the ups as ways to get to the downs, if you want that, go to a frikin bike park and use the lifts.


Seriously.

Why should my favorite uphill trail be re-designated to DH only?

So a few e-bikers can ride up the service roads and down without breaking any laws?


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

Le Duke said:


> Seriously.
> 
> Why should my favorite uphill trail be re-designated to DH only?
> 
> So a few e-bikers can ride up the service roads and down without breaking any laws?


Ill tell you why,

If you are grooving up your favorite climb and someone is coming down... anyone, flow is disturbed. if everyone is moving in the same direction the amount of passing is reduced big time and problems are avoided. one-way trails don't have to be one-way all the time. every six months or whatever they can switch the direction to keep it feeling fresh.

I am talking about well-managed, busy trail systems and solutions for the future.

Also an e-bike begs you to seek out the most technical terrain ridable. So a radical technical accent would be preferred over something smooth.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ddockray said:


> Ill tell you why,
> 
> If you are grooving up your favorite climb and someone is coming down... anyone, flow is disturbed. if everyone is moving in the same direction the amount of passing is reduced big time and problems are avoided. one-way trails don't have to be one-way all the time. every six months or whatever they can switch the direction to keep it feeling fresh.
> 
> ...


Yielding riders solve these issues, so it's really a non-issue. And as far as tech, I never see these things on anything more tech than the bike paths that the Hobo's are pan handling on.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

leeboh said:


> What? Motorized vehicles are already classified on almost all trail systems. E bikes are not mt bikes. They are something different. And need to treated as such. More trails? Start digging.


The low power electric assist class 1 is a new type of bicycle that falls into the same category of official vehicle classification and laws for a bicycle because of its obvious similarity and limitations. you really think maintaining a 5mph speed up a hill is going to alter the spin of the earth? you guys are stuck on semantics as well as forgetting that the law is the law even if you don't agree. Like there is no use bitching anymore about how a corporation is not a person in the US, even if thats patently and obviously false imo, i have to just shut up and deal with it.


----------



## ghoti (Mar 23, 2011)

I'm all for one way trails though this isn't really the point of this thread. I'm surprised at the number of dumb fockers pushing their bike up some single tracks. Maybe that should tell those morons something and that they should take the long fireroads or single tracks to get to the top. Sure it's 3x as long but the gradient is also 3x less so you can actually ride up them. 

As for ebikes, I rarely see them trying to go up steep gradients. They'll just ride the same fireroad/single track to get to the top. Sure it's at a much faster rate but just suck up your ego and admit you can't match e-bikes.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ddockray said:


> The low power electric assist class 1 is a new type of bicycle that falls into the same category of official vehicle classification and laws for a bicycle because of its obvious similarity and limitations. you really think maintaining a 5mph speed up a hill is going to alter the spin of the earth? you guys are stuck on semantics as well as forgetting that the law is the law even if you don't agree. Like there is no use bitching anymore about how a corporation is not a person in the US, even if thats patently and obviously false imo, i have to just shut up and deal with it.


Not sure what state you're in but in California an "electric bicycle" meeting Classes 1, 2 or 3 is not a "bicycle" but an "electric bicycle".

A legal definition.

And in California those electric bicycles can be 750 watts and can easily go uphill at triple the speed of mere mortals. Yes this does change the spin of things.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

LyNx said:


> So WTF happens to those of us not lazy people who actually enjoy climbing technical single track, not everyone is a lazy fockerwho only sees the ups as ways to get to the downs, if you want that, go to a frikin bike park and use the lifts.


You got me all wrong brother, i ride hard and fast XC at least twice a week and i do other sports regularly. This bike is instead of riding DH or motox. This bike is for riding all day, consecutively, bikepacking through the wilderness from town to town, or riding to a friends house for fun without getting real sweaty. I wanna search out the nastiest climbs around that nobody does. we already found some and it was ridiculously fun to ride up trails that you would never-ever bother riding. You are in Barbados right? you know ells and simon.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

im in Pa but the law is the same i think,

New e-bike law passes in California | PeopleForBikes

3x faster? no its not like that, you have to ride one. they really don't have much more power than you do so twice as fast would be the max. its really nice to maintain a base speed and heart rate and just ride concentrating on the terrain and the environment. its sweet, there is nothing here not to like. taking some of the pain out of mountain biking is not a bad thing.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

In all New England states, e-bikes are classified as motor vehicles as far as trail access. 
So make sure to be consistent with the message that everyone in this corner of the country should accept the law as is and not complain about it, right?


