# e-bikes, where do they fit in?



## bplaizier (Feb 1, 2011)

I have been mountain biking since the mid 90’s and have seen bikes change dramatically over this time period. My first real mountain bike was a Cannondale aluminum full ridged. This was one of first bike manufactures to make aluminum frames. They were a very forward thinking company at the time, but I digress. I don’t post on here very much but I read the forums quite regularly. I would have to say that I think there has been more posts on the Ebike regulations topic in a short amount of time than any other topic I have read. From reading from various posts I can tell there is a lot of passion on this topic and it seems to be somewhat controversial. It reminds me of politics to some degree, lots of controversy not matter what you do. I have read several articles on this topic and there is always been heated discussions on this. I even read one post (not on this website) where someone said if they saw someone riding an electric bike on “their” trail then they would “beat the crap out of them.” 

The reason I’m replying to this post is merely to see if I can understand the issues that cause some people to get so passionate about the subject. First off, I’m not for or against e-bikes but just trying to figure out what all the fuss is about. I live in Utah and I haven’t see this much controversy in a sport since snowboards were trying to fit in with skiers. At the time I remember wondering what all the fuss was over. There was only a handful of resorts that even allowed them in the late 90’s. This all changed when the Olympics decided to add snowboarding to its winter Olympics and Utah hosted the winter Olympics in 2002. All resorts instantly allowed snowboarders except one that i'm aware of, which still doesn’t allow them for some reason…? 

I know even the world has different views on Ebiking, in some areas there are no special rules about Ebikes and they are allowed everywhere and some places only allow them on motorized vehicles trails. I would imagine it will take some time to get this all sorted out just liked it did with snowboarding, who knows, maybe 10 years from now Ebiking will be part of the Olympics…? Maybe it is only a fad and will die like 26” rims seem to have done, only time will tell what will happen. Ones things for sure, as with any change there seems to be lots of discussion. So chime in if you like and let us know the good and bad about Ebiking and maybe it will make a difference….or maybe it will just give you a place to vent.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

The level of hostility is pretty mind-boggling. It boils down to:
1) If the hikers associate e-bikes with mtbs we are going to loose trails.
2) Our trails may be harmed.
3) The e-riders will go too fast. 
4) Fat lazy people who should not be there will infest our trails.
5) Crazy "modders" will bring their hopped-up bikes on our trails and cause havoc.

There is a real underlying feeling that e-bikers are "cheating". This is visceral, and I myself can remember seeing a lady zipping along a bike path here and then noticing she was on a e-bike, and something like that thought jumped into my mind.

It turns out one very fundamental human trait is the urge to punish any sort of "free-rider". Somebody who takes resources from the community and does not contribute.

The e-biker hits several hot buttons which fire up this hostile instinct. They are both cheating by getting help to ride, and using trails which are not theirs.

That logic of course is full of holes and misconceptions, but like brexit, it's so tied to a sense of identity with some riders, no rational argument gains traction.

Adding to the complication is the many types and powers of e-bike.

As somebody who has used horses, hiking boots, mtbs and motorcycles in the backcountry, the e-bikes appear to be a great new quiet and low impact way to travel in the backcountry. When a long time friend told me he was getting one, I tried one at a local shop, and was so impressed by the Haibike Sduro All MTN RC, I ordered a similar bike, but with 3" tires. I can't wait. 

But I will also use my other methods of backcountry travel, of course. I'm lucky, as most of the best mtb trails here are motorized already and users of all types are sparse. Our trail system is enormous and there is little conflict between users.


L1050092 by unoh7, on Flickr

One of my favorite local loops is a 5 hour ride involving about 15,000 vertical feet of climbs over and back from a great divide. It's nearly ready 

Tool for that ride:

Dangerous Siren by unoh7, on Flickr

I think the Haibike will reduce my hours on both motorcycles  My mtb riding on a mojo SL will probably stay the same, about one ride a week.

Here is the one I choose:
my bike by unoh7, on Flickr

I hope I'll have it within two weeks.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> The level of hostility is pretty mind-boggling. It boils down to:


-calling them bicycles. The rest of the stuff on your list would go away if they didn't insist on calling themselves mountain bikes and tagging on to the same access. I believe it's really that simple.


----------



## JVG1967 (Feb 22, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> -calling them bicycles. The rest of the stuff on your list would go away if they didn't insist on calling themselves mountain bikes and tagging on to the same access. I believe it's really that simple.


E MTB's don't belong on all trails. I have a Specialized Levo and there are some local state owned multi use trails that I would never ride on, they are simply too crowded.

I also can't see E MTB's in national park non motorized trails for the same reason. E MTB owners have to realize we aren't going to get access to ALL trails. Having said that I do not agree with people that just want a straight out ban on all E MTB's. As long as there is some give and take on both sides we can ride together.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

J.B. Weld said:


> -calling them bicycles. The rest of the stuff on your list would go away if they didn't insist on calling themselves mountain bikes and tagging on to the same access. I believe it's really that simple.


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to J.B. Weld again.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

They should be here, on a motorized trail. Pretty nice isn't it?


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

I *hate *ebikes because of the ugliness the mere mention of them brings out in people (online) who truly believe they are the devil's spawn. To me, they sound like the hateful hikers and hateful equestrians of yesteryear who helped get mountain biking banned from many places in the 80's and 90's, because of a visceral and emotional reaction to something new/different that they didn't want.

I *worry* ebikes will add another 20 years to the efforts to gain some MTB access to existing, high value, backcountry trails we are currently prohibited from.

I *don't fear* seeing ebikes on any trail we can mountain bike on now.

I *wish* the dawn of the eMTB didn't arrive for another 10+ years, but they are here now.

I *agree* that everything will work itself out over the next 10 years, with ebikes and mountain bikes sharing trails just fine (with other trail users), and all these threads about ebikes will have just been a waste of everyone's time, self included.

Like the Wilderness issue ("...no other form of mechanical transport..."), the ebike issue (..."non-motorized trail"...) is equally a *semantics *issue to me, and people will interpret those words however fits their mindset/agenda best.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

J.B. Weld said:


> -calling them bicycles. The rest of the stuff on your list would go away if they didn't insist on calling themselves mountain bikes and tagging on to the same access. I believe it's really that simple.


I wish it was that simple. I still have not found all that many e-likers claiming they are identical to bicycles: there is an E first.

But perhaps you object to the term e-bike? Motorbike, ebike, pedelec. All names with bike. So I don't think that is it.

Bottom line is there are about 4 tiers of ebikes, and its the 250 pedelec which appear near identical to a mtb which I think should be allowed on many mtb trails, local conditions permitting.

If a trail is already overcrowded, I can see how you may want to keep them away. Even there you might them go on weekdays 

Why? Because the impact is near identical. They are slower DH. And in many cases they are safer both for the rider and others. That's the reality as we know it now (other evidence could appear).

But, any trail which access is directly threatened soley because of pedelec access by OTHER users, i.e. hikers/horses, I certainly would not demand to use. I mean a real threat, not just talk.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> I wish it was that simple.
> But perhaps you object to the term e-bike? Motorbike, ebike, pedelec. All names with bike.


It is that simple, establish your own user group and have at it. I really could care less what you call them but I object to "e-bike" only because I believe that name was carefully selected so people perceive it as a bicycle. The same with the pedals.

The entire issue is pretending it's a bicycle that has every right to go wherever a bicycle allowed. It is an outright sham.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I agree. These things wouldn't even be for sale (electric enduro/MX bikes have existed for years and years and never caught on) if it weren't for the manufacturers seeing an opportunity to try to trick people into thinking of them as bicycles.

I think low power electric motos is an AWESOME idea. I used to wish for one when I raced enduros, because even my little 250 E/XC was a TANK and had to be hauled around on a trailer, and had tons of maintenance needs. And stunk and was loud, of course. Moto riding would be *awesome* on a good electric setup with 100# less weight and no noise.

But that's not what we're talking about here. Why pedals? So that people can try to claim they're bikes. Cynical and awful, really.

-Walt


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

J.B. Weld said:


> It is that simple, establish your own user group and have at it. I really could care less what you call them but I object to "e-bike" only because I believe that name was carefully selected so people perceive it as a bicycle. The same with the pedals.
> 
> The entire issue is pretending it's a bicycle that has every right to go wherever a bicycle allowed. It is an outright sham.


JB, sry I have to chuckle at this. Can I still use the term "motorbike" when I refer to my gas powered motorCYLCLES?

Oh! There I go again 

E-bike is a very clear term. Electricity helps in some way. Pedelec is a type of E-bike. Those are the terms we have, but I'd love to hear your suggestions as to new names


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

They fit in on the existing road networks. Which it is too bad the focus is not on instead of trail use.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

Walt said:


> trick people into thinking of them as bicycles...I think low power electric motos is an AWESOME idea. ... Moto riding would be *awesome* on a good electric setup with 100# less weight and no noise....But that's not what we're talking about here. Why pedals? So that people can try to claim they're bikes. Cynical and awful, really.
> 
> -Walt


All of this is beyond true. Deceitful, greedy and inherently dishonest. When a decent "E"-replacement for my 300 comes avail, I'm first in line but the sham of "it's a bicycle, look it's got pedals" is complete and utter BS.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

They're called ebikes for a couple of reasons: 1. The state of California calls them bicycles under law. 2. I bought a bicycle and put a motor onto it in my shop, thus electric+bicycle=ebike. If I had started with a motorcycle it would be an ecycle.


----------



## Bikedriver (Jun 11, 2016)

I completely agree, the level of hostility, hate, and just flat out ignorance out there about ebikes is amazing. 

Someone's choice to ride an e-bike is like many things, just personal preference and personal opinion. They will only "fit in" to your athletic lifestyle if you are a person who likes them, like me, uhoh7, and many others. 

It's not a "bike" , but it is...just as my Montessa Trials moto is a bike, my KTM moto is a bike, and my Ducati is a bike. Motorcycles have been bikes so long as they were invented, to me a "bike" just has 2 wheels. The "motor" has just historically been either a human or a combustion engine. The "motor" in the e-bike is both a human + an electric engine. 

It's not a "motorcycle", but it is, because of course, it really is a bike with a motor. But so is an MTB, the human is the "motor" on a traditional mountain bike. So mountain bikes are really and have always been motorcycles. Just depends on your perspective. 

Ultimately I think it's just something new, a blend and a true evolution of many 2 wheel disciplines, and that's why some people are so stressed and uptight about it. Change is really hard to accept for many people. As history has often shown, that's typically just fear and ignorance.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

E-bikedriver, that's just a bunch of crap. You're arguing semantics to avoid the issue. What I find the most annoying about e-bikers is that just about every single poster (Uhoh7 being an exception) has registered with mtbr.com since e-bikes hit the mainstream. If most e-bikers were/are mountain bikers that came in with an understanding of the history of mountain biking and the issues they have faced, I would feel much more comfortable with e-bikes coexisting with mountain bikes.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

A significant percentage of the time I'm riding my electrified two wheel transporters the motor is turned off because I'm enjoying the extra exercise or extending the battery range. Personally, I don't care if you anti-e's call my electrified two wheel transporter "Fred", give it its own classification or whatever other negative attribute you embellish it with (although it might get you in trouble in CA since the law states otherwise). Of note (TO ME) is that I've never met any other bicyclist (with a fairly large sample size) who reacted negatively. All either had questions about my two wheel electrified transporter, wanted a test ride or asked what was required to construct one. The only individuals that I've encountered who are against ebikes seem to have gravitated to this forum. Maybe being against new things isn't CA-centric, another good reason to reside here. I realize that other areas have different exigencies that could impact the responses of the individuals, but the vitriol, name calling, denigration and other forms of abuse suggest otherwise (TO ME).


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Bikedriver said:


> I completely agree, the level of hostility, hate, and just flat out ignorance out there about ebikes is amazing.
> 
> Someone's choice to ride an e-bike is like many things, just personal preference and personal opinion. They will only "fit in" to your athletic lifestyle if you are a person who likes them, like me, uhoh7, and many others.
> 
> ...


Perspective? That's one word. I just call it a motor. That's all. they are welcome to e-mtb cycle-motor-pedal-motor-bike wherever the MOTO bikes are allowed in MA where I live. Which is about 6 places. I just follow the rules here, they state" no motorized vehicles allowed on trails"


----------



## Bikedriver (Jun 11, 2016)

mountainbiker24 said:


> E-bikedriver, that's just a bunch of crap. You're arguing semantics to avoid the issue. What I find the most annoying about e-bikers is that just about every single poster (Uhoh7 being an exception) has registered with mtbr.com since e-bikes hit the mainstream. If most e-bikers were/are mountain bikers that came in with an understanding of the history of mountain biking and the issues they have faced, I would feel much more comfortable with e-bikes coexisting with mountain bikes.


Really? I've been riding an MTB for let's see....I am getting old, I think just over 29 years. I started before there was even such thing as suspension.

But thanks for the warm welcome to the mtbr community, for that you are right, I am new. New to the sport - you are dreaming.

Someone once told me that to really have an open mind, it's a good idea to "never assume anything". Wow ....there are a lot of closed minds here.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Bikedriver said:


> Really? I've been riding an MTB for let's see....I am getting old, I think just over 29 years. I started before there was even such thing as suspension.
> 
> But thanks for the warm welcome to the mtbr community, for that you are right, I am new. New to the sport - you are dreaming.
> 
> Someone once told me that to really have an open mind, it's a good idea to "never assume anything". Wow ....there are a lot of closed minds here.


 Wow 5 posts. Open mind by a throttle twister, umm ok.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Bicycle in 1964:









Bicyle in 1982:









Bicycle in 2016:









Motorcycle:









Not in the bicycle family?:








(it doesn't have pedals, so I guess the "its not a bicycle" crowd is correct 

How many people would be mountain biking today if bikes never evolved after 1982? My guess is far less than today. These g-darn ebikes (like it or not) are an evolution of the plush, don't-need-to-have-much-skill-to-ride-rowdy-terrain bikes we enjoy today. Maybe they will get more people out doing something fun and healthy too. Sure they could do it on a modern mountain bike... but everyone here could also just ride a heavy, rigid bike with rim brakes.

I'm not an ebike advocate, I'm just open minded.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Adding a motor is not an evolutionary event.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Bikedriver said:


> Really? I've been riding an MTB for let's see....I am getting old, I think just over 29 years. I started before there was even such thing as suspension.
> 
> But thanks for the warm welcome to the mtbr community, for that you are right, I am new. New to the sport - you are dreaming.
> 
> Someone once told me that to really have an open mind, it's a good idea to "never assume anything". Wow ....there are a lot of closed minds here.


Riding motorcycles does not count as mountain biking experience. It wasn't an insult, as an open-minded individual as yourself would surely have understood. I just find it annoying that after "29" years of mountain biking, you joined mtbr.com just to post about e-bikes. Any mountain biker that has been around longer than 10 years knows the potential issues by classifying e-bikes as mountain bikes. I'm not being close-minded by learning from past events. Actually, you're being close-minded by refusing to acknowledge them.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

mountainbiker24 said:


> Adding a motor is not an evolutionary event.


Apparently it is. Just look at all the mainstream bicycle manufacturers and component manufacturers who are offering low powered pedal assist technology.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Empty_Beer said:


> Apparently it is. Just look at all the mainstream bicycle manufacturers and component manufacturers who are offering low powered pedal assist technology.


It's not evolutionary, because they aren't replacing or updating mountain bikes. It is a completely different species. Maybe evolution like adaptation to a new industry market, but not evolutionary like developing thumbs, if you believe in that sort of thing.


----------



## formula4speed (Mar 25, 2013)

Empty_Beer said:


> Apparently it is. Just look at all the mainstream bicycle manufacturers and component manufacturers who are offering low powered pedal assist technology.


At some point during evolution it becomes something else though. Just because something evolved from a bicycle doesn't make it a bicycle. Life started as single cell organisms, we evolved into something else, just because we evolved from that doesn't make us a single celled organism.

Also, don't knock my heavy rigid bikes, they are awesome.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> 1. The state of California calls them bicycles under law.


People repeating this wild oversimplification ad nauseum and saying it equates to open access to any place a real bicycle is permitted "or we're gonna sue" is a crock of **** that hamstrings any sort of productive conversation about e-bike access.

It seems to be the go-to mantra for all e-bikers. Too bad they couldn't change their tune to 'We appreciate that there are legitimate access concerns regarding motorized use on historically human-power-only trails. What can we do to help earn our access, as mountain bikers have done, and to make sure we don't screw real bikers in the process?"

And then start cranking out thousands of hours of trailwork.

Nobody will care what you're riding then.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

mountainbiker24 said:


> It's not evolutionary, because they aren't replacing or updating mountain bikes. * It is a completely different species.*


Maybe in your mind, but not in reality.

Now can people _please _stop calling it "e-mail" and stick with "digital communication"!?! E-mail has nothing in common with traditional mail. E-mail is for people who are too lazy to find a piece of stationary, write out a letter using a pen, pencil or a typewriter, folding it and putting it in an envelope, finding a stamp and placing it on the envelope, adding the name and address to the envelope (and return address), and dropping it in the nearest *mail *box.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

> The "motor" has just historically been either a human or a combustion engine. The "motor" in the e-bike is both a human + an electric engine.
> 
> It's not a "motorcycle", but it is, because of course, it really is a bike with a motor. But so is an MTB, the human is the "motor" on a traditional mountain bike. So mountain bikes are really and have always been motorcycles. Just depends on your perspective.


Honestly, I can't wait for someone to stand up in a public meeting and try this argument with a room full of equestrians, hikers, mtbers and land managers. It'll be amusing.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Harryman said:


> Honestly, I can't wait for someone to stand up in a public meeting and try this argument with a room full of equestrians, hikers, mtbers and land managers. It'll be amusing.


The equestrians and hikers will buy the mt. bikers beers afterwards for doing their work for them... laughing the whole time at their good fortune


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Empty_Beer said:


> Maybe in your mind, but not in reality.
> 
> Now can people _please _stop calling it "e-mail" and stick with "digital communication"!?! E-mail has nothing in common with traditional mail. E-mail is for people who are too lazy to find a piece of stationary, write out a letter using a pen, pencil or a typewriter, folding it and putting it in an envelope, finding a stamp and placing it on the envelope, adding the name and address to the envelope (and return address), and dropping it in the nearest *mail *box.