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ddockray said:


> 3x faster? no its not like that, you have to ride one.


I do ride one and it is like that. I am in Calif. so 750W applies.

I'm not going to waste my time or anybody else's time but I can dig out plenty of Strava segments to prove my point.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Why do so many people argue over what a assist bike is? 30 years ago my neighbor had a 49cc moped that you would have to pedal to get up any sort of hill. Sound familiar. An e-bike is to a moped what a prius is to a corolla.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ddockray said:


> im in Pa but the law is the same i think,
> 
> New e-bike law passes in California | PeopleForBikes
> 
> 3x faster? no its not like that, you have to ride one. they really don't have much more power than you do so twice as fast would be the max. its really nice to maintain a base speed and heart rate and just ride concentrating on the terrain and the environment. its sweet, there is nothing here not to like. taking some of the pain out of mountain biking is not a bad thing.


Here ya go if you want to read up on it, there's no class distinctions like in CA, and like most places, e-mtb access is dependent on who is managing the ground and what they've decided.

Electric Bicycles | PeopleForBikes

Regular Session 2013-2014 Senate Bill 0997 P.N. 1177

PENNSYLVANIA BICYCLE LAWS | Borough of State College Government


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

WTF. This is Stupid. How do you get your motor back?
Go to a bike park with a chairlift. Problem solved.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

rlee said:


> Why do so many people argue over what a assist bike is? 30 years ago my neighbor had a 49cc moped that you would have to pedal to get up any sort of hill. Sound familiar. An e-bike is to a moped what a prius is to a corolla.


The biggest technical difference is a moped has an automatic transmission.

i think if any ebike has an automatic transmission then it is technically a moped in the eyes of the US government. Some day soon the bike manufactures will offer automatic shifting with the advent of e-shifting so more laws will probably need to be redefined to avoid unnessesary licensing.

The question still open in my mind is, when is a bike not a bike. 
Hmmm I think the answer is when it doesn't feel like a regular bike anymore. A class 1 ebike still feels like a bike, ok, a bike that came "back from the future" but still a bike. If it had twice the power and there was no need to apply reasonable pressure to the pedals it would be stupid and i wouldn't ride it. like mopeds are stupid imo and so are prius s'. i think electric cars are stupid because they really don't offer any major benefit to the driving experience and cost a lot extra.

the ebike is different, case in point..

last night i set it to turbo mode (which is hardly ever needed on a regular MTB ride) and went for a sunset ride around town. Just cruising in top gear on the backroads, flip-flops, no helmet, easy breezy. 20mph is not fast on the road, if i pedaled as much as i wanted to i hit the limiter quickly so i had to back off to a very mellow pace. it was so beautiful to be out. Normally i would never do this, even if i hadn't had a beer. I came home, had another beer, then went out again. Cruised all around, climbed a few big hills just for fun, went to the strip mall, got two slices, rode home no hands most way holding my pizza box (the bike is so stable) with no sweat and no car. It really does open up so many possibilities and allow for some unique and wonderful experiences on a bike.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

Harryman said:


> Here ya go if you want to read up on it, there's no class distinctions like in CA, and like most places, e-mtb access is dependent on who is managing the ground and what they've decided.
> 
> There are class distinctions and they put ebikes in the same class as bicycles in the eyes of the PA state government. they are already renting them for use in the local parks and paths and nobody cares because its not annoying or hurting anyone and its fun and if any "land manger" is going to try to go above the law and declare that no one is allowed to ride ebikes on "his" land, then he is bike nazi.
> 
> ...


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

Moe Ped said:


> I do ride one and it is like that. I am in Calif. so 750W applies.
> 
> I'm not going to waste my time or anybody else's time but I can dig out plenty of Strava segments to prove my point.


which ebike do you have that puts out 750w?


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ddockray said:


> which ebike do you have that puts out 750w?


Of recent; I have 3 different kits from Luna:

Bafang BBS02 which is nominal 750W stock, has not been hotrodded. PAS and throttle. They are sold as being Calif. legal.

Cyclone Mini 2KW haven't played with it much but my plans are to make it legal via controller settings. PAS and throttle.

Cyclone 3KW which with my current battery setup is about 1.9KW. PAS and throttle but mostly use throttle. A definite moped unless I dial back the controller.​
What's interesting is how these ratings are created; they're what the controller is taking from the battery, not what the motor is putting out to the wheel. My experience is that there are considerable losses in the system; I'm guessing 70% efficient at best.

They are also all cadence-sensing PAS; much harder to use on the dirt than are the torque-sensing PAS designs. There's no way the 750W Bafang can keep up with a 250W Levo on twisty single-track in PAS mode. Using the hand throttle yes.

One of the reasons I've been using Strava e-bike is to set a baseline for e-bike segments in the park; anything that beats my time on the climbs is not a legal Class 1 or 2 (or 3). Curiously the strong Levo riders can give my 1.9KW Cyclone a good run for the money; makes me wonder if there are already "cheats" being utilized. Most of the Levo riders are Specialized employees; the headquarters being just down the road so to speak and they use Coe as a proving ground.

Also I suspect most of the current bikes from the major manufactures are conservatively rated, it would take a laboratory setup to separate true motor output from the total electrical and human input.

Regardless, on Coe's climbs e-bikes are often 3X faster than the average MTBer.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

ddockray said:


> The biggest technical difference is a moped has an automatic transmission.
> 
> i think if any ebike has an automatic transmission then it is technically a moped in the eyes of the US government. Some day soon the bike manufactures will offer automatic shifting with the advent of e-shifting so more laws will probably need to be redefined to avoid unnessesary licensing.
> 
> ...


 So now drinking and driving on city streets is okay?


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

Moe Ped said:


> Not sure what state you're in but in California an "electric bicycle" meeting Classes 1, 2 or 3 is not a "bicycle" but an "electric bicycle".
> 
> A legal definition.


Yes, a legal definition pertaining to class 1, 2 and 3 bike lanes.

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist1/d1projects/manila-atp/bikeways_explained.pdf


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

Moe Ped said:


> Of recent; I have 3 different kits from Luna:
> 
> Bafang BBS02 which is nominal 750W stock, has not been hotrodded. PAS and throttle. They are sold as being Calif. legal.
> 
> ...


Thanks Moe good info, you are definitely on top of it. i thought about doing those kits but wow is was like 2k to outfit an old bike and we have log-overs everywhere so i waited for the something like the levo. 750w is a lot of power. i imagine if the speed limiter is set at 20 there is not much point having that much power. Be cool someday if specialized would allow you to go 28 mph when on the road with a levo. should be a simple app to allow the software change when you are obviously traveling on a road as per gps tracker.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

singletrackmack said:


> Yes, a legal definition pertaining to class 1, 2 and 3 bike lanes.


If you're trying to be funny your humor is lost on me. Sorry. California electric bicycle Class 1, 2 and 3 have very little to do with Class I, II and III bike lanes.

What's your point?


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ddockray said:


> Thanks Moe good info, you are definitely on top of it. i thought about doing those kits but wow is was like 2k to outfit an old bike and we have log-overs everywhere so i waited for the something like the levo. 750w is a lot of power. i imagine if the speed limiter is set at 20 there is not much point having that much power. Be cool someday if specialized would allow you to go 28 mph when on the road with a levo. should be a simple app to allow the software change when you are obviously traveling on a road as per gps tracker.


For $1K you can have nice mid-drive kit with a good battery. For $2K you can put that kit on a pretty fair brand new hardtail.

750W is about right for mixing it up with car traffic (city driving) or climbing 30% grades (trails). Also matters if one weighs 150# or 300#. 250W is the gateway drug. The USA e-bike lobby knows what they're doing.

Specialized Turbo S models already go 28 mph.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

rlee said:


> So now drinking and driving on city streets is okay?