 E-mail = electronic mail
P-mail = pencil or pen mail


----------



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

Empty_Beer said:


> How many people would be mountain biking today if bikes never evolved after 1982?


I would for sure, I love cycling. It's been few years but the last time I went for a ride on my '82 Stumpy it was a riot, grins all around.

I think your vision of the evolution of the bicycle is flawed. First there was the bicycle (actually boneshaker) and then later they attached engines to them and they became motorcycles. Once there were motorcycles bicycles without motors were thereafter referred to as bicycles. Your description would more accurately be described as de-evolution.

Using your rational the next logical step would be something along the lines of an electric YZ250- sans pedals of course.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I would happily keep riding a 1980's tech mountain bike. Great trails, good friends, and maybe a beer afterwards... good times. 

If I needed to choose between great trails and modern bikes, I'd pick the trails every time. I remember a lot of epic rides and races, both good and bad. I couldn't generally tell you what bike I was on for any of them.

-Walt


----------



## SeaBass_ (Apr 7, 2006)

It's not an evolutionary idea. Only the fuel for the motor has changed.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

https://www.electricbike.com/e-bike-patents-from-the-1800s/

-W


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Empty_Beer said:


> The equestrians and hikers will buy the mt. bikers beers afterwards for doing their work for them... laughing the whole time at their good fortune


It will interesting to see where future alliances form.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Walt said:


> https://www.electricbike.com/e-bike-patents-from-the-1800s/
> 
> -W


This proves without a shadow of a doubt that ebikes were meant to be categorized as motorized vehicles -- just like all internal combustion engine vehicles -- over a hundred years ago! No need for a new category! I stand corrected! 

It must have been ebikes all along that lead to the massive trail access losses mountain biking suffered in the 80's and 90's! Now they are back and they're going to end mountain biking as we know it! Eff ebikes!!!


----------



## Bikedriver (Jun 11, 2016)

Yeah, of course ebikes are motorized vehicles. But should we then all go back to hiking only? You could really look at it the same way for a normal bike. The 0 - 200 or so watt transfer of energy (depending on your physical shape) "motor," on a normal MTB, most of the time, is a human. At the end of the day, "Bikes" are all just 2 wheel machines that humans invented and love to ride, it's simply that many different people enjoy many different types of riding on 2 wheels. I don't think the method of propelling any 2 wheel machine forward ultimately matters personally. I can only speak for myself, but I suspect others who actually ride ebikes (and perhaps downhill) feel the same, what matters to me the most is how much fun I have when I do it. 

So, how do you like to transfer energy to and propel your favorite 2 wheel "machine" the most?

Combustion engine only?

Human engine only?

Electric engine only?

Combination of Chairlift engine + human engine? 

Combination of an electric engine and human engine?

What I think really different about ebikes is that typically "Bikes" have mostly either been human or combustion, or gravity powered, so the differences in these machines, especially in the amount of energy that could be delivered to 2 wheels, and the energy that could be stored, and method of energy storage, was always pretty massively different. I think the technology for batteries, just never made sense to combine the 2. But now it does. Most ebikes (pedal assist) are ultimately a combination of 2 engines, or 2 sources of energy, the human and the electric. I sort of find it similar to downhill, but not as fast, because that is also 2 sources of energy you are using to enjoy your 2 wheeled machine; it's a combination of the potential energy stored and provided by the chairlift and the human energy you might also add to the bike as you descend. The end result is the same, riding faster most of the time, and for some, having as much fun as possible. With an ebike there is no chairlift needed assuming < 10 - 20 mph is fast enough for you off road, the electric engine is replacing the chairlift real time. Still, if you want to go really fast, ... can't beat the chairlift, gravity is pretty strong.


----------



## NEPMTBA (Apr 7, 2007)

Empty_Beer said:


> Bicycle in 1964:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Pretty cool, and just think Harley and Davidson added an engine back in the day and look where it got them!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Bikedriver said:


> .....


So, word games and hypotheticals are all well and good, but how do you attempt to address the issue of mountain bike advocates and trail builders being forced to become apologists/advocates for something they likely have no interest in, and which will make all of our access batttles much, much more complicated and difficult (and less successful, specially when we have to go in front of boards and LM's and look like absolute fools trying to convince people that a motor isn't really a motor)?

I can think of a lot of trails that never would've been built if this was the way things were.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Empty_Beer said:


> The equestrians and hikers will buy the mt. bikers beers afterwards for doing their work for them... laughing the whole time at their good fortune


Umm, I usually ride the trails I work on. A most recent bridge project in Georgetown, MA involved lots of folks. 2 towns, conservation areas, REI grant money, hikers and bikers for some labor and a pro builder to do the work. Lumber was carried a good distance by the local HS football team. Cross training and community service combined. The bridge went over an active beaver dam and connected the trail nicely. Instead of a log mess to try to cross. Win win all around. The same groups of people we see building trails, coming to us for trail work and consults. The same people we go to get trail approval. It's called team work and cooperation. And a seat at the table. All with some common goals of outdoor recreation and trail access under how the current laws are written. So,new guys at the table. Who's ear do you have? And a work background of 20 years or so. Partnerships with land managers, stakeholders and decision makers? Who's laughing now.


----------



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

They fit great in contrived loopholes.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Bikedriver said:


> Yeah, of course ebikes are motorized vehicles. But should we then all go back to hiking only? You could really look at it the same way for a normal bike. The 0 - 200 or so watt transfer of energy (depending on your physical shape) "motor," on a normal MTB, most of the time, is a human. At the end of the day, "Bikes" are all just 2 wheel machines that humans invented and love to ride, it's simply that many different people enjoy many different types of riding on 2 wheels. I don't think the method of propelling any 2 wheel machine forward ultimately matters personally. I can only speak for myself, but I suspect others who actually ride ebikes (and perhaps downhill) feel the same, what matters to me the most is how much fun I have when I do it.
> 
> So, how do you like to transfer energy to and propel your favorite 2 wheel "machine" the most?
> 
> ...


Blah blah blah.... You're ignoring or just ignorant of the issues actually being discussed.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

slapheadmofo said:


> People repeating this wild oversimplification ad nauseum and saying it equates to open access to any place a real bicycle is permitted "or we're gonna sue" is a crock of **** that hamstrings any sort of productive conversation about e-bike access.
> 
> It seems to be the go-to mantra for all e-bikers. Too bad they couldn't change their tune to 'We appreciate that there are legitimate access concerns regarding motorized use on historically human-power-only trails. What can we do to help earn our access, as mountain bikers have done, and to make sure we don't screw real bikers in the process?"
> 
> ...


 I agree that it is an inconvenient fact for your side of the discussion, but there it is: in the state of California the law considers Class 1,2 and 3 ebikes to be bicycles. The implications and impact of that change can be argued all day, but that will not change the fact that where I live my ebikes are all bicycles. Not motorcycles, not mopeds and not some sort of in-between hybrid, but bicycles, plain and simple.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

WoodlandHills said:


> I agree that it is an inconvenient fact for your side of the discussion, but there it is: in the state of California the law considers Class 1,2 and 3 ebikes to be bicycles. The implications and impact of that change can be argued all day, but that will not change the fact that where I live my ebikes are all bicycles. Not motorcycles, not mopeds and not some sort of in-between hybrid, but bicycles, plain and simple.


I expect that law to be modified now that e-bikes are targeting trails. If it doesn't, I'm prepared to lose trail access across the country.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

WoodlandHills said:


> I agree that it is an inconvenient fact for your side of the discussion, but there it is: in the state of California the law considers Class 1,2 and 3 ebikes to be bicycles. The implications and impact of that change can be argued all day, but that will not change the fact that where I live my ebikes are all bicycles. Not motorcycles, not mopeds and not some sort of in-between hybrid, but bicycles, plain and simple.


You are aware that there are 49 other states, no?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

tiretracks said:


> You are aware that there are 49 other states, no?


Obviously not.

And once again, his post proves my earlier point re: the constant regurgitation of something that's not really relevant at all to the issues being raised. No matter what is the questions are, the answer is always "In California, a lawyer said a bike with a motor doesn't have a motor". As if that means something.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

WoodlandHills said:


> I agree that it is an inconvenient fact for your side of the discussion, but there it is: in the state of California the law considers Class 1,2 and 3 ebikes to be bicycles. The implications and impact of that change can be argued all day, but that will not change the fact that where I live my ebikes are all bicycles. Not motorcycles, not mopeds and not some sort of in-between hybrid, but bicycles, plain and simple.


Nope, they are defined as "Electric Bicycles" in the legislation which is an amendment to the vehicle code, they are not "Bicycles". It changed the previous definition from "Moped" or Motorized Bicycle" to "Electric Bicycle".



> THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
> 
> SECTION 1. Section 312.5 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read:
> 312.5. (a) An "electric bicycle" is a bicycle equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts.
> ...


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

And the Vehicle Code only applies to particular well-defined "pathways". The framers of this code say clearly they had no intention of it applying to what most MTBers would consider a trail. This all just leads to a circular discussion that's already been had a bunch of times and doesn't address any of the issues I have, not does it apply anywhere else except that weird little corner of the country, so no need to get back into it again.

Unless, as I suspect, that's all you've got to bring to the table.


----------



## Bikedriver (Jun 11, 2016)

I thought the point of the thread was "where do they fit in." Wow, I honestly had no idea there was such division in feelings on ebikes here in the US until I started reading more in this forum and talking to a few people about it.... Seems like they don't fit in, or rather they only fit in for some people in some places. 

But my point was from just a really simple power point of view, 
Bike w/ human = approx. 0 -200 watts

ebike = assuming < 750 watts, < 20 mph, pedal assist only = maybe around 500 - 1000 watts if you can add a few hundred, but realistically far less than 1 hp most of the time.

Ebikes between 750 - 4500+ watts - I don't see these riding most bike trials, whats the point?, they are so heavy, and always will be unless the laws of physics and electromagnetics can be proven wrong, Why even put pedals on it? At weights of over about 45 lbs, that "feeling" of a normal MTB or downhill MTB goes away, and that's the best part of an eMTB, and in that case I honestly think most will find combustion is better, and/or ride trials approved for combustion engines. 

Most motorized MX bikes = 20,000 - 50,000 watts 

There is such a big difference between 50,000 watts and 1000 watts, I really don't understand what people are all up in arms about. 1000 watts is much closer to 200 watts than it is to 50,000 watts. 

I've seen, like in many places in Europe for example , that ebikes "fit in" just fine with bikes as far as I can tell. I've seen them all over the place in the cities and trails, they are so much more popular there. I went to a MTB Demo test ride event in Europe last year, seemed like there were just as many ebikes as bikes in the Demo tents with people riding all around....regular bikes and ebikes, together. Without problems. No one died. The sky didn't fall. It was cool. Everyone was having fun. Lots of smiling. 

I honestly don't understand what the issues are. Is it worries about trial damage? help with trail maintenance? Most are really relatively low power and the max assist speeds are lower than many riders can achieve without electric assist or down any hill on any trial,, the added weight to many could be as much as one could conceivable gain over the winter from too much beer and no exercise, ...I just don't get what all the fear and uncertainty is about. 

I think it's unfortunate to see they are not yet fitting in well in. I think they are awesome, I just have soooo much fun riding mine, and I think they (@ < 750 watts) are much more like traditional bikes, than they are like combustion motorbikes, so that's where they should fit in.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

tiretracks said:


> You are aware that there are 49 other states, no?


 I only can live in one at a time......


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

mountainbiker24 said:


> E-bikedriver, that's just a bunch of crap. You're arguing semantics to avoid the issue. What I find the most annoying about e-bikers is that just about every single poster (Uhoh7 being an exception) has registered with mtbr.com since e-bikes hit the mainstream. If most e-bikers were/are mountain bikers that came in with an understanding of the history of mountain biking and the issues they have faced, I would feel much more comfortable with e-bikes coexisting with mountain bikes.


TY for noting my join date 

I would bet 90% of e-mtb 250w riders you will ever see on a trail have owned and ridden mtb bikes for years.

When I tell mtb locals here about the bike I ordered, not one has had a negative comment for me. Most can't even believe it's possible to obtain such a thing. The idea of going for a ride without pushing the cardio to the limit is very appealing to those I've talked with.

I think much more likely than 250w pedelecs being a problem for mtb access, the paranoia from a few very vocal mtb riders about e-mtbs based on pure speculation will foster some negative attitudes and even outright physical confrontations on trails in some places.

The 250w pedelecs are only faster going up, and they are not coming remotely close to DH speeds on those climbs. DH they are slower. Anyone who rides an mtb has felt their co-ordination effected by fatigue. This will be alot less on a e-mtb. So control is going to be better. 250w pedelec trail impact is identical and maybe even less than a normal mtb. Possibly less because of reduced flailing and less skidding.

I'll be able to test myself pretty soon I hope, and will update those thoughts.


----------



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

They fit just fine into dumpsters.


----------



## GRPABT1 (Oct 22, 2015)

You know what really annoys me? Some butthurt moron gave me negative reputation merely for commenting on an E-bike thread. It's not that I care about reputation on a forum but the very fact someone would get so bent out of shape pisses me off. I don't even own an E-bike or have a desire to own one. I just simply don't have a problem with them and I think most of the hatred is unfounded and speculative. Can't we all just get along? This forum has an E-bike section, yet every thread in it is filled with hatred from people who haven't even ridden E-bikes. Now what if I went over to the Specialized section and started hanging **** on every specialized owner in every thread? I'd promptly get myself a whack from the ban stick. Yet apparently it's OK to act like a douche bag in this section. Again I will reiterate that I do not own nor wish to own an electric bike of any form, I simply have never ever had my day impacted upon by an E-bike one iota (except that is in this forum).


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Bikedriver said:


> I thought the point of the thread was "where do they fit in." Wow, I honestly had no idea there was such division in feelings on ebikes here in the US until I started reading more in this forum and talking to a few people about it.... Seems like they don't fit in, or rather they only fit in for some people in some places.
> 
> But my point was from just a really simple power point of view,
> Bike w/ human = approx. 0 -200 watts
> ...


You see, what the problem is is that MTB advocates shouldn't be saddled with presenting and defending all of what you've written. If you guys can sell it to the powers that be, I don't see any sort of real issues with low-power e-bikes on many of the mtb trails I usually ride. Just please don't try to hinge my access on yours. Happy to have you, but if you **** on the floor, you're on your own. Only fair.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Every rider that I've met who was riding an eMTB was a current MTB rider too; this was just a different experience for them. Also, every MTB individual that I've met has been interested in my bike either riding it or asking how it was constructed. All the negative comments for eMTB have been on this forum. I've been mountain biking for 30+ years attending meetings, doing trail work, being involved in rescue activities and attempting to be a good advocate for MTB. I can see why some individuals posting here have an adversarial relationship with other trail users based on their pomposity and sense of entitlement.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

fos'l said:


> sense of entitlement.


Precisely. It doesn't go over well with the people that have been working on access for years or even decades.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

fos'l said:


> Every rider that I've met who was riding an eMTB was a current MTB rider too; this was just a different experience for them. Also, every MTB individual that I've met has been interested in my bike either riding it or asking how it was constructed. All the negative comments for eMTB have been on this forum. I've been mountain biking for 30+ years attending meetings, doing trail work, being involved in rescue activities and attempting to be a good advocate for MTB. I can see why some individuals posting here have an adversarial relationship with other trail users based on their pomposity and sense of entitlement.


All of which is appreciated, but none of which addresses my concerns.


----------



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

slapheadmofo said:


> You see, what the problem is is that MTB advocates shouldn't be saddled with presenting and defending all of what you've written. If you guys can sell it to the powers that be, I don't see any sort of real issues with low-power e-bikes on many of the mtb trails I usually ride. Just please don't try to hinge my access on yours. Happy to have you, but if you **** on the floor, you're on your own. Only fair.


Why is this so hard to understand for electric bike advocates? Why do electric bike advocates interpret this view as hateful?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> Why is this so hard to understand for electric bike advocates? Why do electric bike advocates interpret this view as hateful?


Because in CA, e-bikes are the same as real bikes?


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> You see, what the problem is is that MTB advocates shouldn't be saddled with presenting and defending all of what you've written. If you guys can sell it to the powers that be, I don't see any sort of real issues with low-power e-bikes on many of the mtb trails I usually ride. Just please don't try to hinge my access on yours. Happy to have you, but if you **** on the floor, you're on your own. Only fair.


Basically I have no problem with this attitude. I agree mtb riders should not need to "defend" e-mtbs. By the same token I don't think they need to attack them.

Sure if OTHER users make huge deal about e vs mtbs, even I would rather see the e-bikes restricted and the mtbs left alone. But the facts about impact should not ignored. And why "pre-object"? I would hope the restrictions would be applied where there is a problem, not before any problems have been seen.

However I do think the mtb riders should be friendly to other users, including e-mtbs as a default behavior.

The current hysteria is actually promoting the idea of an e-mtb, by giving the option so much attention. Same thing happened with pot in the 30s. Nobody outside some musicians used it till the propaganda began


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

My only interest at this point is making sure there's enough attention that the "e-bike = bike" loophole is firmly slammed shut. If it turns out that e-bikes work well with other users on the trails, that's great. If not, too bad. But assuming they are the same as real bikes is not a good starting point IMO.

-Walt


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> Basically I have no problem with this attitude. I agree mtb riders should not need to "defend" e-mtbs. By the same token I don't think they need to attack them.
> 
> Sure if OTHER users make huge deal about e vs mtbs, even I would rather see the e-bikes restricted and the mtbs left alone. But the facts about impact should not ignored. And why "pre-object"? I would hope the restrictions would be applied where there is a problem, not before any problems have been seen.
> 
> ...