Yes it is ok and totally legal in the USA for anyone 21 or older weighing more than say 150lbs can have a couple beers within an hr and drive or ride.

i rode my bike to a restaurant, had two beers with dinner then rode home.
is that ok with you pal?


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

alexbn921 said:


> WTF. This is Stupid. How do you get your motor back?
> Go to a bike park with a chairlift. Problem solved.


i think he meant not to remove the motor from the bike (like it sounds) but to
disengage the motor completely from the regular drive train. 
The levo motor disengages automatically and seamlessly and most others do too. non-issue. if you want to ride the levo at a DH bike park, just drop the battery and go.

the ego video is cool but when he removes the motor he doesn't ride with two batteries and a motor in his pack. that is not feasible. he leaves the pack at the top of the mountain, takes a run regular, then comes back up on the lift. he still has to ride down later with the whole ebike.

I'm thinking that once batteries have more power that many people will spend money on an e-bike rather than a dedicated DH bike and chairlift tickets. I have one friend already saying his next "extra" bike will be an e-bike as he just can't justify spending another 5-6k on a DH bike used only 5 weekends a year.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)




----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

The bikeway class system has everything to do with the ebike clase system. How do you think they came up with the language?

Also:

"This new law means that riding an electric bicycle on bikeways is no longer illegal in California"

"This new law, effective January 1, 2016, only applies to Class I, II, III, and IV bikeways in California"

"State, county and city parks are managed outside of the vehicle code, just as the federal land management agencies. "Bicycle path or trail, equestrian trail, or hiking or recreational trail" is commonly used in the Vehicle Code, and is the preferred way to discuss path/trail access, even for paved or soft-surface bikeways."

And this is a neat little chart. Don't see anything about dirt singletrack on there. Strange.


----------



## sunderland56 (Aug 27, 2009)

ddockray said:


> if you want to ride the levo at a DH bike park, just drop the battery and go.


So if I take my XR250 to a bike park, can I do the trails as long as I don't start the motor? With the transmission in neutral, the engine is completely disengaged from the drive train. Just think of it as a big heavy stride bike.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ddockray said:


> 750w is a lot of power. i imagine if the speed limiter is set at 20 there is not much point having that much power. Be cool someday if specialized would allow you to go 28 mph when on the road with a levo. should be a simple app to allow the software change when you are obviously traveling on a road as per gps tracker.


Even if people observe and don't tamper with the software speed limiters, a 750w bike would have more torque so could be quicker, quicker out of corners, quicker back up to whatever top speed you could manage on that section of trail. The weight penalty will only be a couple of pounds, which on a 48lb ebike isn't the end of the world.

I can see there being a diversification in emtb models moving forward, with some focused on being lightwieght and tailored for providing minimal assist and extended range for the explorers and higher power, more burly for the go fast guys. Especially, since in the US, there's more power to be had legally.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

singletrackmack said:


> The bikeway class system has everything to do with the ebike clase system. How do you think they came up with the language?
> 
> Also:
> 
> ...


Sorry dude; you are wrong, wrong and wrong.

You are quoting a wishful thinking group that was promoting a different piece of legislation (that was only about bike path and bike lane) that wasn't passed by the state legislature.

AB-1096 that was signed into law says this in 21207.5 (b) "The local authority or governing body of a public agency having jurisdiction over a bicycle path or trail, equestrian trail, or hiking or recreational trail, may prohibit, by ordinance, the operation of a class 1 or class 2 electric bicycle on that path or trail."


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

ddockray said:


> Thanks Moe good info, you are definitely on top of it. i thought about doing those kits but wow is was like 2k to outfit an old bike and we have log-overs everywhere so i waited for the something like the levo. 750w is a lot of power. i imagine if the speed limiter is set at 20 there is not much point having that much power. Be cool someday if specialized would allow you to go 28 mph when on the road with a levo. should be a simple app to allow the software change when you are obviously traveling on a road as per gps tracker.


My Turbo S does that precisely.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

sunderland56 said:


> So if I take my XR250 to a bike park, can I do the trails as long as I don't start the motor? With the transmission in neutral, the engine is completely disengaged from the drive train. Just think of it as a big heavy stride bike.