 Great, so like pot just wait 78 years to be legal. Almost all mt bikers I know are very friendly. Default? I will wave to the e motorcycles when I see them on the road. Mr Idaho, come East or around some population centers, LOTS of people object to mt bikers and motors in general on the trail. AMC anyone? Ever been called a wheeled locust? There have always been problems where I ride with mt bike access. And continue to have problems. Default? How about not making things worse for access to trails. Start there.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> Basically I have no problem with this attitude. I agree mtb riders should not need to "defend" e-mtbs.


And if everyone had that attitude, *especially electric bike manufactures*, none of these threads would exist.


----------



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

Walt said:


> My only interest at this point is making sure there's enough attention that the "e-bike = bike" loophole is firmly slammed shut.


Same here, everything else is just rhetoric.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Walt said:


> My only interest at this point is making sure there's enough attention that the "e-bike = bike" loophole is firmly slammed shut. If it turns out that e-bikes work well with other users on the trails, that's great. If not, too bad. But assuming they are the same as real bikes is not a good starting point IMO.
> 
> -Walt


Lessee... we have:

o Fully rigid singlespeed bikes
o Fully rigid geared bikes
o Hard tail bikes with gears and front suspension
o Hard tail bikes with 1 gear and front suspension
o Hard tail bikes with gears, front suspension and pedal assist
o Full suspension XC bikes
o Full suspension All Mountain bikes
o Full suspension DH bikes
o Full suspension bikes with pedal assist
o All of the above come with three different wheel sizes
o All of the above can come with dropper posts

How does anyone that isn't a bike enthusiast differentiate one bike from another? Answer: They don't and won't. They just see what their brain tells them is a "bike". But they will differentiate between the people riding them... categorizing the rider as either a jerk, a non-issue, or a nice/nice-enough person.

If people on these ebike threads spent as much time preaching and promoting great trail etiquette as they do reading and writing comments about ebikes, we'd inch the ball towards greater trail access and trail user relations a little further, regardless of the type of bike one rides.

p.s. I was riding my Nomad on some nearby fun trails recently and came upon two women on horses. I stopped to do all the things we're supposed to do. 1st lady says her horse is good with bikes and that her husband is a mountain biker. She's looking at my bike, points at my frame and asks, "What's that? Some kind of shock absorber?" No joke! :cornut:


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Empty_Beer said:


> Lessee... we have:
> 
> o Fully rigid singlespeed bikes
> o Fully rigid geared bikes
> ...


And they all have one thing in common.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Empty_Beer said:


> How does anyone that isn't a bike enthusiast differentiate one bike from another?
> :


Well, the fact that e-bikes have a motor on them would be a pretty obvious giveaway, dontcha think?


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

slapheadmofo said:


> Well, the fact that e-bikes have a motor on them would be a pretty obvious giveaway, dontcha think?


Obvious? Nope. Where is the motor?


----------



## Bikedriver (Jun 11, 2016)

slapheadmofo said:


> You see, what the problem is is that MTB advocates shouldn't be saddled with presenting and defending all of what you've written. If you guys can sell it to the powers that be, I don't see any sort of real issues with low-power e-bikes on many of the mtb trails I usually ride. Just please don't try to hinge my access on yours. Happy to have you, but if you **** on the floor, you're on your own. Only fair.


Hey I'm not defending anything, just giving my opinion and perspective! take it as you like.

I agree that's Fair. I feel pretty sure that attitudes will change when more riders actually try one. But I don't understand why anyone would think that riders who ride eMTB's would or are going to **** on the floor... by that I assume you mean something like cause all kinds of problems, destroy the trails, not contribute to trail maintenance and building, not be in local clubs, and probably most worrisome, eliminate the access to the trails you like to ride. Why is that I wonder? Its almost like there is some expectation that some new breed of rogue eMTB riders are going to start camping out at the trailheads, starting brawls, and leaving trash everywhere, and causing pure havoc.

Most eMTB riders are or are going to be previous and current MTB riders....the same riders that take care of and promote access to the trails now and that have worked hard over the years and decades to go from what was more or less nothing when the sport started, to now.... Same people, different bikes. I don't know anyone who started riding an eMTB suddenly because they exist, maybe on the road, but not on technical trails. Every single one of the guys I ride eMTB bikes with are also avid riders and/or competitive Euduro or downhill racers who have been passionate about MTB's life long. Just because they ride an eMTB sometimes didn't change that. The assumption that it would for people like myself or others I know that ride eMTB's isn't Fair.


----------



## Bikedriver (Jun 11, 2016)

Empty_Beer said:


> Obvious? Nope. Where is the motor?
> 
> View attachment 1079279


I think the motor is probably in the downtube, same place they are and check now for road racers who cheat with electric motors. Pretty cool bike though. Can't imagine that has much range or power, but still, good engineering none the less.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

GRPABT1 said:


> You know what really annoys me? Some butthurt moron gave me negative reputation merely for commenting on an E-bike thread. It's not that I care about reputation on a forum but the very fact someone would get so bent out of shape pisses me off. I don't even own an E-bike or have a desire to own one. I just simply don't have a problem with them and I think most of the hatred is unfounded and speculative. Can't we all just get along? This forum has an E-bike section, yet every thread in it is filled with hatred from people who haven't even ridden E-bikes. Now what if I went over to the Specialized section and started hanging **** on every specialized owner in every thread? I'd promptly get myself a whack from the ban stick. Yet apparently it's OK to act like a douche bag in this section. Again I will reiterate that I do not own nor wish to own an electric bike of any form, I simply have never ever had my day impacted upon by an E-bike one iota (except that is in this forum).


Didn't you know that any positive comment about eMTB's is met with rancor, debasement and ridicule by the few that have crawled out from under their rocks to respond to this forum? They still think they're in the third grade when 10 or so of them would beat up the two smallest girls in the class and take their lunch money everyday.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

fos'l said:


> Didn't you know that any positive comment about eMTB's is met with rancor, debasement and ridicule by the few that have crawled out from under their rocks to respond to this forum? They still think they're in the third grade when 10 or so of them would beat up the two smallest girls in the class and take their lunch money everyday.


Butthurt much? You have no room to talk about "rancor, debasement and ridicule".


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Hey, I'm in 5th grade!

-Walt


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

another vid from a strong mtb rider with open mind:


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Really neat but it still takes a talented experienced rider to do that how long before that is more common ?? to see one those on the trail??


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Empty_Beer said:


> Obvious? Nope. Where is the motor?
> 
> View attachment 1079279


That's precisely the problem! A land-manager, hiker, or equestrian sees that thing flying up a hill and blames it on mountain bikers. If you can't differentiate between the two, then they will be treated the same in many places.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

mountainbiker24 said:


> That's precisely the problem! A land-manager, hiker, or equestrian sees that thing flying up a hill and blames it on mountain bikers. If you can't differentiate between the two, then they will be treated the same in many places.


Instead of worrying about an ebike going a benign 6 to 13 mph up a hill, how about focussing your advocacy on when and where your friends shouldn't be bombing down MUT's at 25 to 35+ mph on mountain bikes? This is our greatest problem as 2 wheelers, not some person going UPHILL slightly faster than a regular bike goes.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Where's the fun in that, the electric motor is doing ALL the work, if not for that motor,not making all those climbs :skep: That is the big part of what makes MTB so unique, over coming obstacles using our own engines, using different technologies yes - _suspension, gears,hydraulic brakes _- but it's our own power that gets the bike up and over them. Say it again, too many lazy people who only want to have "fun" but don't want to have to put in the work it takes to get to have it, easy way out, once again fueled by a bunch of money hungry conglomerates 



uhoh7 said:


> another vid from a strong mtb rider with open mind:


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Empty_Beer said:


> Instead of worrying about an ebike going a benign 6 to 13 mph up a hill, how about focussing your advocacy on when and where your friends shouldn't be bombing down MUT's at 25 to 35+ mph on mountain bikes? This is our greatest problem as 2 wheelers, not some person going UPHILL slightly faster than a regular bike goes.


With 750 extra watts at my disposal, I can do 20-25mph up basically any climb you point me at.

Just saying.

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Empty_Beer said:


> Instead of worrying about an ebike going a benign 6 to 13 mph up a hill, how about focussing your advocacy on when and where your friends shouldn't be bombing down MUT's at 25 to 35+ mph on mountain bikes? This is our greatest problem as 2 wheelers, not some person going UPHILL slightly faster than a regular bike goes.


35+ on MUT singletrack? Your friends ride faster than anyone I know.

Unlike some who act like 250W bikes are all we will ever see, I do worry about the days when most motorized mountain bikes will have 3 times that power enabling you be far faster uphill, smoke the flats and yes be faster downhill. I don't know about most of you, but there's plenty of rolling downhills I ride that you'd be able to activate your motor on. Once used to the weight, I fail to see how you couldn't be faster or at worst, the same on a downhill on an ebike.

Then, the engineering part of my brain immediately starts thinking, hmm, if I could design a mtb that I didn't have to worry about making effcient to pedal, what would it look like? I'm sure I'm not alone either, expect ebikes to change from a mtb with a motor attached to a purpose built bike designed around a motors strengths. Longer, more supple travel, stiffer wheels, bigger brakes, fatter, sticky tires all optimized to rail turns, blast rock gardens and ride faster than current trailbikes. I don't want my front country trails filled with DH bikes, thanks anyway.

Then there's the extended range. Most people aren't lucky enough to have a single long trail they can do an out and back on, they do the bulk of their riding in specific areas with nested loop trail systems. So, even if you are not adding any new riders by an existing mtber choosing to ride his emtb, he's going to ride farther and faster in the same amount of time or expending the same amount of energy. Instead of one loop with the big climb after work, maybe he'll be able to do two now? Or tack on another section instead?

So, while I do worry about idiots riding too fast MUTs as it is (thanks Strava) I don't want them to be able to ride even faster bikes while at it as well as increasing trail impact per rider.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Walt said:


> With 750 extra watts at my disposal, I can do 20-25mph up basically any climb you point me at.
> 
> Just saying.
> 
> -Walt


Are you speaking from experience? How long were you able to sustain that speed?

The 750W* ebikes my friends and I raced on couldn't get anywhere near 20mph going up any moderate or significant hill. And on any flat section or pedally descent, the assist turned off at 20mph so we were pedaling 50 pounds of bike slower than the un-assisted bikes ridden by fellow expert class racers. I haven't seen any videos of Class I or II ebikes going anywhere near 20 mph on uphills either.

You must be a beast! :thumbsup:

* Edit - I'm assuming we raced 750W Haibikes. They were stock from a local bike shop, and pedal assist immediately turned off upon hitting 20mph, which I only achieved on flats and pedally descents. Never on an uphill.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Empty_Beer said:


> Are you speaking from experience? How long were you able to sustain that speed?
> 
> The 750W ebikes my friends and I raced on couldn't get anywhere near 20mph going up any moderate or significant hill. And on any flat section or pedally descent, the assist turned off at 20mph so we were pedaling 50 pounds of bike slower than the un-assisted bikes ridden by fellow expert class racers. I haven't seen any videos of Class I or II ebikes going anywhere near 20 mph on uphills either.
> 
> You must be a beast! :thumbsup:


I think the point was that 1100w of combined power has the potential to produce significant speed increases, perhaps several times faster than human legs and lungs alone.

Seems it would be pretty easy to dial you speed in to 19mph, easily double the speed of one of those leg-powered bums pushing a measly 350w.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Harryman said:


> 35+ on MUT singletrack? Your friends ride faster than anyone I know.
> 
> yada, yada, yada..
> 
> So, while I do worry about idiots riding too fast MUTs as it is (thanks Strava) I don't want them to be able to ride even faster bikes while at it as well as increasing trail impact per rider.


You're not going to see any horses on this trail, but it is open to all, including motos. All singletrack. Fastest guys (mostly pros) are breaking 40mph in places: https://www.strava.com/activities/14309687#1067753576

This is a true, non-motorized MUT... where horses frequently are encountered. Fortunately where folks hit 30+ mph, the visibility is unobstructed... but I always worry someone is going to kill someone else on the 2 blind spots on this descent: https://www.strava.com/activities/271758503#6363650682









I'm not going to worry about people hotrodding their ebike to go a lot faster than what has been legally permitted by regulation. I'd guess the people that do that would represent a tiny fraction of trail users, and I won't assume that those who do tinker are automatically jerks who don't know how to share a trail. I'd be curious to know if hotrodding has been an issue/problem in Europe though.

I'm also not going to worry about people going further or doing 2 laps instead of 1. And I'm certainly not going to be bothered if someone expended less energy than the next guy.

I will continue to worry about poor trail etiquette and will continue to do what I can locally to educate riders on sharing trails safely and respectfully with others.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Le Duke said:


> I think the point was that 1100w of combined power has the potential to produce significant speed increases, perhaps several times faster than human legs and lungs alone.
> 
> Seems it would be pretty easy to dial you speed in to 19mph, easily double the speed of one of those leg-powered bums pushing a measly 350w.


I have to ask, have you actually ridden a Class 1 or 2 ebike?

My experience racing this bike as fast as I could possibly pedal was that at max effort, I could not get close to achieving a speed anyone would consider to be "fast" going up hill. I'm chasing my buddy here:


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I don't need to ride one, I can do basic math. 1100 W and ~200# vehicle+rider weight = very, very fast.

You can calculate it out right here: Speed

Assuming a .02 coefficient of friction (smooth dirt) I'd go about 12.7 m/s, or 28 mph on a moderate 5% climb.

On a very steep 10% grade I'd still go 21 mph.

So for all practical purposes, we'd be looking at hitting the assist limit on all climbs, all the time, if you wanted to.

-Walt


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Oh Walt! Seriously? :shocked:

Well... enjoy your armchair, keyboard and calculator while the MTB world doesn't get destroyed by ebikes.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Empty_Beer said:


> I have to ask, have you actually ridden a Class 1 or 2 ebike?
> 
> My experience racing this bike as fast as I could possibly pedal was that at max effort, I could not get close to achieving a speed anyone would consider to be "fast" going up hill. I'm chasing my buddy here:
> 
> View attachment 1079527


Nope. Why? Because I have no desire to do so. And, fortunately, my house is surrounded by USFS land, as far as the eye can see.

Anyways, 19.9mph in a situation where you'd normally go 6-8mph is not "fast"?

I realize everything is subjective, but, really, you don't see 2.5-3x+ the speed being a problem in areas with limited visibility?

Hell, there are some times where I have to slow down going uphill on low-grade hills, under my own power, and that's at 1/3rd the speed.

I don't have to ride an e-"bike" to know that significant speed increases = conflict.

FWIW, I could go to the VA, get seen by a doctor, and be eligible for an ADA card immediately. And yet, you'll never catch me e-doping on an e-"bike". Ever.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

250W should make you pretty darn fast, even without a lot of effort on your own part. 

And remember, we're talking about what's legal in the US, which is 3 times that power. 

It's just a backdoor for e-motos. Which I'm actually for... just not on MUTs. 

That pic looks like a great place to ride an e-bike to me. My local trails, not so much. I almost collided with someone coming the other way today on a blind corner with a total closing speed of *maybe* 15 mph (me going a very cautious ~10 on the DH, him riding a casual ~5mph uphill). If he'd been going even a little faster, it would have been bad. 

-Walt


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Wow! That's 2. Who else is waving opinions around left and right but hasn't bothered to even _try _one of these rigs? Harryman? Mountainbiker24? JB Weld? tiretracks?

Now, I don't have to try crystal meth to know it is not something I ever want to try, but a bicycle with pedal assist is not comparable to something truly destructive like crystal meth, although I suppose some could get addicted to pedal assist. But that is actually improving one's health, in my opinion, since pedaling is pedaling.

I'll try my best to refrain from responding to comments from those who have no actual hands-on experience with ebikes from now on. I might as well spend my internet time debating HOHA's about re-opening some sections of the Pacific Crest Trail to mountain bikes. :thumbsup:


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Empty_Beer said:


> Wow! That's 2. Who else is waving opinions around left and right but hasn't bothered to even _try _one of these rigs? Harryman? Mountainbiker24? JB Weld? tiretracks?


Your assumptions demonstrate that you are not interested in any kind of meaningful discourse, you simply wish to beat a dead horse.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

Here is my reason to reject them with out riding them. They are the keurig of bikes. 

One can make great coffee with any means of currently available methods of making coffee; French press, pump espresso, stove top espresso, drip, pour over, etc. Keurig however allows you to make coffee 1 minute quicker with a nice waste piece of aluminum and plastic as a byproduct. 

It is not like the coffee pod machine is smaller or will probably last as long as most other means of making coffee (cheap drips notwithstanding, the department store bike of coffee makers) but people buy them in droves because they make crummy coffee quicker.

I can make a cappuccino in my home machine in 4 minutes. Keurig can do it in 2. The cost? Freshness, added waste, chemicals (?), preservatives. The gain? 2 minutes.

E-bikes feel the same to me. You get everything that mountain bikes get with a little extra speed and a little less effort. However you also get added technology, batteries and motors, lead, platinum, and electricity from probably non renewable sources.

What happens in 2 years when your batteries die? Land fill? What about 5 years when you can't get replacement parts for your drive because they have evolved so far? Chuck the bike? Ride a 40lbs hardtail?

In this case they are like cellphones. After a couple of years will they be obsolete? Will there be an ebike recycling bin at home depot?

These are not questions I need to ask about my bike. So in pursuit of less time and effort you, like coffee pods, gain more waste, more complexity, less availability, untested lifespan to do something that there are already more ways than possible to do and have a good time doing a little faster, with a little more effort, and for more money.

Just like keurig.

sent


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

tiretracks said:


> Your assumptions demonstrate that you are not interested in any kind of meaningful discourse, you simply wish to beat a dead horse.


I think I've participated in meaningful and respectful discourse all along... I just figured people posting frequently in the *ebike *forum have actually ridden an ebike at least once. I was genuinely surprised to learn that Walt and Le Duke have not, given how many comments they've made on the subject. Have you ridden one? If so, how fast could you go up a moderate hill, and how long could you sustain that speed?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

My interest here is pretty much to make sure the "e bikes are just like regular bikes!" meme is killed good and dead.

I already have to ride my normal bikes slower than I'd like on a lot of trails, because the bikes are too capable and fast. The last thing I need is added power, and the last thing I want is to watch a bunch of yahoos add speed and ease with no extra effort, and then ruin the experience for others.

It would have been easy to roll these out to the moto crowd and the manufacturers to explicity state that they were motorized and intended for motorized trails only. Instead we have a sneaky, cynical attempt to get them in under the radar by making them look like normal bikes and exploiting loopholes in laws intended for paved paths and roads. We hear basically nothing from the manufacturers and advocates other than "they're just like bikes" and "they're coming so deal with it" and "they're popular in Europe". Pathetic, really. 

I used to race and ride motos. Motos are rad. These could easily replace a lot of ICE motos and make the world a better place for motorized recreation. Too bad.

-Walt


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

rockcrusher said:


> Here is my reason to reject them with out riding them. They are the keurig of bikes.
> 
> One can make great coffee with any means of currently available methods of making coffee; French press, pump espresso, stove top espresso, drip, pour over, etc. Keurig however allows you to make coffee 1 minute quicker with a nice waste piece of aluminum and plastic as a byproduct.
> 
> ...


None of that changes the fact that the keurig is here and consumers are purchasing it... and so are ebikes... and laptops... and cell phones... and Teslas... and Sony Walkmen. Are you really drawing the line on environment with the ebike battery?

So an ebike isn't for you. Same goes for me. I guess it is the demonizing of something that is likely to have little to no affect on my enjoyment of mountain biking that bugs me. And I just can't help but compare the attitudes towards ebikes (from mountain bikers exclusively) to the attitudes of some vocal hikers and equestrians back in the 1980's towards mountain bikes. It feels like history is repeating itself, but hateful hikers and equestrians now have some mountain bikers on their side.

I feel like I can literally turn every anti-ebike argument (or whatever you want to call it) around and make the same case for prohibiting mountain bikes on MUTs.

Okay... now I need to step away from this forum. I know I won't change any of the entrenched minds here! Happy trails!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

The hikers (and I, and most of the rest of us, are hikers as well as mountain bikers) are mostly right, though. Mountain bikes are fast. They DO cause problems. Most of the time those can be mitigated with good trail design, good manners, and enough trail to distribute users at low density. 

But if you add more speed, you add to all those problems. That's the main reason motos aren't allowed on MUT in most areas. Adding speed is a bad thing for mountain biking, and motors and batteries are going to add speed. Period. 

You can argue about exactly how many watts or what speed the assist cuts out, but the bottom line is that faster is NOT what we need for continued trail access. I don't want to hike on a trail with my kids where people are going to be bombing at 20mph down AND up. And I know how people like to ride their unpowered bikes - which is as fast as they can. Why would they do anything different with a faster bike?

-Walt


----------



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

Empty_Beer said:


> Wow! That's 2. Who else is waving opinions around left and right but hasn't bothered to even _try _one of these rigs? Harryman? Mountainbiker24? JB Weld? tiretracks?


I've ridden low powered electric bikes but none of the recent incarnations.

Whether or not I've ridden one is totally irrelevant to every objection I have with them though, whether or not they're fun is equally as irrelevant. Nobody knows what their impact will be because no one knows how popular they may become. The amount of electric bikes on the trails now and the behavior of their riders is meaningless data as far as future predictions. How many riders may or may not adhere to the regulated limits is unknown. How far battery technology might advance in the next few decades is unknown.

Once again (sigh) I've no problems with the machines or the riders themselves, it's Specialized, Trek, Pizzi, et al. that I have issues with. They're lobbying to redefine the bicycle in order to open previously untapped markets with zero regard for those who have no interest in them. Without this potential loophole electric mountain bikes would be a non-issue and non-controversial.


----------



## JVG1967 (Feb 22, 2014)

All this back and forth about E Bikes and trail access is crazy. Out of all the threads in this section of the forums there are like five that I've counted that are actually discussions about the bikes themselves and not access arguments. Personally I could give a sh*t whether the trail I ride on is motorized only or non motorized only as long as I have a place to LEGALLY ride my Specialized Levo. 

The arguments that E Bikes should have access to all trails is crazy and same for the argument that they should be banned from all trails. The bikes are here to stay and that's evident by the increasing number of manufacturers jumping into the market. Every state has different rules and regulations regarding the bikes and its up to the owners to find out what they are and abide by them. Seems pretty simple to me.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Empty_Beer said:


> You're not going to see any horses on this trail, but it is open to all, including motos. All singletrack. Fastest guys (mostly pros) are breaking 40mph in places: https://www.strava.com/activities/14309687#1067753576
> 
> This is a true, non-motorized MUT... where horses frequently are encountered. Fortunately where folks hit 30+ mph, the visibility is unobstructed... but I always worry someone is going to kill someone else on the 2 blind spots on this descent: https://www.strava.com/activities/271758503#6363650682
> 
> ...


You have trails that enable that sort of speed, I stand corrected. Everything here is either steeper and more technical or more twisty, we don't have wide open sweepers like that.

People do delimit their bikes in the EU, all it takes is $200 and 5 minutes.

Brands must be tough on e-bike modifications, says supplier | Bicycle Business | BikeBiz

Speed Tuning Kits Threaten E-Bike Market Development

In action - 




Like you, I don't care who expends more or less energy, but as a trail designer, I do care about usage. My local trails are swarming with users and if ebikes are significant in number, I'm not going to ignore the increase in range over an mtb.



> * Edit - I'm assuming we raced 750W Haibikes. They were stock from a local bike shop, and pedal assist immediately turned off upon hitting 20mph, which I only achieved on flats and pedally descents. Never on an uphill.


No, I'm almost 100% certain 250W. Haibike only makes a few that I think are 350W and 500W and ebike races are usually limited to 250W to try and keep a level playing field. Except for a few very small companies, 750W bikes are only seen as kitbikes at this time. Until January, anything over 250W in Europe (s-pedelcs) was considered a moped and needed light, license etc. So, no one was making emtbs in that power range since you couldn't legally ride them on trails. Human nature at work, after 5 years of 250W, people wanted more power.......



> Wow! That's 2. Who else is waving opinions around left and right but hasn't bothered to even try one of these rigs? Harryman? Mountainbiker24? JB Weld? tiretracks?


I've ridden a Levo and ridden surrounded by piles of ebikes in Europe, both on the road and dirt. If this was Europe and everyone was limited to 250W bikes with 15.5mph cut off, and the other user groups didn't care? I'd be for them. But this isn't, a 250W motor is "low powered", yet still enough for most sensible people who feel that with an assist bike, you should be pedaling and the motor assist you. A 750W motor is beyond those limitations, pedaling in the kitbike community who ride 750W and up is considered a relic, only done when necessary. The speed cut offs here are also higher, easily bypassed and there will be essentially zero enforcement. Kitbikes are exempt for all practical purposes, they aren't mentioned in the legislation at all.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Harry, agree about kit bikes --- too difficult to regulate or certify and will probably never (never say never) be "approved".
Rode a Trek 28 mph Bosch-equipped commuter today; reportedly Bosch can access the computer data remotely and determine how long the bike has been ridden in each assist level. This is why I don't think that many individuals will "tune" the motor, but I've been wrong before.
Also, I built a more powerful bike (32 mph - must be ridden on private land) using a direct drive hub motor, but am very happy with Class 1 PAS, 20 mph maximum assist.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Empty_Beer said:


> Wow! That's 2. Who else is waving opinions around left and right but hasn't bothered to even _try _one of these rigs? Harryman? Mountainbiker24? JB Weld? tiretracks?


I have experience with an electric-powered pedal-assist commuter bike that a shop I worked for back in 2008 was selling. It had a throttle, so you didn't have to pedal, and it had a top speed of about 20 mph, if I remember correctly. It wasn't fast in the context that mountain bikes can be pedaled well over 20 mph, but it was much faster in certain situations that I wasn't used to. On a trail, this would translate to many more blind corners at higher speeds and, as mentioned numerous times, increased closing speeds everywhere other than downhills. This bike would increase potential user conflicts on many mountain bike trails. I only say "potential" because I never rode it on trails, but it is pretty obvious.

Now my turn to ask a question to justify all you e-bikers' relevence to this discussion. How many of you guys have actually done volunteer trail work and been through trail access battles? If you haven't been a part of both, you'll never understand why mountain bikers are anti e-bike. Although it seems pretty clear that very few people actually make an attempt to understand both sides of this argument, given how every thread turns into the same arguments with the same faulty logic and little gain.


----------



## dstepper (Feb 28, 2004)

I think the better question is what demographic will switch to e-bikes. New people to MTBing. People that MTBs. People that where riding motos. It is only the new that are not familiar with trail access issues. I do all the above including lots of trail work. The advocacy is better left to people that can handle frustration better than I. 

Dean


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

As I've said before, I've done trail work, been to meetings (where IMO the equestrians were mollified when they realized we were not interested in scaring the hell out of them, but wanted the environment to be acceptable for all groups; the hikers seem harder to convince), helped rescue individuals, been a docent to lead MTB groups, hiked because I enjoy it and to gain a different perspective and been as good an advocate of MTB as possible. I've ridden my MTB probably 400X to 500X in the last two years and 5X on an e-MTB, so if they're never approved I won't die because of nothing to do. I'm an eMTB advocate, do as many errands as possible on my eMTB and hope they're approved on some (all) trails eventually. Can't believe they won't be with all the money being poured into them.


----------



## Capt.Ogg (Jun 5, 2015)

Walt said:


> But if you add more speed, you add to all those problems. That's the main reason motos aren't allowed on MUT in most areas. Adding speed is a bad thing for mountain biking, and motors and batteries are going to add speed. Period.


I ride both. And for the life of me I have not been able to snatch a single KOM on my e-mtb. The longer and steeper the climb, the closer I get, but not even close to KOM. (I do mark my ebike rides private after comparing results).

I know I'm statistically insignificant and a poor rider. Overall I'm a bit faster on ebike, but only about 1mph/h. Note: I ride EU regulated 250W pedal assist ebike so things may be different in US with higher wattage and speed limits. Anyone destroying KOMS on ebikes here?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

In CA we have some long ascents (in fact, many of the trails that I frequent are long climb up, long descent back --- even if it's some kind of loop). While it's possible for some to improve their times, the fast guys --- don't ride and might not be helped by e-assist --- are still faster. My friend ascended a long climb in record (for him) time, but still not as fast as quick riders. JMO with a little facts.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

So, fast guys are fast, slow guys are slow, slow guys with a motor are not as fast as fast guys. Got it. 

I've been passed on the climbs by just about everyone I've ridden with who was on a EU spec ebike, so I guess I'm slow. They looked far faster than they would have been, since they were hardly working, so I guess they were slow too. Except they were pretty fast actually, ....I'm just confused.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

fos'l said:


> Can't believe they won't be with all the money being poured into them.


Meh...this hasn't done jack for motorized users in the northeast.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Harry, don't feel bad, I get passed by slow bikes on my MTB; my wife and I rode eMTB's once (out of probably 500X riding together) and actually passed some people on a long ascent. She loved the bike but always rides her MTB, so that's what I do.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

"Even if people absolutely don't get them or object to them on moral grounds, we've yet to see anyone that's ridden an e-MTB for any length of time and not had a grin so huge it needs to be chiselled off their face. We're pretty sure the level of assistance is directly linked to your cheek muscles. "

10 reasons you should try an e-MTB - BikeRadar USA

This is a recent article and pretty friendly compared to some others I've read on the same site.

Also noted somewhere in my skim today, was that no pro of any calibre can beat a normal person on a e-mtb climbing (barring something needing advanced technical moves). Which really must not endear the things to some "purists". 

But is that really a reason to ban them? Maybe some places. However, I don't see the grounds to restrict backcountry travel at a given impact level because of an assist. Noise? I could see that. Weight? About an extra 25lbs. Lightest motorcycles are around 160LBs, and a normal enduro is 250LBs.

In the minds of the creed, the e-mtb is a cultural assault. Oh well, there's alot of that going around these days 

Sometimes fun trumps identity politics


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Nah, I never feel bad when getting passed, my competitive days are long gone. I'm just out for the experience.



> All that extra power means that mild or uphill trails quickly becomes a fast and furious test of skills. Instead of huffing, puffing and dripping with sweat, you'll now be going fast enough to have to spot berms and catch drifts even on uphill trails. Basically it's like descending all the time, and who could hate that?


Actually, while I was reading the list, all I could think of is 1), why isn't 250W enough, why 750W? This sounds plenty powerful. And, 2) this is a list of all the things that while fun, further reinforce the difference between ebikes and bikes.

I'm paraphrasing:

1 - You can descend all the time
2- They are much heavier than bikes
3- You'll have so much fun descending all the time, you'll ride farther and faster than on a bike.
4- More miles with less effort = more impact per rider
5- Powerful enough to shuttle two of your friends. More ripping downhills for everyone!
6- Weight doesn't matter because you have a powerful motor pushing you around.
7- Keep riding when you are old and unfit
8- Ride faster than a pro! DH all the time remember?
9- They are fun
10 - You now know what they are like

While fun is a great way to sell ebikes and every other sort of toy, and I have no doubt that they are, it's a weak argument that is often returned to as a reason for access. "Once you try them, everyone will want them on all trails". Which doesn't carry any weight when it actually comes down to making decisions as to what sort of use is appropriate on what trails.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Harry, I never claimed they should have access because they are fun. 

They should have access appropriate to their impact. Which is dramatically less than a motorcycle. Restricting them like noisy gas-powered bikes is oblivious to the difference.

You don't "descend all the time", of course. Gravity has many more watts than any e-bike


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Two things: 
1) Everyone is different, but for me it's all about the bike which is why I'm always experimenting with geometry etc; eMTB's gave me another parameter. I've been on (TO ME) the greatest trails in CA, UT and AZ, and they were scenic and exciting, but it's always been about the bike. So will ride eMTB's where they're allowed.
2) Doesn't the "cheating" arguments (I'm using cheating to encompass all the benefits of assist) apply to using an eMTB for errands too? Used to use my MTB for errands; now accomplish them in less time on an ebike.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> They should have access appropriate to their impact. Which is dramatically less than a motorcycle. Restricting them like noisy gas-powered bikes is oblivious to the difference.


I can get behind that.
I know plenty of trails that would work fine for e-bikes. I also know some that probably wouldn't IMO.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

slapheadmofo said:


> I can get behind that.
> I know plenty of trails that would work fine for e-bikes. I also know some that probably wouldn't IMO.


Yep. If everybody would agree that e-bikes are different than mountain bikes and motorcycles and belong with a separate designation between the two, I would completely be on board. Some trails would be fine with e-bikes, and some would not. I just don't want to see e-bikes and mountain bikes lumped together.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> I'm an eMTB advocate, do as many errands as possible on my eMTB and hope they're approved on some *(all)* trails eventually. Can't believe they won't be with all the money being poured into them.


All of them eh? As much as I love mountain biking I realize they don't belong on every trail, at least not if you consider other users. Agree with the $$$ part, doesn't make it right though.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

JB; agree, if there was a trail in which eMTB use would compromise MTB activity, wouldn't ride it; if all trails would compromise MTB, wouldn't ride ANY of them. FOR ME, in 30+ years of MTB, I can't remember an instance where passing (used to be, now getting passed) someone (hiker biker or equestrian) caused a problem. The only instances of "distress" were caused by an out of control descender almost slamming into me.
Also, from what I perceive, manufacturers expect CA law to be accepted by lots of other states (UT has already or may have been the model for the CA law). Now, they're distributing so many eMTB's out here, they seem to be expecting off road rules to change. As I've said before, I've been wrong before.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Now, they're distributing so many eMTB's out here, they seem to be expecting off road rules to change.


I fear you're correct, and it blows IMHO. Can you see that if money were not involved and the situation were evaluated from a purely logical and fair standpoint these rule changes would never happen? Just because something is obscenely profitable does not make it right.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Yikes.*



> All that extra power means that mild or uphill trails quickly becomes a fast and furious test of skills. Instead of huffing, puffing and dripping with sweat, you'll now be going fast enough to have to spot berms and catch drifts even on uphill trails. Basically it's like descending all the time, and who could hate that?


What the BR article is basically saying is that it's like riding a motorcycle. That's exactly why I used to ride motos (descending/bike handling all the time) and also why you can't ride motos on most trails.

I'm really not clear why the article doesn't even attempt to answer questions about what happens when you have a lot of e-bikes "descending all the time" in both directions on singletrack with people's dogs and kids running around.

There are definitely places and trails where it would be no problem at all. I much prefer people be out on e-bikes than not out at all, or out on ICE motos. I just can't see it working on any of the narrow, heavily used MUTs around me, or really anywhere I've ever lived.

-Walt


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Other interesting thing (IMO) in CA is the manufacturers wrote the assembly bill that was subsequently approved unanimously by both houses, then signed by the governor. First I heard of the rule was when it passed.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

It was discussed some in the ebike forums before is was signed, but yeah, like most legislation, there seems to have been zero public input or process. Even less for Utah, which now has the same legislation but even more relaxed. I think there was a month for public comment? Then, *poof*, there it was. I expect to see the same thing happen in the other states.

There is a large disconnect between those who want to sell them and the reality on the ground. A LBS just got in a Levo while there is no legal place to ride them in town except for roads and bike lanes, and as far as I can tell, they had no clue that you couldn't ride them anywhere you wanted. I mean, wouldn't you check? 

On several of the ebike forums, there are reasoned discussions about why 250W/20mph is fine and how higher power and speeds will push ebikes into moped territory and just bring far more oversight and restrictions and screw it up for everybody. OFC, not everyone agrees with that, but it's obvious that the industry didn't give that position much thought.


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

To those focused on multi surface road riding, not MUT riding, going to the MoPed classification makes a lot of sense actually. 

The rules and regs are longstanding and well defined. They are not allowed on non-motorized trails/paths. The DOT and NTSA takes over from the CPSC though and there are those hoops to jump through (VIN, lic. plate, approved tires/rims, full lighting, horn, mirror and the real stumper is an auto transmission) on the design/manufacturing end and there are licensing and insurance costs on the consumer side. 