Good question, but nobody does that because its not worth doing. You know that going downhill on a full size dirt bike is not fun.

Hey if its fun people would already be doing it.

Ever heard of a downhill motorcycle race? no? me either.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Moe Ped said:


> Sorry dude; you are wrong, wrong and wrong.
> 
> You are quoting a wishful thinking group that was promoting a different piece of legislation (that was only about bike path and bike lane) that wasn't passed by the state legislature.
> 
> AB-1096 that was signed into law says this in 21207.5 (b) "The local authority or governing body of a public agency having jurisdiction over a bicycle path or trail, equestrian trail, or hiking or recreational trail, may prohibit, by ordinance, the operation of a class 1 or class 2 electric bicycle on that path or trail."


FYI - Link to the actual law for those who want some light bedtime reading:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1096


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

alexbn921 said:


> WTF. This is Stupid. How do you get your motor back?
> Go to a bike park with a chairlift. Problem solved.


Not everyone lives near a bike park

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Klurejr said:


> FYI - Link to the actual law for those who want some light bedtime reading:
> https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1096


Yeah I was just re-reading the part in forum rules about posting links to laws/regulations so quoted and was thinking "ooops" I need to do that more often (like here specifically).

Thanks for beating me to it.

I'm thinking another thread RE the People for Bikes group and how folks are still finding and using their 2 year old (and incorrect) blog posts as the gospel truth for the interpretation of AB-1096. I suspect their interpretation of other states may be similarly incorrect. It pays to do one's own research.

I believe their latest info for CA is correct.

From that _"STATE: In California State Parks, where bicycles are allowed, Class 1 and Class 2
electric bicycles may be allowed as long as they're not specifically called out as
prohibited. Contact California State Parks for more information"_


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Moe Ped said:


> Yeah I was just re-reading the part in forum rules about posting links to laws/regulations so quoted and was thinking "ooops" I need to do that more often (like here specifically).
> 
> Thanks for beating me to it.


No problem, in many places it would not be an issue. But here in the e-Bike forum there is so much vitriol on both sides all claims need to be backed up with some sort of proof. Plus that one was easy to find myself. ;-)


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

Harryman said:


> It's already been done
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wow 3500 watts peak power and 1700watt nominal? That is insane.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

ddockray said:


> ...
> The simplest win win for everyone is just more trails. you got any better ideas?
> Trying to keep pedal assist bikes off the MTB trails is not going to work.
> ....


Not any easy solution at all. The easiest solution is ban all bikes and don't think the land managers won't consider that if there are too many user conflicts and ileagal poaching. The first solution is to put up signs and hope e-bike riders comply. If they don't and there are trail conflicts it gets ugly. Banning all bikes is easiest way to solve that problem. That is what I don't want to see happen.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

JoePAz said:


> Not any easy solution at all. The easiest solution is ban all bikes and don't think the land managers won't consider that if there are too many user conflicts and ileagal poaching. The first solution is to put up signs and hope e-bike riders comply. If they don't and there are trail conflicts it gets ugly. Banning all bikes is easiest way to solve that problem. That is what I don't want to see happen.


I see your point but a total ban on bikes is not a real solution and if any land/park manager thinks its easier to ban bikes than to do his job and come up with creative solutions, then he's stubborn, lazy, and should be replaced with an unbiased manager who cares about all types of trail users. Adding an extra trail here or there each year to spread out traffic in busy sections is no big deal. Lets not pretend it is.

Think about the old horse and buggy days when motor cars were starting to become popular, I'm sure there were many mayors and officials who wanted to ban cars in their town and only have horses, walking and bikes. We all know what happened. you can't stop progress and they built more roads.

Freedom comes with responsibility. Everyone must be responsible for themselves and care and respect the freedom of others or some day we will lose all the freedom that we have if we no longer trust people to be humane.

If i did not know better, i could never imagine a modern highway system like we have today where cars are passing each other at 70 mph just a couple feet away. I can't believe there are not more head-on collisions? Sure there are accidents and people die everyday but the cost is minor compared to the benefit the vast majority of people enjoy from the freedom of driving.

We have to trust each other to be cool or we will lose our humanity in a compartmentalized world of rules. There is a reason New Hampshire's license plate says "Live free or die", because without freedom, there is no hope, and no reason to live.

"Ride free or die"!


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ddockray said:


> I see your point but a total ban on bikes is not a real solution and if any land/park manager thinks its easier to ban bikes than to do his job and come up with creative solutions, then he's stubborn, lazy, and should be replaced with an unbiased manager who cares about all types of trail users. Adding an extra trail here or there each year to spread out traffic in busy sections is no big deal. Lets not pretend it is.
> 
> Think about the old horse and buggy days when motor cars were starting to become popular, I'm sure there were many mayors and officials who wanted to ban cars in their town and only have horses, walking and bikes. We all know what happened. you can't stop progress and they built more roads.
> 
> ...


Your post has some merit and points worth discussing but is off-topic and likely we'll be saying "goodbye" after the moderator reads it. This thread is about motor systems you take off of the bike when you get to your destination. If you want to discuss the transition from horse and buggy to automobiles you should start another thread (maybe even in the General or Off-Camber forums)

Or maybe I'll start another thread as a memorial to you.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

Moe Ped said:


> Your post has some merit and points worth discussing but is off-topic and likely we'll be saying "goodbye" after the moderator reads it. This thread is about motor systems you take off of the bike when you get to your destination. If you want to discuss the transition from horse and buggy to automobiles you should start another thread (maybe even in the General or Off-Camber forums)
> 
> Or maybe I'll start another thread as a memorial to you.


I hear ya Moe, and thanks for the heads up. You know where I'm coming from so this is for anyone else...

It seems every topic relating to ebikes morphs into a discussion of politics eventually. Until some of the dividing issues are settled, the legal issues and peoples vision of the future of ebikes will always be in the center of the conversation.

If the moderator(s) looks look back i just brought the thread back to the original topic, answered some questions and added a few ideas. I responded to someone who responded to me. If there is a problem then i don't see it. i think all the nay-sayers are getting stuck on the whole "if it has a motor and the trail sign says no motorized vehicles, then its cut and dried, but its not, not any more. These are just words they used before and now things are changing and the signs must be updated to reflect the new paradigm.

Its not as simple as "no motors on the trail" anymore. I bring this idea up because this premise is the basis for the whole thread and many others.

I said my peace here and now I'm going to go live my life. 
Ride on boyz and girlz.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ddockray said:


> Its not as simple as "no motors on the trail" anymore.


Actually, it is.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

Harryman said:


> Even if people observe and don't tamper with the software speed limiters, a 750w bike would have more torque so could be quicker, quicker out of corners, quicker back up to whatever top speed you could manage on that section of trail. The weight penalty will only be a couple of pounds, which on a 48lb ebike isn't the end of the world.
> 
> I can see there being a diversification in emtb models moving forward, with some focused on being lightwieght and tailored for providing minimal assist and extended range for the explorers and higher power, more burly for the go fast guys. Especially, since in the US, there's more power to be had legally.


I totally agree. As the North American market develops i can imagine companies like Trek/Specialized/giant/scott coming out with a DH bike that will take full advantage of 750watts and more XC oriented bikes with superior range and efficiency. Probably on the drawling board already.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

ddockray said:


> Its not as simple as "no motors on the trail" anymore. I bring this idea up because this premise is the basis for the whole thread and many others.


Distilling it down to this we have something to talk about. It can be as simple as "no motors on the trail" as long as some lobby doesn't hire slick lawyers to to write a piece of legislation proclaiming "electric bicycles are not motor vehicles".

So in California they did and e-bike access is very complicated; IMHO the legislation is but a smokescreen to allow the devices to become thoroughly entrenched. Further legislation is sure to follow to clarify the issue. Even mandated as it now falls on local governments to decide about e-bike access. What could have been 1 simple law in Sacramento will now be thousands of new laws across the state. I digress.

So does the sign at the trail head say "no electric bicycles" or "no riding of electric bicycles"?