MoPeds have been around for a long time but ones that mimic the fit of a bike and you can actively pedal at speed are on the way.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Harryman said:


> On several of the ebike forums, there are reasoned discussions about why 250W/20mph is fine and how higher power and speeds will push ebikes into moped territory and just bring far more oversight and restrictions and screw it up for everybody. OFC, not everyone agrees with that, but it's obvious that the industry didn't give that position much thought.


This is also the impression I've gotten. The couple of e-bike riders I've spoken with have been dumbfounded to learn they can't go on singletrack here, and the Pedego shop in town openly advertises that you can ride on dirt trails to tour around the various tourist sites - which is also at least theoretically illegal (only pavement is allowed here as of now).

I'm assuming the companies selling the bikes are aware of this problem, but addressing it would kill sales of e-bikes aimed at mountain bikers, at least in the short term. So as far as I can tell they're just trying to ignore the issue entirely.

-Walt


----------



## JVG1967 (Feb 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> This is also the impression I've gotten. The couple of e-bike riders I've spoken with have been dumbfounded to learn they can't go on singletrack here, and the Pedego shop in town openly advertises that you can ride on dirt trails to tour around the various tourist sites - which is also at least theoretically illegal (only pavement is allowed here as of now).
> 
> I'm assuming the companies selling the bikes are aware of this problem, but addressing it would kill sales of e-bikes aimed at mountain bikers, at least in the short term. So as far as I can tell they're just trying to ignore the issue entirely.
> 
> -Walt


Advising people you can use trails when you legally can't for sales is just plain wrong!! I checked my local laws and actually called the parks and places I wanted to ride before I bought my Levo. I'd have been seriously pissed if I found out after spending 4K on a Levo that I had no place to ride it legally.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

If the MTB community in an area considers eMTB's a threat to trail access (I don't, but we know what one opinion is worth), they should do something before the horse is out of the barn. I'm fairly certain the bike shops in socal indicated the new law allowed Class 1 bikes on trails when it wasn't true; maybe wishful thinking; again, it's kind of moot here since there's neither policing nor a budget for it AFAIK.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yeah, we have a grand total of zero rangers/patrollers and thousands and thousands of riders here. So social stigma is really the only existing enforcement. It would be nice if bike shops offered *every* new bike owner (electric or not) some basic rules of the trail/where to ride info.

-Walt


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

Walt said:


> Yeah, we have a grand total of zero rangers/patrollers and thousands and thousands of riders here. So social stigma is really the only existing enforcement. It would be nice if bike shops offered *every* new bike owner (electric or not) some basic rules of the trail/where to ride info.
> 
> -Walt


This here is the issue that everyone seems to forget. Rules are pointless when they can't be enforced.

It's always been difficult for the uninformed to spot an e-bike anyway. I've noticed significant cosmetic advances on this too recently.

While I agree there is money involved I'd also suggest there is a significant desire for ordinary people as its them that are buying them. (Only stuff that people want gets sold)

250W = average power output of good fit rider. 500W = power output of world class rider.

42hp WR450 (trail bike I used to own) = noisey 31,000W

I've ridden a 500W bionx powered (pedal assist no throttle) moonlander quite a bit (we were bionx distributor and had a demo bike). It was like having a very nice tail wind. It was not my WR450!!!

I test rode a stealth bomber (10,000W) I think. I was fantastically underwhelmed.

Based on my experience pedelecs have their place (500W or less and no throttle). I found couples who wanted to ride together but one was much fitter than the other really liked having one to even things up. Also it provides a great access to activity solution for less able people (includes all sorts of things including poor fitness)

500W or less pedelecs don't need huge batteries so remain relatively light (less than 10kg onto weight of normal bike) and inconspicuous. They are also silent and not very fast (assistance in mainly limited to 30kmh max).

These are impossible to police on trails (silent and difficult to distinguish from a 'normal' bike) and in my opinion they don't do any real world harm (silent and not powerful enough to damage trails) so no ones going to bother anyway. Also the people who buy these types of bikes aren't exactly going to be hell raisers!!!! Think about everyone you know who has a sub 500W e-bike. Are they wild n crazy tear it up part hard types? Very much doubt it

Most relatively physically competent and experienced riders won't want one because the extra weight and faff detracts from the riding experience (heavy bikes handle horribly and batteries are an expensive pain in the ass)

The +500W bikes with throttles like the stealth bombers etc are however motorbikes despite being thinly and badly disguised as bicycles. They are easy to spot because of the batteries required.

I think one big difference between the sub 500W pedelec and the 10,000W electric motorbike is the different rider type. The stealth bomber buyer seems to attract a particularly specific type of person. One, being perfectly honest, I personally don't understand. Having ridden one I couldn't understand why you wouldn't just get a motorbike. They have very very few advantages. Just as expensive, just as heavy, less powerful, less range.

I think there will be a time when battery technology catches up and we see electric trail bikes with performance similar to a petrol bike but I think that is a very very long way off.

So my take is the cycling community needs to understand the differences between the 2 distinctly different styles of e-bike that exist in the world today and differentiate between them in discussions.

Sub 500W pedelec without throttle

+500W motorbike with throttle

I think both have their place and I think that the legislation that I see being drawn up around the world correctly reflects that difference and the impact they will both have through their use buy the types of people that will buy them.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

> So my take is the cycling community needs to understand the differences between the 2 distinctly different styles of e-bike that exist in the world today and differentiate between them in discussions.
> 
> Sub 500W pedelec without throttle
> 
> +500W motorbike with throttle


750W bikes with throttles are legal here, so.......

I don't think anyone expects to see 10,000W bikes with any regularity for the reasons you mention, but 1000-1500W bikes won't be rare. Yes, most people will buy 250W bikes, simply because that's pretty much all that's available right now, along with a few 350W and a few 500W bikes. The majority will ride 750W bikes when they are the latest and greatest and fill the showrooms.

As you said, with close to zero enforcement, people will ride what they like, and bikes are very difficult to distinguish from ebikes, the difference between emtbs even more so unless you are an expert. I think people who care though will catch on pretty fast. The best solution IMO is for emtbs to ride motorized trails where there's no restrictions, no enforcement necessary. Locally, whenever someone on a moto ventures on to our very busy non motorized trails, they end up being told they are on the wrong trail probably every 100 ft which seems to be enough to discourage them from returning. I'd expect the same to happen with ebikes. Will that be enough? Who knows.


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

Sorry. Fact check. The stealth B-52 (bomber) I mentioned and referenced at 10,000W is actually 5200W on their website

Stealth are based in Melbourne and I have heard a lot of complaints from folks of them being used regularly on the Mtb trail system there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I don't see the difficulty of distinguishing between e-bikes and bikes visually as a benefit, though. That just means we get higher overall speeds and "mountain bikes" get blamed for scaring hikers and causing collisions. Then the authorities, who mostly aren't interested in distinguishing between them, figure the easiest thing is to just ban bikes of all kinds from whatever trail the problem happened on. 

I've said it a million times - cap the assist at 10mph. That solves the "downhill speeds all the time" problem. 20mph is nuts.

-Walt


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

Walt said:


> I don't see the difficulty of distinguishing between e-bikes and bikes visually as a benefit, though. That just means we get higher overall speeds and "mountain bikes" get blamed for scaring hikers and causing collisions. Then the authorities, who mostly aren't interested in distinguishing between them, figure the easiest thing is to just ban bikes of all kinds from whatever trail the problem happened on.
> 
> I've said it a million times - cap the assist at 10mph. That solves the "downhill speeds all the time" problem. 20mph is nuts.
> 
> -Walt


I guess the reason a 10kmh cap wouldn't work is bikes are primarily used around the world as a form of transport. E-bikes are a huge part of the evolution of that

I don't have figures but I'd take a good guess based on what I have seen around the world that mountain bike style bikes do more miles on pavement than on trails

That's impossible and impractical to legislate for.

Bike legislation is primarily based around the use of bikes as forms of transport because this is what they are primarily sold/purchased for

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

Based on my experience <500W bikes aren't dangerously faster going uphill. They are just not that powerful and not ridden by the right type of person. 

This bears out in test reports I've read


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

iggs said:


> Based on my experience <500W bikes aren't dangerously faster going uphill. They are just not that powerful and not ridden by the right type of person.
> 
> This bears out in test reports I've read
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


10 reasons you should try an e-MTB - BikeRadar USA



> All that extra power means that mild or uphill trails quickly becomes a fast and furious test of skills. Instead of huffing, puffing and dripping with sweat, you'll now be going fast enough to have to spot berms and catch drifts even on uphill trails. Basically it's like descending all the time, and who could hate that?


Just simple physics says you'll at least double your climbing speed with an extra 500W at your disposal. With 750W of assist, I could ride 28mph on smooth dirt up a 5% grade, for example. Even the 250W bikes are advertised/reviewed as capable of making any random person "faster than a pro".

-Walt


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

Cummon Walt- you know better than to believe all advertising hype!! 

Have you ever tried one? It doesn't sound like you have to be honest

Anyway let's look at some examples. Take Nino for instance. Incredible athlete with incredible skills, it's not unreasonable to argue that he is probably the fastest person in the world up off-road climbs. When I see him riding his very very lightweight bike up hills (on TV) I don't see someone going so fast that they risk injuring spectators near by.

Bear in mind with an e-bike you need to add 9kg to the weight to allow for the motor and battery (let's not worry about additional engineering to cope with the extra weight) that sucks up a significant amount of the additional watts.

Then you have to take into account the fact that fit skilled cyclists don't buy e-bikes.

What you end up with is an unfit and unskilled person chugging up a hill they wouldn't be able to otherwise probably at the same speed as everyone else

You could say now "ahah, gotcha! That person is now at the top of the hill on a lethal weapon"

Well it's just not like that. Unfit and unskilled people don't go very fast DH and if they do find themselves going fast the only person they hurt is themselves (which they soon stop doing because that's they way it works)

Gravity is he biggest player in all this. I get tired on some descents without even pedalling because I'm working so hard. A heavy bike will be slower too because it takes more energy to ride it. Only negatives for the e-bike rider in descent.

The only time you are likely to see fit competent riders off-road on e-bikes is when they are testing them. For fit skilled riders the disadvantages of e-bikes outweigh the advantages.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

iggs said:


> Then you have to take into account the fact that fit skilled cyclists don't buy e-bikes.


All the more reason to prohibit them, we've all seen the carnage caused by the unskilled operators of high performance vehicles. The rest of your reasoning is conjecture and is spurious at best.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I'm no Nino and *I* can ride fast enough up moderate climbs going all out that I have to be careful around the blind corners. So yes, I'd say that's a problem. Especially if there's 2-way traffic - think of a twisty flat section of trail with 2 riders both going 20mph in opposite directions...

Yes, you add maybe 8 kg of batteries and motor in exchange you get 250W (or 500, or 750...) of power. A fit 80kg rider (10 times the mass) produces about the same amount. You do the math on that one...

_Walt


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

So you are a hardcore rider and have a big fitness level. You buy your inexperienced wife a e-bike so she can go 20mph on singletrack to keep up with you. What happens on the first blind corner or the first time you encounter other users?
I thought you liked your wife? Don't be a knob. Go buy your wife a bicycle and go slow with her until her fitness level gets better and she becomes a MTB'er.
Everyone needs skill before they go fast.


----------



## JVG1967 (Feb 22, 2014)

I've said this before and I'll say it again, the average rider aboard a e bike like the Levo is not going to go flying up any decent incline at 20 plus mph. The first major factor is the motor assist cuts out at 20mph. When it does your left trying to motivate a 40lb plus bike up hill. Not fun, trust me. To stay in the motor power you have to select a gear that has you pedaling more than normal which also lowers your speed. 

For example on a hill that I regularly climb, unassisted on my Fuel 29er I can go up it at 6 to 8 mph. On my Levo I can go up at 10 to 12 mph. Yes I doubled my speed but it's not even close to 20mph. 

Someone who is at a pro fitness level may be able to go up at 20mph but once they hit that speed the motor cuts out. The 250 watt pedal assist bikes are not going to have any more impact on trails than a regular mountain bike. It's the higher wattage bikes that are the problem. The 500 watt and higher bikes should be restricted to motorized trails only. The lower powered bikes will be dependant on local state laws and regs. Each state is different so check before you buy.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

You doubled your speed with 250W. Bring on the extra 500!

-Walt


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Walt said:


> You doubled your speed with 250W. Bring on the extra 500!
> 
> -Walt


Most people don't seem to understand that, below ~17-18mph, climbing speed is linearly correlated to power output. Meaning, if 250w = 6mph, 500w = 12mph. I'm also guessing that none of them have ever used a power meter.

That, or they have fingers in ears, heads in sand, shouting, "Physics doesn't apply to non-road bicycles!".

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Walt said:


> You doubled your speed with 250W. Bring on the extra 500! -Walt


Why stop there? 3000w is available for any old bike you have laying around. And no pesky pedaling necessary.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

rlee said:


> So you are a hardcore rider and have a big fitness level. You buy your inexperienced wife a e-bike so she can go 20mph on singletrack to keep up with you. What happens on the first blind corner or the first time you encounter other users?
> I thought you liked your wife? Don't be a knob. Go buy your wife a bicycle and go slow with her until her fitness level gets better and she becomes a MTB'er.
> Everyone needs skill before they go fast.


 Ah don't you guys look up at the corner ? I mean the faster you go the father down the trail you should be looking you guys know that right?? If the top speed is 20 on your wifes e bike she will likely ride around 8-10 mph and not be struggling and have a big grin this will mean she will ride more getting stronger , 20 mph on Midwest trails is pretty fast I just got done riding about 15mi on some Mich single track 8-15 avg mph


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

rider95 said:


> Ah don't you guys look up at the corner ? I mean the faster you go the father down the trail you should be looking you guys know that right?? If the top speed is 20 on your wifes e bike she will likely ride around 8-10 mph and not be struggling and have a big grin this will mean she will ride more getting stronger , 20 mph on Midwest trails is pretty fast I just got done riding about 15mi on some Mich single track 8-15 avg mph


Have you ever heard of a "blind corner"?

Believe it or not, sometimes you can't see around the bend in front of you.

Going 20mph uphill vs. 10mph gives you significantly less reaction time.


----------



## JVG1967 (Feb 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> You doubled your speed with 250W. Bring on the extra 500!
> 
> -Walt


Correct, I doubled my speed to what a rider with a higher fitness level would do. The bikes with 500 watts and higher belong on motorized trails only.


----------



## JVG1967 (Feb 22, 2014)

Le Duke said:


> Most people don't seem to understand that, below ~17-18mph, climbing speed is linearly correlated to power output. Meaning, if 250w = 6mph, 500w = 12mph. I'm also guessing that none of them have ever used a power meter.
> 
> That, or they have fingers in ears, heads in sand, shouting, "Physics doesn't apply to non-road bicycles!".
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


Don't need a power meter, I'm against 500 watt and higher bikes being on non-motorized trails.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

JVG1967 said:


> The 250 watt pedal assist bikes are not going to have any more impact on trails than a regular mountain bike. It's the higher wattage bikes that are the problem. The 500 watt and higher bikes should be restricted to motorized trails only. The lower powered bikes will be dependant on local state laws and regs. Each state is different so check before you buy.


I haven't checked every states regs, but I haven't seen any that weren't 750W or 1000W. Nor have I heard of any municipalites restricting it to 250W, it'd be interesting if there were. Basing future impact in the US around 250W bikes seems pointless to me, I'd much prefer it that way, but I think higher powered bikes will be the norm. That's what the industry wants to sell and they are writing the legislation.


----------



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

JVG1967 said:


> The 250 watt pedal assist bikes are not going to have any more impact on trails than a regular mountain bike.


What if trail traffic increases 10x because of them? Will they still have the same impact then?


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

J.B. Weld said:


> What if trail traffic increases 10x because of them? Will they still have the same impact then?


There's not gonna be 10x e bikes on the trail lets be realistic and they wont have any impact that a reg mt bike will have on the trail , you might see one now n then in the near future check one out see for your self


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

rider95 said:


> There's not gonna be 10x e bikes on the trail lets be realistic and they wont have any impact that a reg mt bike will have on the trail , you might see one now n then in the near future check one out see for your self


National Parks have seen massive increases in visitors.

Why? How? The NPS built paved roads into all of them. Completely changed the "backcountry" experience for those who were seeking to avoid people, automobile exhaust, etc.

What was once the province of those who wanted to sweat, to work their way to a view seen by precious few, is now that of those who have a car with AC, an $80 National Parks Pass, and the ability to turn their head 90 degrees to the right or left.

Luckily, building more roads in some NPs is simply impractical, or prohibitively expensive. Which means that once you get more than a mile or two off a paved surface, the numbers of pale, overweight tourists drops significantly.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Who would buy a 250W bike when a 500 or 750W one was available? The writing is on the wall on that one. The Levo and other first-generation mass produced e-bikes are the *slowest* and least capable ones that will ever exist. And they are adding 5-6mph to your climbing speed (and closing speeds with riders coming the other way) already. On a flat, non technical trail, it's not hard to imagine e-bike vs. e-bike at 40mph closing speed...

I nearly had a head-on collision a few days ago in which the total closing speed (me, 10mph descending very cautiously, climber at ~5mph) was only 15mph. If the guy coming uphill had an extra 250W and 5-8mph, it would have been unpleasant. But at that point, who would be at fault? I'd have been the *slower* rider. 

The point is this: climbing is slow and hard and unpleasant. That is a BENEFIT to mountain biking because it keeps closing speeds low on 2-way trails and allows more remote locations to be less crowded for those who want to spend the effort to get there. "Downhill all the time" is a bad thing unless we want to go the way of the moto.

You could have all the benefits of making climbs easier, rides longer, handicapped riders access, etc - all with a cutoff at ~10mph or even lower. If e-bike folks want to really be serious about getting access to MUTs, that's where they should be directing their efforts. 