To the point of removing a motor to make it legal, an analogy is in the subtle difference between "no bikes" and "no bike riding"---one implies possession and the other implies use. It's been used here before; does taking apart a handgun no longer make it a firearm? (Try that in your carry-on luggage!)

So much gray area becomes B&W when the ranger writes a ticket.


----------



## ddockray (May 6, 2009)

Moe Ped said:


> Distilling it down to this we have something to talk about. It can be as simple as "no motors on the trail" as long as some lobby doesn't hire slick lawyers to to write a piece of legislation proclaiming "electric bicycles are not motor vehicles".
> 
> So in California they did and e-bike access is very complicated; IMHO the legislation is but a smokescreen to allow the devices to become thoroughly entrenched. Further legislation is sure to follow to clarify the issue. Even mandated as it now falls on local governments to decide about e-bike access. What could have been 1 simple law in Sacramento will now be thousands of new laws across the state. I digress.
> 
> ...


If that rangers name is Slapheadmofo you are going to be in for a world of hurt. hahaha.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

ddockray said:


> I see your point but a total ban on bikes is not a real solution and if any land/park manager thinks its easier to ban bikes than to do his job and come up with creative solutions, then he's stubborn, lazy, and should be replaced with an unbiased manager who cares about all types of trail users. Adding an extra trail here or there each year to spread out traffic in busy sections is no big deal. Lets not pretend it is.


90% of the time Land Managers are goverment employees. They don't care about mountian bikers, they only care about making their lives easy and not causing problems. In my state we have a lot of trails already 99% are two way multiuse trails. There are places building new trails, but you are naive if you think these city, country, state and federal land managers won't default to what is easy and ban all bikes if there are too many complaints. They don't want to police e-bikes vs regular bikes. They don't want to make it hard and 99% don't have money to build trails and just barely enough to maintain. It would take a strong government lobbying effort have them create more new trails. They best we could hope for is not closing all trails. So instead of having 95% of trails open to bikes as we do now we might get 35% re-opened.

Currently e-bikes are banned on motorized trails since.. guess what.. They have a motor. I have yet to see an ebike poaching trails, but I do know people that have. If these guys stay "under the radar" and don't mess with hikers and other trail users we might be fine. However if they start doing stupid stuff and making all mtn bikers look bad it will not be good. I bet most casual hikers could not tell and e-bike from a regular bike, but all that means is that we all get blamed. When I pass hikers on the trail I am always as friendly as possible just to do my best to leave a good impression that we all can get along.

As for cars and horse and buggy... This is very different since I am not talking about using bikes for transportation. They are use for going around in circles. e-bikes have place as alternative to cars or regular bikes for commuters. I see great possibilities for use as transportation, but using them as fun machines is simply not the same and comparison to cars is simply wrong. Cars replaces horse and buggy because it became clear over time that it was a better way to get from point A to point B. 99% of mtn biking is from point A looping around back to point A.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

JoePAz said:


> As for cars and horse and buggy... This is very different since I am not talking about using bikes for transportation. They are use for going around in circles. e-bikes have place as alternative to cars or regular bikes for commuters. I see great possibilities for use as transportation, but *using them as fun machines is simply not the same and comparison to cars is simply wrong.* Cars replaces horse and buggy because it became clear over time that it was a better way to get from point A to point B. 99% of mtn biking is from point A looping around back to point A.


This is exactly what I think should be discussed in a new thread; you've stated it well!


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ddockray said:


> I hear ya Moe, and thanks for the heads up. You know where I'm coming from so this is for anyone else...
> 
> It seems every topic relating to ebikes morphs into a discussion of politics eventually. Until some of the dividing issues are settled, the legal issues and peoples vision of the future of ebikes will always be in the center of the conversation.
> 
> ...


 The OP assumes the fire road is open to motorized vehicles I guess? And yes it comes down to the motor. Clear line in the sand. Does taking out the battery not make it a motorized vehicle? MA rider here. Motorized vehicles for the most part not allowed on multi use trails here. So, motor, not allowed. Very clear. Not going to change anytime soon. Maybe PA is different? Are they allowed on the game lands down there? Just realize most states, counties and local parks all have their own rules. If you have a dirt bike shut off and still are on the trail pushing it, the enviro police will write you a ticket, fine you and impound said motorized vehicle. FYI. Wouldn't be the same thing with an e bike without the battery? Intent vs legal letter of the law?