-Walt


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

I understand that you are applying what you all perceive to be physics but what you conclude is not my experience based on a few rides on a 500W pedelec I had access to and sharing busy trails with plenty of trail ebikes on Eurobike demo days (I was always on non ebikes as I had stuff I needed to do)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JVG1967 (Feb 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> Who would buy a 250W bike when a 500 or 750W one was available? The writing is on the wall on that one. The Levo and other first-generation mass produced e-bikes are the *slowest* and least capable ones that will ever exist. And they are adding 5-6mph to your climbing speed (and closing speeds with riders coming the other way) already. On a flat, non technical trail, it's not hard to imagine e-bike vs. e-bike at 40mph closing speed...
> 
> I nearly had a head-on collision a few days ago in which the total closing speed (me, 10mph descending very cautiously, climber at ~5mph) was only 15mph. If the guy coming uphill had an extra 250W and 5-8mph, it would have been unpleasant. But at that point, who would be at fault? I'd have been the *slower* rider.
> 
> ...


E Bikes (250 watt) won't have access to EVERY trail, that's impossible. Some non-motorized trails are just too dam crowded. Allowing e bikes on trails that are already crowded with hikers, joggers, kids etc is just asking for trouble. Even as an e bike owner I understand this and I'm fine with it. Most national parks fall into this category so I doubt e bikes will be allowed there any time soon.


----------



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

JVG1967 said:


> E Bikes (250 watt) won't have access to EVERY trail, that's impossible.


Your attitude is sensible but 'every trail' is exactly what many electric bike advocates are gunning for.


----------



## JVG1967 (Feb 22, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> Your attitude is sensible but 'every trail' is exactly what many electric bike advocates are gunning for.


People just need to be realistic about this whole thing. Not all trails are suitable for e bikes. Some are too crowded to handle the higher speeds e bikes are capable of. National parks draw a lot of people and the trails get crowded, not a good mix with e bikes.

Some trails are too compact and narrow for e bikes. We have a local trail here in Delaware which I ride on my Fuel 29er. It's very narrow, one way traffic, and there are places where the trees are very close together and it's a tight squeeze to ride through. The last thing I need is the motor kicking in when I'm trying to shoehorn my bike between them. I've already removed a fair share of skin from my knuckles on my regular bike.

https://imageshack.us/a/img921/9866/VT9lUH.jpg


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

The problem is that the companies selling the bikes, and most of the owners of the bikes, seem to want them to simply be treated as bicycles for trail access purposes. That's insanity. There are some trails that can handle more speed no problem. There are lots that can't.

I've proposed this before but I'd say:
-Motorized, anything goes.
-Directional, bike-only trails: allow e-bikes
-Directional (for bikes) MUTs: allow e-bikes on a case-by-base trial basis
-Bidirectional bike only and MUTs: no e-bikes

I think that's a pretty reasonable starting point. If it turns out that there are no problems, then access to other trails could be opened up. 

-Walt


----------



## JVG1967 (Feb 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> The problem is that the companies selling the bikes, and most of the owners of the bikes, seem to want them to simply be treated as bicycles for trail access purposes. That's insanity. There are some trails that can handle more speed no problem. There are lots that can't.
> 
> I've proposed this before but I'd say:
> -Motorized, anything goes.
> ...


I have no problem with that. If it works out then other trails could be opened up to e bike access.


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

It sounds unenforceable

There is absolutely no point in unenforceable rules of any kind


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

iggs said:


> It sounds unenforceable
> 
> There is absolutely no point in unenforceable rules of any kind
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That is why a blanket prohibition makes the most sense.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

iggs said:


> It sounds unenforceable
> 
> There is absolutely no point in unenforceable rules of any kind
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You don't really need enforcement other than social stigma. Nobody is going to want to ride their e-bike on a trail where they get yelled at every 100 feet. That's why you don't see motos or ATVs on trails where they're banned, not because there's a sheriff at every trailhead.

Besides, if you really believe that since we can't enforce any rules on the trail, we should just abandon everything and let everyone do whatever they want. I guess that's at least a consistent anarchist position, but I'm not sure I'd advocate it in a public forum. I can just see some silver haired lady waving a printout of your post in outrage at a public hearing...

-Walt


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

Hmmmm interesting points

More fool anyone waving anything of mine around in public

I've deleted the next 'joke' I was trying to make as there is no way I can make it anyway appropriate

I wonder what the case is for free speech if everyone worries that what they say in honesty could be realistically waved around at any moment.

Having just watched a referendum in the UK where politicians TOLD people they were bored with experts and watch with trepidation at the Drumf nightmare unfold I am very much against folks not discussing honestly what they think and qualifying it with either their experience or lack of it.

I'm not clever enough to second guess if and how I might be quoted so my only options are to shut up or say what I think openly and honestly. I think honest discussion is a better way forward.

I can see logic in the ban them all because that will at least stop some.

It wouldn't stop me but then I don't currently fit into the demographic that I see buying and riding e-bikes

I just think that based on my experience if it looks like a bicycle it is a bicycle and I think their capacity for harm is pretty damn similar.

E-bikes are here and they are here to stay. I think they form a significant part of the future of transport.

I think there is something potentially with bicycle advocates shooting themselves in the foot in some respects.

As stated above in my experience sub 500W pedelecs don't cause any more real risk to anyone or anything than a conventional bike (taking into account existing legislation where it exists (power restriction, power assist speed restriction & ideally pedelec only (no throttle))).

Just like anything else the problem lies in the riders (Mtb or Moto is the same). Under most circumstances 99.999% of the time for unskilled riders the first person that gets hurt is the rider. This is Darwinian theory working at its best.

On this basis I think overstating the risk could open the door to arguing bikes are dangerous in the same way. Same speeds in reality (in my experience) both up and down

Go and try one THEN tell me I'm wrong 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I agree that they're a big part of the future of transport. But dirt trails (at least in the developed world) are basically never used for "transport". They are used for recreation. Totally different world, totally different rules. 

I don't think Brexit or the Donald have any bearing on this, honestly. I'm a little confused by that part. 

-Walt


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

I don't see how you can completely separate transport and recreational cycling. Roads are used for both. Trails are used for both (eg canal paths in the uk are a popular cycle commuter corridor and are used recreationally). Bikes are used for both

We are talking about legislation here and advocacy. The way we approach all aspects of our law making has an effect. Politicians have played the don't listen to the experts card ALOT recently and this will have an effect on all aspects of law making (potentially)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

It's pretty easy to separate mountain biking from transport, at least in the US. I'd be surprised if 1% of mountain bikers commute to work (or anywhere) on singletrack. Perhaps in the UK that's not the case. 

Here I don't think a canal path would be considered a "trail", nor managed as such. 

Regardless, it would be easy to just judge that on a case by case basis. Wide open path next to the canal? Do whatever you like. Narrow twisty trail in the woods? Maybe not.

-Walt


----------



## Capt.Ogg (Jun 5, 2015)

Walt said:


> Who would buy a 250W bike when a 500 or 750W one was available? The writing is on the wall on that one. The Levo and other first-generation mass produced e-bikes are the *slowest* and least capable ones that will ever exist.


People who obey laws. I'm in EU (Finland to be exact). We have the right to roam on foot, skis and bicycles. Bicycles include max 250w pedal assist only ebikes and assist is limited to 16mph. The impact on trails from these bikes are the same as regular mtbs.

Major manufacturers build their bikes according to laws and regulations. That's why big name manufacturers (Bosch, Yamaha, Shimano, Brose) make these e-mtbs 250W because then they comply with EU regulations. It's not like 250W is the current maximum they are able to make - building a 2kW ebike would be a non-issue for them. When laws and regulations are sorted out in USA I would expect them to make bikes according to those specs. But currently there's no point.

The problem are the DIY people and smaller shops who build whatever they want from cheap chinese parts and ride them on trails. I'm worried these will have negative impact on ebikes here in Finland too.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

iggs said:


> Hmmmm interesting points
> 
> More fool anyone waving anything of mine around in public
> 
> ...


You're wrong.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Capt.Ogg said:


> When laws and regulations are sorted out in USA I would expect them to make bikes according to those specs. But currently there's no point.


In the US, we are have 750W as the upper power limit, 20mph assist. Just FYI. I doubt that will be lowered anytime soon, as the laws are all intended for street/pavement/commuter bikes.

We have very much the opposite of your right to roam laws here - private property owners are generally allowed to do anything they want to prevent trespassing, up to and including shooting the trespassers in some cases.

So a pretty different situation overall.

-Walt


----------



## mac89 (May 13, 2008)

They fit in on the road.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

> Major manufacturers build their bikes according to laws and regulations.


Yup, 250W emtbs here in the US will be around for those who want them, but anyone interested in performance will be riding 750W at a minimum once they are available. I think there will be some drivetrain issues to work out with the much higher torque of the more powerful motors, it will be interesting to see how they develop. Conti has an ebike specific belt drive system, Rohloff hubs are a natural fit, will we see internal transmissions?


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Walt said:


> Who would buy a 250W bike when a 500 or 750W one was available?
> -Walt


Well, Specialized, Haibike, Cube, Trek, Rotwild, Scott, must all be complete idiots, because their 9 grand top of the line bikes are all 250W.

Yes the bike path will take 750, according to the laws now. But the NFS and BLM are ignoring that with their total ban, based on regulations devised in the 1960s.

Now there is a chance to encourage the 250w bikes, and that's simple. Allow them either via a permit system or with hand picked trails to have some extra access.

I was also interested where you thought e-bikes might use uni-directional trails. While that does show a pretty open mind, I do think picking the trails out ought to depend on multiple factors, number one being concentration. Already we have seasonal closures for motorized trails, so I see no reason why a Saturday closure might be used in some cases in an area like yours.

However all these schemes assume there are lots of e-bikes. Who has seen one on their trail?

We could open every mtb trail to 250w bikes tomorrow and what would be the effect? None. I don't think you would see any increased crowding from e-bikes for many years, and since a good number of e-bikers will be mtb bikers who are just using "the other", it may never become a serious factor in the next decade.

Why ban them when they are not an issue? It does not make sense at a number of levels, including impact, and controversy. The ban for 250w bikes with identical impact is inherently controversial. Many are going to ignore it and many will not even be aware, but the battle will draw lots of attention and what is that going to mean?

More E-bikes.

If you don't like E-bikes, the best thing to do is ignore them. 

Remember "Reefer Madness"


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

uhoh7 said:


> Well, Specialized, Haibike, Cube, Trek, Rotwild, Scott, must all be complete idiots, because their 9 grand top of the line bikes are all 250W.
> 
> Yes the bike path will take 750, according to the laws now. But the NFS and BLM are ignoring that with their total ban, based on regulations devised in the 1960s.
> 
> ...


And the effect of leaving the trails closed to them? None.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> However all these schemes assume there are lots of e-bikes. Who has seen one on their trail?


How many mountain bikes did I see on the trails when I bought my first production one in 1983? Approximately 0.

Your persistent contention that electric bikes have "identical impact" to bicycles is equally flawed science.


----------



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

tiretracks said:


> And the effect of leaving the trails closed to them? None.


You're wrong, the effect on Specialized, Trek etc. bottom lines could be substantial.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

tiretracks said:


> And the effect of leaving the trails closed to them? None.


I agree with this statement 100%. It's the only way to prevent future problems. No motor, means no motor.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> Well, Specialized, Haibike, Cube, Trek, Rotwild, Scott, must all be complete idiots, because their 9 grand top of the line bikes are all 250W.
> 
> Yes the bike path will take 750, according to the laws now. But the NFS and BLM are ignoring that with their total ban, based on regulations devised in the 1960s.
> 
> ...


Emtbs are going to be popular here, just like in Europe if there are places for them to be ridden. I stayed at a bike hotel in the Dolomites where 50% of the mountain bikes were emtbs. Ofc there's no impact yet, I believe 125K ebikes sold last year in the US, a decrease from previous years actually, with I would assume the vast majority targeted for transportation, not singletrack. They will start to become visible in a trickle on trails this season, with momentum building as time goes on.

To assume that the major bikes brands are not going to build electric mountain bikes tailored to the regs governing the worlds biggest mountain bike market is unrealistic. There's never been a word from the manufacturers that they feel 250W is enough. Give them a few years to develop them.

While allowing ebikes on trails on a case by case basis sounds neat, my experience with land managers is that is not a preferred way to manage trail systems. Who decides and what are the parameters for busy front country trails? How to do keep them segregated? I haven't met a land manager who even likes one way trails, or mtb specific trails (except true DH trails/parks) since people are oblivious and will blunder onto any trail leading to even more and dangerous conflicts. Trails where everyones expectations are consistent are safer and easier to manage. I do know some systems do use even/odd days and things like that to manage busy systems with some success, but in my locale, they'd never go for it.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

I have mountain biked 99% of the time that I've ridden over the two years that I've built e-MTB's, which I use for errands. I'm stating this so that individuals know that I'm an MTB'er first; if they never allow e-MTB's on trails, big deal..

The anti-MTB coalition must be licking their chops. They have quotes saying to ban all e-MTB's from trails; others state it's getting difficult to differentiate an e-bike from an MTB (or cite the fact that inspectors need to use advanced techniques to detect cheating in the TdF). The only possible resolution is to ban all MTB's. Let's keep it up and provide more ammunition.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Should we just pretend they are bikes then and hope no one finds out they actually have motors on them?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Too late for that. Maybe best to use reasoned responses that don't provide more ammunition. When we say that 250w motors will be "adjusted" to provide more speed than 20 mph, and also the manufacturers are going to start producing 750w motors, that's lots of ammunition.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Both are true though, there's enough demand in the EU that some dealers will delimit your bike for you, let alone sell you the gear. And some individuals are already delimiting here as well.

Want to buy a 750W emtb? Here ya go:

RadRover Electric Bike Technical Specs | Rad Power Bikes


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Still only 20 mph; I built a 32 mph bike using a generic motor, but can't use it on bike trails; in CA above 20 mph - 28 mph must be on a bike lane contiguous to a road. This is arguable, but I don't think many users would modify an expensive OEM bike and void the warranty when you can build one and retain the warranty much more inexpensively. However, my point isn't about what will be "roaming the trails", but what's perceived and the influence it will have on access. I'm not necessarily speaking about CA since there's so much open space out here that isn't utilized that it doesn't seem like we need to worry. Others seem to feel differently about what's available to them. Nobody seems to be changing their opinion here, but we could be impairing our access.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

fos'l said:


> Too late for that. Maybe best to use reasoned responses that don't provide more ammunition. When we say that 250w motors will be "adjusted" to provide more speed than 20 mph, and also the manufacturers are going to start producing 750w motors, that's lots of ammunition.


Going to impossible to put that Genie back in the bottle, every Sierra Club anti has been viewing this thread.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Excellent point TT, possibly some SC's even posting for all we know. May be possible to do damage control, but don't have a clue where to start. 
The mostly ignored thread on "legislation" was initiated since some laws get enacted without the populace knowing about them beforehand; might be prudent for individuals in "sensitive" areas to stay up to date and react appropriately before it's too late.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

I haven't ignored the legislation thread, I'm looking into if anything has been introduced at the state level yet, but I have nothing to add at this point.

If we keep it clear that electric mountain bikes are motorized and keep them off non motorized trails, it will limit any ebike based arguments that the HOH can use against mtbs. It would also eliminate any of the class distinctions, enforcement issues and user conflicts. On motorized trails, emtbs would be free to ride what and as they'd like. On motorized trails, other users are expecting to see motorized vehicles moving at a higher rate of speed and on trails you where wouldn't expect a mtb. 

I've yet to see what electric mtbs bring to the mtb community that is to our benefit. There are benefits to the individuals that ride them and to those who make a buck off of them, but not to the community as a whole.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Harry, excellent; that's what I meant.
It "could" be argued that e-bikes increase the number of riders giving a larger, more powerful presence. However, I don't think there's a problem in socal, so I'm not going to worry about it.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

The only "larger more powerful presence" that counts for anything is the folks that show up for trail work. Simply going shopping doesn't do it. I'm thinking your typical e-bikers are going to tend to be far more shopping- than digging-oriented.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

I can only speak for myself living in the front range of Colorado where our trails are being loved to death. Every year, there are more users on the trails of all stripes, hikers, runners and mtb'ers. Mountain biking isn't a niche sport in areas where the terrain is good and there are people around, we don't have to promote it IMO. Those who want to ride, will ride and in my hometown, there's more riders than ever.

If you ask a rider if they would like to more people on mtbs, they'd likely say "Sure!" If however, you ask them if they'd like to see more people on their favorite trail, they'd likely say" Uhhh, well... maybe not, I kind of like it how it is now"

Me too, I'm not in a huge hurry to bring more riders into the sport, I figure they will find us eventually anyway. It's not like trails everywhere are overgrown with unuse and seeing another rider is rare.

As far as ebikers helping out with advocacy? Nah, I wouldn't expect it and I'm not picking on them because they ride with motors. IME over the years, new riders don't have any idea that they could help, should help or anyone does help build and maintain trails. I wouldn't expect a new emtb'er to be any different than a new mtb'er. The people who want to be involved are usually those who have been at it for a long time, who finally realize the trails they love didn't just appear out of nowhere and want to give back. I wouldn't expect an experienced rider who starts riding an ebike to be any more likely to help than they were before, the percentage of people who do is very small.

If you want to increase help on the advocacy side of thing, it'd be more effiecient to market it to the existing community.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yeah, the world I live in needs more mountain bikers like it needs more surfers. Which is not at all, really. I used to live in the front range like Harryman and don't anymore because of the exact problem he's describing.

Despite the fact that I make my living from it, I have zero desire to "grow the sport" or whatever. 

-Walt


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Again all the dogma about "motors", as if it makes sense to limit access for a 250w Pedelec as if it was an enduro motorcycle. I was on a ride yesterday, and taking some shots of wildflowers, when a former local ranger came up on his mountain bike. He just shook his head at the restrictions. "Those rules were invented in the 60s" he said shaking his head, "and they need to get them up to date with reality".