----------



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

JoePAz said:


> 90% of the time Land Managers are goverment employees. They don't care about mountian bikers, they only care about making their lives easy and not causing problems. In my state we have a lot of trails already 99% are two way multiuse trails. There are places building new trails, but you are naive if you think these city, country, state and federal land managers won't default to what is easy and ban all bikes if there are too many complaints. They don't want to police e-bikes vs regular bikes. They don't want to make it hard and 99% don't have money to build trails and just barely enough to maintain. It would take a strong government lobbying effort have them create more new trails. They best we could hope for is not closing all trails. So instead of having 95% of trails open to bikes as we do now we might get 35% re-opened.
> 
> Currently e-bikes are banned on motorized trails since.. guess what.. They have a motor. I have yet to see an ebike poaching trails, but I do know people that have. If these guys stay "under the radar" and don't mess with hikers and other trail users we might be fine. However if they start doing stupid stuff and making all mtn bikers look bad it will not be good. I bet most casual hikers could not tell and e-bike from a regular bike, but all that means is that we all get blamed. When I pass hikers on the trail I am always as friendly as possible just to do my best to leave a good impression that we all can get along.
> 
> As for cars and horse and buggy... This is very different since I am not talking about using bikes for transportation. They are use for going around in circles. e-bikes have place as alternative to cars or regular bikes for commuters. I see great possibilities for use as transportation, but using them as fun machines is simply not the same and comparison to cars is simply wrong. Cars replaces horse and buggy because it became clear over time that it was a better way to get from point A to point B. 99% of mtn biking is from point A looping around back to point A.


:thumbsup: good post! Recreation and transportation are 2 entirely different things.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

leeboh said:


> ... If you have a dirt bike shut off and still are on the trail pushing it, the enviro police will write you a ticket, fine you and impound said motorized vehicle. FYI. Wouldn't be the same thing with an e bike without the battery? Intent vs legal letter of the law?


Not exactly the same thing, but a similar example.

Arizona Trail Race 750 is bikepacking race from Mexico border to Utah Border. It uses Arizona trail where not in wilderness (forest and paved road bypasses used), but when it gets to the Grand Canyon things get complex. Bypass is lots of miles of paved road and the Az trail goes down the canyon and up the other side. Bikes are not allowed below the rim so the solution that works is the riders load their bikes on their backs and hike down and up the other side. Wheels cannot touch the ground. If you are found even rolling the bike you are in violation. So what does that mean for e-bikes with removable motors? Not really sure, but I believe the idea is if your bike is on your back you can't ride it at all. If you are rolling it you might be tempted to ride it or were riding it and hopped off when a ranger came by. In the end rules are rules even if they don't always make sense. I know need to carry the bike though the big ditch is a pain, but preferable to not being able to even carry it at all.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ddockray said:


> If that rangers name is Slapheadmofo you are going to be in for a world of hurt. hahaha.


FWIW, there's a good chance I have as many if not more off-road motorized vehicles at home than anyone else in these threads. I'm not any sort of 'purist' as far as being against motors on trails, not by a LONG shot. I'm simply strongly against confusing mtb access issues by allowing a very, very small group of folks to all of a sudden start insisting that mountain bikes have motors now, which is nonsense, and has a lot of potential to screw up all the hard-fought access mtbers have gained been granted due to being strictly human powered.

Mountain bikes are mountain bikes.
E-bikes are e-bikes.
Dirt bikes are dirt bikes.
ATVs are ATVs.
UTVs are UTVs.

They all fit somewhere different as far as trail access goes.

None of this is complicated, unless you are being purposely obtuse or are actually 'challenged' when it comes to clear thought processes.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

outlaws said:


> Just occurred to me someone should make them so we can use the motor to climb on fireroad and have a "quick release" to take out the motor while descending. That should make ebikes legal then  How feasible would that be?





Harryman said:


> It's already been done
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Probably should of closed this thread after the first reply....


----------