Even more ovulated is the idea the sierra club bogey people are reading this thread for some more ammo to ban mtbs. That kind of paranoia has grown from the "secret trail" culture which is part of the "community" DNA. The Sierra Club as al the ammo they will ever need on youtube, where advanced mtb behavior is very well documented.

Today our town was packed, and for the first time ever I saw rental ebikes on the paths. At my lunch stop I ran into a guy I've known forever, who has mtbed all over idaho in some crazy places. His 1k watt ebike is in the build process.

"Are you ready to get yelled at?" I asked. He laughed, "I could care less," he replied with no apprehension, "I was running these trails before anybody even had a mtb, so they can say whatever they want". 

Others regard the 225USD infraction as something akin to a season pass. So we will see what really happens in the next few years. I think most of the yelling will be happening in other states, to be honest. I did have one mtb rider scowl at my KTM as I neared the trailhead: he was surprised (my bike is quiet) coming around a blind corner, but I was expecting it and barely moving.

Like a significant minority of mtb riders, he was pushing hard, oblivious, expected the hikers to get out of his way, I guess, but he had to brake for me 

But I should not blame him, as twenty years ago I was thinking "oh they should ban motorbikes here", riding my mtb of course, and before I got back into riding ST on motos. The urge to ban the other guy is like road rage: built in. 


L1050233 by unoh7, on Flickr


L1050446 by unoh7, on Flickr


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

uhoh7 said:


> Again all the dogma about "motors",


Yes, that's where the line will be drawn.


----------



## kneecap (Dec 20, 2003)

Nice pics, really beautiful, uhoh7, where are they taken?
I like your take on all of this as well.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> Again all the dogma about "motors", as if it makes sense to limit access for a 250w Pedelec as if it was an enduro motorcycle.
> At my lunch stop I ran into a guy I've known forever, who has mtbed all over idaho in some crazy places. *His 1k watt ebike is in the build process*. He laughed, "I could care less," he replied with no apprehension


Man, some people are so f'n dense.... Thanks for proving everyone's point by demonstrating our worst fears all in the same post..... If anyone is still paying attention anymore, this is the exact reason why all e-mtbs should be banned from marked non-motorized trails.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

Walt said:


> Yeah, the world I live in needs more mountain bikers like it needs more surfers. Which is not at all, really. I used to live in the front range like Harryman and don't anymore because of the exact problem he's describing.
> 
> Despite the fact that I make my living from it, I have zero desire to "grow the sport" or whatever.
> 
> -Walt


Your post above reflects some of my feelings. I've never really wanted mountain biking to go fully mainstream. Kind of like you don't want your favorite underground band to have a top 40 hit and do an interview on Entertainment Tonight.

I have a few friends that are into this sport with me. Several others have tried it, but didn't stick with it, I think mainly because there is a hell of a lot of suffering involved.

Having an electric motor to assist is definitely going to take a lot of the difficulty away in pedaling up, which will likely tip the scales for a lot of riders. And as battery and electric motor technology continue to improve, the range and power capabilities will only increase.

Just like any other technology, the e-bikes are coming, like it or not. I think it makes sense that they be categorized differently than a pedal-powered bicycle so that MTBs are not inextricably linked with them. They really are different, and that difference will continue to grow as the technology improves.


----------



## tehllama (Jul 18, 2013)

Walt said:


> I agree. These things wouldn't even be for sale (electric enduro/MX bikes have existed for years and years and never caught on) if it weren't for the manufacturers seeing an opportunity to try to trick people into thinking of them as bicycles.
> 
> I think low power electric motos is an AWESOME idea. I used to wish for one when I raced enduros, because even my little 250 E/XC was a TANK and had to be hauled around on a trailer, and had tons of maintenance needs. And stunk and was loud, of course. Moto riding would be *awesome* on a good electric setup with 100# less weight and no noise.
> 
> But that's not what we're talking about here. Why pedals? So that people can try to claim they're bikes. Cynical and awful, really.


I agree with this, however with one caveat. Because power density of current options suck, the pedal capability is basically a range-extender would be a good way to actually properly market them.

Instead, insisting that they are 'pedal-assistance only', demanding identical classification as non-motorized systems, and going as far as putting speed-based motor cutoffs are where it becomes a cynical marketing exercise.

Where I live, there are OHV trails are often too tight and would be un-fun on a 125cc moto, however an electric bike (pedal or pure throttle) weighing ~60lb would be the tool of choice. This is where eBikes should find a home, and they will as the power density starts to get high enough. A 250W eBike with a solid 2-hour runtime, whether or not it can be manually pedal assisted, would be actually quite a bit of fun. In smaller sizes, they'd be great mini bikes.

When looking at how to regulate it, it's not about the models that are out now - it's about what is going to be technologically possible in the forseeable future. The equivalent of the first Tesla in eMTB is probably a decade off, but that will be a very different beast in terms of how it can be used on a trail. It'll be arguably the most fun possible on two wheels for the sorts of OHV trails I'm thinking of - but that doesn't make it appropriate for trails that are conceived, planned, built, and maintained with the intention of non-motorized users.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

tehllama said:


> In smaller sizes, they'd be great mini bikes.


Did someone mention a e-minibike?

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/782844499/the-super-73

Due to our twisty and technical trails I see more than a few guys on trials bikes which seem to be a better fit than a 250cc trailbike. There's a few kit ebike guys who have built sort of lightweight e-trials bikes which look like a hoot. As battery tech improves and motors get lighter, I could see them being viable competitors to ICE bikes for trail riding.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

J.B. Weld said:


> Your attitude is sensible but 'every trail' is exactly what many electric bike advocates are gunning for.


We're not gunning for "every trail", just ALL the trails mountain bikes have access to. Thats all :thumbsup:


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

PinoyMTBer said:


> We're not gunning for "every trail", just ALL the trails mountain bikes have access to. Thats all :thumbsup:


Never going to happen. Never.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

tiretracks said:


> Never going to happen. Never.


Never say never! In time we'll ride together(well, not you personally) and have a beer or smoke a joint afterwards.

Then chat about why the hell did we even argue about this. Then we'll head out for the 6th or 7th loop to finish the day (because batteries will be a lot lighter and lasts longer by then) I'll have my e-MTB and you'll have yours too.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

PinoyMTBer said:


> Never say never! In time we'll ride together(well, not you personally) and have a beer or smoke a joint afterwards.
> 
> Then chat about why the hell did we even argue about this. Then we'll head out for the 6th or 7th loop to finish the day (because batteries will be a lot lighter and lasts longer by then) I'll have my e-MTB and you'll have yours too.


Stay gold Pony Boy, stay gold.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Those are some cool pictures man! I really love the experience of being at the mountain peak and enjoying the grandeur.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

tiretracks said:


> Stay gold Pony Boy, stay gold.


:thumbsup:


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

kneecap said:


> Nice pics, really beautiful, uhoh7, where are they taken?
> I like your take on all of this as well.


TY Most of my shots are near home in central Idaho 

My Haibike arrived at the dealer today and is shipping to me, so soon I'll be getting into trouble with it 

The bruhaha reminds me of when shaped skis suddenly appeared on the ski scene in the 90s. OMG. "It's a fad!", said many of the "big dogs". They HATED them. Now those old tooth picks are the strange ones LOL

The paranoid here make me want to join threads on MTBs and just remind everyone that many hiking trails are closed to them. 

It's such a shame there are a vocal bunch crying to ban the 250w pedelecs, for no good reasons, but people are that way. You would think mtb people would be especially welcoming to show the other users they know how to share with a vehicle of like impact. Golden Rule.

And I think it's quite possible the majority do feel this way, when they understand the bikes we are talking about.

Here is an example of how stupid it is to consider a e-mtb as a motorized vehicle in NFS regulations:

We have a number of trails with seasonal closures. That is they are motorized untill 8/29, then become non-motorized. Why?

Hunters don't want to hear motorbikes. Which is at least a real issue. Motorbikes do make some noise. But E-bikes don't. The entire reason for seasonal closure does not apply to any type of e-bike, let alone the pedelec.

But hey......they have a motor, duh. Yes they have a motor of a kind never seen in the forest before, with none of the "motorized" attributes for which the rules were written.

Either there will be new better rules or the old ones will be often broken, as happened when mtbs first came to many areas. They broke the rules. Once that became obvious they were given avenues of 'rehabilitation' LOL

Right now scotland just made all off-road paths accessible to mtbs, while in england and whales many are still foot travel only. Long live Scotland!

Along the River by unoh7, on Flickr

Salmon Headwaters by unoh7, on Flickr

Berm Below by unoh7, on Flickr


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I remember shaped skis, and snowboards, and all of that. It wasn't similar at all.

-Walt


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Shaped skis, those were the ones with motors?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> And I think it's quite possible the majority do feel this way, when they understand the bikes we are talking about.


I wonder why you always refer to 250W emtbs like that's all we'll ever see on the trails? 750W emtbs are legal pretty much everywhere in the US and I think for you in Idaho, the upper limit is 1000W. They are a different vehicle than a 250W ebike.

I'm not concerned about emtbs now, the 250W bikes available now are low powered and are invisible to almost everyone, with only a handful of riders in any one area. I'm concerned about the future, when there is a significant population riding what are considered mopeds in the rest of the world.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Harryman said:


> I wonder why you always refer to 250W emtbs like that's all we'll ever see on the trails? 750W emtbs are legal pretty much everywhere in the US and I think for you in Idaho, the upper limit is 1000W. They are a different vehicle than a 250W ebike.
> 
> I'm not concerned about emtbs now, the 250W bikes available now are low powered and are invisible to almost everyone, with only a handful of riders in any one area. I'm concerned about the future, when there is a significant population riding what are considered mopeds in the rest of the world.


Reasonable point; might have been prudent to have 250w for off road and 750 for bike lanes contiguous to a roadway. However, designation of power needs to be addressed too.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

So what are the e-bikers suggesting in this regard? Up to 250-watt motor should be considered to be the same as an MTB, but over 250 watts should be in a different category than a standard MTB?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

JACKL said:


> So what are the e-bikers suggesting in this regard? Up to 250-watt motor should be considered to be the same as an MTB, but over 250 watts should be in a different category than a standard MTB?


Just follow the rules. In CA, the classes are defined. My only point was that Class 1 & 2 electric bicycle groupings might have been enhanced by 250w maximums since when I've ridden those systems, they were more than adequate.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

JACKL said:


> So what are the e-bikers suggesting in this regard? Up to 250-watt motor should be considered to be the same as an MTB, but over 250 watts should be in a different category than a standard MTB?


In Europe, that is exactly the case with 250w/25kmh(15.5mph) classified as a pedelc (L1e-A), and with 250W/45kmh(28mph) classified as S-pedelec (L1e-B) with additional restrictions like mopeds as to where you can ride them as well as registration and insurance. Over 250W is also considered a moped. How S-pedelcs are treated varies in some countries, but they are considered a separate class.

While 250W/25kmh has worked quite well on and offroad in Europe for close to a decade, commuters there are pushing for higher speeds and power levels and emtbers like it as well.

Obviously, Mr. Pizzi, who authored the California and Utah legislation is primarily concerned with selling bikes, if he had considered how higher power levels would impact the acceptance of emtbs, he might have written it with clauses specifying power and speed limits appropriate for both on and off road.

"The bikes, however, have ignited a dispute between manufacturers, mountain bike advocacy groups and riders. The argument hinges on whether the bikes should be allowed on the same trails as traditional mountain bikes.

The debate hasn't slowed early adopters from purchasing the bikes. According to Larry Pizzi, chairman of an industry group called the Electric Bicycle Committee, at least nine companies plan to sell e-mountain bikes in the U.S. in 2015 to meet demand, up from five in 2014.

"They make mountain biking accessible to people who don't want to work hard or can't work hard," says Mr. Pizzi, who also sells e-bikes through his company, Currie Technologies. "It's a huge opportunity to get more people on mountain bikes."

The Fight to Ride Electric Mountain Bikes on the Trail - WSJ


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Nobody gets the seasonal closure silliness, I guess, or they don't want to admit there is a point


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

I really don't understand why someone would want a low powered e-bike. When you read the posts they describe marginal gains uphill and slower on the downhill because of extra weight.
The assist bikes I have ridden are docile and do not appeal to me at all. But a 2000 plus watt with no speed restriction does.
In my opinion if you cannot use the motor for shuttling dh runs then it is useless.
If you are lazy or out of shape then beginner trails will be fun for you. You don't need assist.
If you are using it for commuting then that is another topic, isn't it?


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

rlee said:


> I really don't understand why someone would want a low powered e-bike.


There are a bunch of pro riders who love them. In fact most people who try them love them.

The point is not that we all agree on how to play on two wheels. It's that we respect everyone's right to their own choice, and if the impact is low, the right to access public lands.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I'm a pro rider and I love motorcycles too. That doesn't mean I think they should be on MUTs, in general.

-Walt


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

You asked a question in the thread title and here is your answer, maybe once and for all you'll read and comprehend it...They belong in their OWN CATEGORY, categorized as what they are POWERED bikes. Just stop trying to get in under the normal, pedal only bikes category, take your separate category you deserve and you'd be surprised at how a whole lot of the hate and angst stops towards them.



uhoh7 said:


> There are a bunch of pro riders who love them. In fact most people who try them love them.
> 
> The point is not that we all agree on how to play on two wheels. It's that we respect everyone's right to their own choice, and if the impact is low, the right to access public lands.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

Here is where I am going with my question. It seems that for the most part even the e-bikers are in agreement that high-powered e-bikes (for example 1000 watts) don't belong on MTB-only trails. So I think we are all in agreement that there needs to be criteria to distinguish between different types of bikes for the purpose of trail access for any given trail.

I do seem to hear a 250-watt limit mentioned, although I'm not sure how many e-bikers would be happy with that. Using that as the limit, 250 watts is fine, but 300 is not. Or just pick a number, 500, whatever.

So looking at the big picture, what makes the most sense to distinguish between the different categories of bikes? We need something that is practical to enforce at a quick look. Let's be realistic, just about any determined person can increase the power delivery on an e-bike by modifying or bypassing the electronic controller. That's child's play. The stock motor can only take a certain amount of current before it fries, but certainly there are plenty of ways around that as well.

Motorized vs. non-motorized to delineate the different categories still seems like the only practical long-term solution to me.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

LyNx said:


> You asked a question in the thread title and here is your answer, maybe once and for all you'll read and comprehend it...They belong in their OWN CATEGORY, categorized as what they are POWERED bikes. Just stop trying to get in under the normal, pedal only bikes category, take your separate category you deserve and you'd be surprised at how a whole lot of the hate and angst stops towards them.


Their own category would be fine, the current policy of putting them in the same category with 50hp motorcycles makes far less sense than pretending they are mtbs.

That's the point: in impact the 250w pedelecs sold by the major players are near identical to MTBs and nothing like a motorcycle. Isn't that obvious?

Hate and angst seldom have a rational basis, and this controversy is no exception.

"E-Bikes will take your guns" There is as much truth to that as any of the negative postulations I have heard about E-bikes from mtb riders.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

That's where the e-mtb movement has gone wrong though, with those who sell them and write the regs pretending they are the same when they should be knowledgable enough to know that both the bikes and the political climate are far different here than they are in Europe. That's what has mtb riders riled up, because yes they are not motorcycles, but no, they are also not bicycles. 

If from the start the approach was; "Here's a great new electric motorized bike, it should be it's own user group and access granted where it is appropriate", you would end up with some parks/riding areas actually doing their due dilligence and allowing them and some not. With a clear delineation between them and mtbs, other users expectations would be met. On some trails I expect to see horses, on some trails motos, on some trails neither. Now, you have a confusing mess, with most people riders/hikers/equestrians saying, "It's got a motor, fack off." Land managers, with it dumped in their lap, if they already are underresourced and have user conflicts will find it easier to classify bikes of any type as with motor/without motor.

There's two ways this could play out. One, those who don't ride ebikes will make the decisions regarding ebike access because on a local level, the bike industry has zero influence and the ebike community isn't organized. Two, cooler heads could try a different approach, because this one is not going to be good for either sport and I think will end up with a lot of trails closed to ebikes.

The tired arguments that they "Are just like bikes!" and "Once you try them you'll change your mind!" won't fly on a political level which is where these decisions are made. I'm not saying these are your arguments btw, just the ones that are commonly trotted out.

On the other side, like it or not, our tired arguments will hold more political weight, because even if I'm wrong and the 750W emtbs have exactly the same impact as a mtb and are only ridden at 7mph by one legged little old ladies, the fact that is has a motor and the perceptions that brings will be hard to overcome. Motor=motorized is non negotiable for many people.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

BTW, Harry, one of your postulates is developing in CA. Electric bicycles (we need to call them that or defy a state law) are being allowed in various off road areas on a "park by park" basis, some yes, some no, some not defined yet. Seems to be operating swimmingly, although someone will object and say it's not the same sport.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

That's good for you. I don't expect there to be any backlash against emtbs for a while, we won't know how it's going to go until they become frequently seen and known to the variety of users and again once 750W bikes are common. No one will care because most people have never heard of them.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

The thing is, commuter e-bikes are such an obvious and huge win with basically zero opposition, and loads of potential profit - why not focus on that, and then assess where things are? You'll have lots of data on what people do with e-bikes, loads of info on how they share paved/commuter trails with slower traffic, and a GIANT gold star from even the most hard-core Sierra Club types. 

Then you can say to the legions of new bike riders, hey, let's talk about going offroad with these and how we can design new trail systems and more trail systems and get all kinds of new people out riding for recreation on dirt, and here's how much power and speed will work ok.

But that's not at all what is happening. Instead we're getting the "it's really fun and you can shred berms uphill" and "it's just like a normal bike and not any faster" AT THE SAME TIME. That makes no flipping sense at all and enrages most mountain bikers - let alone hikers or equestrians. It's obviously contradictory to say that e-bikes are faster or more capable than normal bikes and then to turn around and say that they should be treated the same way, but for some bizarre reason that's what the e-bike folks have decided will work. 

Legal arguments about what constitutes a "motor" are even more inane, since they create the appearance of loophole-jumping and cynical trickery rather than a desire to improve the experience of mountain bikers (let alone other trail users) in general. Don't tell me about what the state statute defines as a motor. Tell me how you're going to help design trail systems for everyone to enjoy and make sure we don't see 5000W electric motorcycles on them in 5 years. 

I think there are a LOT of places e-bikes make sense. But the industry has to approach it the right way, and right now, they're failing miserably to do that. Doing the right thing now will pay huge dividends later. Doing the wrong thing will get me (and others like me) to advocate for a blanket ban because we won't feel we can trust that the e-bike industry cares about trail access or the health of mountain biking overall. 

-Walt


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

1) We didn't push the CA legislation through, although some individuals (nobody that I know) were aware of it. 
2) Feel for Harry and those individuals with limited trail access; not the situation in CA, so a different environment, different considerations.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Walt said:


> The thing is, commuter e-bikes are such an obvious and huge win with basically zero opposition, and loads of potential profit - why not focus on that, and then assess where things are? ]


But what if those handicapped commuters' batteries die while they are riding to or from work? You don't expect them to pedal heavy bikes, do you????


----------



## Capt.Ogg (Jun 5, 2015)

Walt said:


> I think there are a LOT of places e-bikes make sense. But the industry has to approach it the right way, and right now, they're failing miserably to do that.
> -Walt


Actually most of the ebikes are ridden and bought for streets (commuting etc). But here we only see the mtb side of things. The price of emtbs alone keep these things marginal and people who buy these usually have earlier mtb experience.


----------



## Tweetie Peachie (Jun 26, 2015)

I wanted to figure it out but I have limited knowledge about e-bikes. In my own point of view, it is efficient to those who can't use the traditional pedal because of knee pain. Well, electronic bikes are far better to operate than car based on fuel cost.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Empty_Beer said:


> But what if those handicapped commuters' batteries die while they are riding to or from work? You don't expect them to pedal heavy bikes, do you????


LOL funny stuff its happen to me but not more than twice you learn very quickly how far you can go , I get about 25mi rd 12mi off


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Capt.Ogg said:


> Actually most of the ebikes are ridden and bought for streets (commuting etc). But here we only see the mtb side of things. The price of emtbs alone keep these things marginal and people who buy these usually have earlier mtb experience.


 I rode my e bike to work today as I do every day then it will take to the grocery store after work , from there it will be over to get my growlers of beer filled. Then on the weekend my e bike goes on the back of our van with the GFs bike and then were off for some adventure some were , the e bikes are great for exploring new towns and new places or to the park for a out door concert.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

From 2013-early summer of 2015, I was in my best physical riding condition. During that time I could care less about emtb, I didn't even look into any forum chatter about them. If I did, I would've been one of the "E-haters" and just call every ebikers Cheaters. 

I went to Mammoth with my riding buddies and had a great time until I made a mistake on Recoil. I ended up shattering my right heel and ankle. Which is my dominant foot. To "fix it", the surgeon had to fuse my right ankle and install plates on both sides plus 9 pins. I did my best to rehabilitate my right leg for about a year. But after 30-40 minutes of sustained climbing I start feeling intense shooting pain from my "repaired" right foot. I've had numerous injuries before, but this is the most debilitating.

I love mountain biking! It is my passion and I won't let anyone tell me I can't do it because of some people's misinformed, uninformed, or formed opinion based on hearsay. 

I've done numerous trail work, organized and led group rides, I've even participated in beginner skills clinics. I have earned my turns in the most painful way!

E-MTB is now my tool so that I could make it up to the mountain peaks and enjoy that experience. If you still think I can't ride because of my rig, F**k you! I'll keep pedalling! Happy trails folks...:thumbsup:


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I've said before, and I think everyone agrees that people with legitimate handicaps are welcome to ride them. 

If you love mountain biking, though, you know it's about the trails and trail access, not the bikes. I think you can agree that the e-bike industry is not concerned about this.

-Walt


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Pinoy, it's evident the opponents and proponents have firmly established positions. Some of the opponents have valid concerns, some just like to argue. Nothing is being resolved although most of both groups seem to agree:
1) E-bikes are fine where diesel trucks can drive, although wouldn't be surprised if some still think it's cheating and their vitriol suggests they would rather have a gas guzzler doing errands than an e-bike.
2) Low-powered e-bikes can be used on trails by physically challenged individuals, although it's important to note that physically challenged doesn't equate with mentally challenged.
3) Neither group would ride on legal trails if we knew it would compromise MTB access.
4) A 250w maximum is better than 750w.
5) Everything else we're a million miles apart and not getting closer.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

My only real beef is the "they are just bikes" and "the law says a motor is XXX so I can do whatever I want that a mountain bike can" stuff. 

I think there is a decent chance that low power e-bikes are just fine on a lot of trails. But there's also a chance that they're not, or that people don't really want low power (see the various UK reviews talking about berm slamming uphill, dongling, etc). 

They should be managed as their own distinct thing, not given blanket access to anywhere bikes can go nor banned universally. Pretty simple.

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Walt said:


> They should be managed as their own distinct thing, not given blanket access to anywhere bikes can go nor banned universally. Pretty simple.
> 
> -Walt


Wildly simple, and sensible. 
Dunno why this is seen as an issue by some e-bikers. 
Just treat it like what it is. What's the BFD?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> What's the BFD?


They feel entitled to access.


----------



## tehllama (Jul 18, 2013)

Walt said:


> My only real beef is the "they are just bikes" and "the law says a motor is XXX so I can do whatever I want that a mountain bike can" stuff.
> 
> I think there is a decent chance that low power e-bikes are just fine on a lot of trails. But there's also a chance that they're not, or that people don't really want low power (see the various UK reviews talking about berm slamming uphill, dongling, etc).
> 
> ...


Completely nailed it. Also consider that a 1000W, 750W, 500W, or 250W bike will look basically indistinguishable on the trail to users, land managers, and other stakeholders, and there you have it.

//Discussion


----------



## Capt.Ogg (Jun 5, 2015)

Apparently they do not fit in here. Or this subforum should be split in two: 1. US access issues & semantics, 2. ROW and actual discussion about ebikes


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Capt. Obvious


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Capt.Ogg said:


> Apparently they do not fit in here.


Ding ding!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I tend to think that's true - they do not fit in at MTBR in general. Perhaps as a sub of the commuting forum or something, but I'd guess the majority of users here don't really consider them bicycles.

Most of the arguments here regarding why they should be allowed access could also be applied to gas and electric powered vehicles of a number of types that don't have pedals. So really, this is a debate about motorcycles, with pedals or not. But it's about motorcycles, not bikes. Hence the general disdain/hostility here on MTBR.

-Walt


----------



## emjayel (Apr 21, 2007)

uhoh7 said:


> I wish it was that simple. I still have not found all that many e-likers claiming they are identical to bicycles: there is an E first.
> 
> But perhaps you object to the term e-bike? Motorbike, ebike, pedelec. All names with bike. So I don't think that is it.
> 
> ...


Please explain how they are safer? On the surface my immediate reaction is to call B$, but guess I'd like to hear your reasoning.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

PinoyMTBer said:


> I've done numerous trail work, organized and led group rides, I've even participated in beginner skills clinics. I have earned my turns in the most painful way!
> 
> E-MTB is now my tool so that I could make it up to the mountain peaks and enjoy that experience. If you still think I can't ride because of my rig, F**k you! I'll keep pedalling! Happy trails folks...:thumbsup:


Good job in going from being part of the solution to part of the problem.


----------



## Capt.Ogg (Jun 5, 2015)

I don't think there's a problem. People actually love to hate something. Ebikes fill that purpose very well.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Not at all. I love e-bikes. I've stated here that I think they are going to be an amazing way to get people out of cars and in better shape. A huge win for society.

On mountain bike trails, though, I think there's plenty of reason to not be so psyched. Human powered mountain bikes are already pretty much at the limit of speed differential with other users that MUTs can handle. Adding any more speed seems like a pretty bad idea.

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

fos'l said:


> 1) We didn't push the CA legislation through, although some individuals (nobody that I know) were aware of it.
> 2) Feel for Harry and those individuals with limited trail access; not the situation in CA, so a different environment, different considerations.


Don't worry about me, I have extremely good access, hundreds of miles available out my back door with more being built each season. :thumbsup:

SOL if you're on an ebike around here though, there's very little available offroad.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

1) Relative to whether this forum should be on MTBR: I don't think that an e-bike enthusiast added it.
2) Relative to entitlement: In CA, it's a state law; of course we're entitled just like everyone else who uses state facilities.
3) Said the opponents and proponents were a million miles apart; misspoke; we're not as close as that.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Question, Fos'l - would my gas-gas be ok too? It's just as quiet, doesn't make any gross smoke or tear up the trail, and doesn't go any faster at top speed (downhill) than a mountain bike - just uphill and on flats. Same basic story. 

What do you think?

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Walt said:


> Not at all. I love e-bikes. I've stated here that I think they are going to be an amazing way to get people out of cars and in better shape. A huge win for society.
> 
> On mountain bike trails, though, I think there's plenty of reason to not be so psyched.
> 
> -Walt


Same with me, ebikes are a fantastic form of transportation, I'd readily buy or build one if I could justify it.

I don't see an upside allowing them on non motorised trails. If you're disabled, get an ADA exemption, I'm all for that. Otherwise, ride them on moto trails, or lobby to change appropriate non moto trails to a new designation that allows them. This seems far more logical than arguing that a motorized bike shouldn't be considered motorized.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Walt said:


> Question, Fos'l - would my gas-gas be ok too? It's just as quiet, doesn't make any gross smoke or tear up the trail, and doesn't go any faster at top speed (downhill) than a mountain bike - just uphill and on flats. Same basic story.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> -Walt


No, they're illegal; very simple IMO. I used to love off road motorcycling, but legal access has been denied.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Harry, sorry, seemed like the front range in CO was starving from your comments. Don't worry, never travel with my e-bikes; always MTB.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

fos'l said:


> No, they're illegal; very simple IMO. I used to love off road motorcycling, but legal access has been denied.


Ok, so why are they illegal? It seems like the same impact and potential problems.

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

fos'l said:


> Harry, sorry, seemed like the front range in CO was starving from your comments. Don't worry, never travel with my e-bikes; always MTB.


We have lots of riders and other users, but lots of trails to spread them out on. Come visit and ride our 24 mile long, 9500ft and 7500ft singletrack descents, soon to be world famous.


----------



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

Walt said:


> Ok, so why are they illegal? It seems like the same impact and potential problems.
> 
> -Walt


x2^

If petrol motorbikes with speed/power limiters were available to mimic electric bike speeds shouldn't they be allowed on mtb trails too? Without pedals? After all impact would be "identical" to hikers & mtb's.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

What's really sad is the lack of spine and greed that Francois/MTBR has shown, that he's caved to the likes of SpecilED and others who are pushing these to make money, trail access, laws or legality be damned. It is OBVIOUSLY clear that the majority of MTB users on this site are not interested and do not want them around, but the almighty $$$$ has spoken and just "so" they have their own forum.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Walt said:


> Ok, so why are they illegal? It seems like the same impact and potential problems.
> -Walt


Oh yes, a 1 hp mountain bike with pedal assist has the same potential impact as a 50hp gas powered enduro.

Let's be damn sure they are restricted exactly the same, just in case.

Land of the free, home of the dogma


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Ok, where would you draw the line? Are we going to dyno every bike in the parking lot? 

Most of the speed gains come with the first 500W or so, because you start to be limited by the terrain and air resistance pretty quickly. So yes, the 1hp and 50hp bike do probably belong in the same category, since they're both many times more powerful and faster than a bicycle. 

I have an idea, let's call things with motors... motor vehicles and deal with them accordingly. That seems like a nice easy distinction, eh?

-Walt


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

By the "logic" above, Shimano's new MTB shifters, which are motorized, will be on motor vehicles. Opponents and parrots unite and decry.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Come on, you can do better than that. If you want to write in a non-propulsion motors only provision, that's fine. Hell, most cell phones have motors in them to let them vibrate.

I don't think any reasonable person is going to be impressed by your logic.

Again: the "XYZ isn't really a motor" argument is ridiculous on it's face. Just stop. Call them motorized and make arguments for how we can keep them at low enough power levels and speeds to share MUTs, because that's what is going to actually matter going forward.

-Walt


----------



## Welnic (Feb 6, 2013)

LyNx said:


> What's really sad is the lack of spine and greed that Francois/MTBR has shown, that he's caved to the likes of SpecilED and others who are pushing these to make money, trail access, laws or legality be damned. It is OBVIOUSLY clear that the majority of MTB users on this site are not interested and do not want them around, but the almighty $$$$ has spoken and just "so" they have their own forum.


It's much better that e-bikes have their own forum than having e-bike threads show up everywhere else.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Harryman said:


> Good job in going from being part of the solution to part of the problem.


How am I a part of the problem? I'm simply using a tool to help me overcome a handicap, and so I can continue to enjoy my riding.

Public safety & trail etiquette is always my priority whenever I ride. I always yield to other trail users and stay within my riding ability.

I do believe that there should be some kind of certification process where you have to prove your Ebike is truly a class 1 or class 2. In order to gain access to singletrack trails where bicycles are allowed. That certification has to be shown in a form of a tamper proof sticker (similar to what DMV uses) placed outside of the motor housing to keep them from modding their rigs. In the event that sticker is damaged or tampered with due to a crash or service done to the Ebike. They'll need to recertify. This is where IMBA should come in and create the guidelines for such regulations.


----------



## Capt.Ogg (Jun 5, 2015)

I just almost choked when I saw a full spread ad of Specialized Turbo Levo in Bike magazine. Have they sold their souls or trying to make a living?


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

capt.ogg said:


> i just almost choked when i saw a full spread ad of specialized turbo levo in bike magazine. Have they sold their souls or trying to make a living?


a long time ago.


----------



## Bikedriver (Jun 11, 2016)

uhoh7 said:


> Oh yes, a 1 hp mountain bike with pedal assist has the same potential impact as a 50hp gas powered enduro.
> 
> Let's be damn sure they are restricted exactly the same, just in case.
> 
> Land of the free, home of the dogma


I totally agree because I ride both. 1 hp bike is absolutely nothing like a 50 hp motorcycle. Its stupid to put them in the same "class" .


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Bikedriver said:


> I totally agree because I ride both. 1 hp bike is absolutely nothing like a 50 hp motorcycle. Its stupid to put them in the same "class" .


No more stupid than trying to "class" them with bicycles...


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Bikedriver said:


> I totally agree because I ride both. 1 hp bike is absolutely nothing like a 50 hp motorcycle. Its stupid to put them in the same "class" .


A 1HP motor would have me going uphill between twice and three times as fast as a world class cyclist.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

LyNx said:


> What's really sad is the lack of spine and greed that Francois/MTBR has shown, that he's caved to the likes of SpecilED and others who are pushing these to make money, trail access, laws or legality be damned. It is OBVIOUSLY clear that the majority of MTB users on this site are not interested and do not want them around, but the almighty $$$$ has spoken and just "so" they have their own forum.


MTBR also has a commuter forum...and even a beer forum. The topic of e-bikes is going to come up somewhere on this board whether there is an e-bike forum or not.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

d365 said:


> No more stupid than trying to "class" them with bicycles...


Right. I'd also like to point out that a 2-hp mini-bike is also illegal on bicycle trails.

I don't have a problem with e-bikers working to create a separate class, or a sub-class of motorized vehicles. I do think there is a difference between internal-combustion powered vehicles and electric-powered vehicles. Noise level and exhaust gases come to mind.

However it is a lot easier for e-bikers to categorize e-bikes as bicycles, so that is what they are trying to do. Just don't expect me to buy into it.

Right now, it's really not a problem because there are relatively few e-bikes, most are fairly low-powered, and don't have the range for sustained high-power. 5 years from now? 10 years from now? Different story.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> Come on, you can do better than that. If you want to write in a non-propulsion motors only provision, that's fine. Hell, most cell phones have motors in them to let them vibrate.
> 
> I don't think any reasonable person is going to be impressed by your logic.
> 
> ...


In the eyes of the federal land managers it does not matter if the motor provides propulsion. If a rider uses their ebike on a road legally, removes the battery connection, then decends a non-motorized trail, they are breaking federal law. DI2 is breaking the law when used on non-motorized trails.

How much power an ebike has is irrelevant to safety.


----------



## emjayel (Apr 21, 2007)

Hey Walt, I think we kinda agree for the most part, but I'm confused by this post (below) you made. I just can't imagine these sub-50hp motorbikes (SHOOTOUT: 2016 250F Motocross Shootout - Cycle News) not doing at least 100 times more damage to a trail than a 1hp mtb. Am I missing something in your post?



Walt said:


> Ok, where would you draw the line? Are we going to dyno every bike in the parking lot?
> 
> Most of the speed gains come with the first 500W or so, because you start to be limited by the terrain and air resistance pretty quickly. So yes, the 1hp and 50hp bike do probably belong in the same category, since they're both many times more powerful and faster than a bicycle.
> 
> ...


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Linktung said:


> In the eyes of the federal land managers it does not matter if the motor provides propulsion. If a rider uses their ebike on a road legally, removes the battery connection, then decends a non-motorized trail, they are breaking federal law. DI2 is breaking the law when used on non-motorized trails.
> 
> How much power an ebike has is irrelevant to safety.


Well, it's fine with me if we ban Di2. What's your point? I can't imagine any land manager caring about shifting. I can imagine them caring about bikes that go much faster than they did before, though...

-Walt


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

emjayel said:


> Hey Walt, I think we kinda agree for the most part, but I'm confused by this post (below) you made. I just can't imagine these sub-50hp motorbikes (SHOOTOUT: 2016 250F Motocross Shootout - Cycle News) not doing at least 100 times more damage to a trail than a 1hp mtb. Am I missing something in your post?


If you ride on singletrack on a moto you would understand. Impacts on soils and trails aren't that great. It's impacts on other users that matter more.

-Walt


----------



## dstepper (Feb 28, 2004)

Mountain biking the remote areas in the west I welcome the motos being out there. There are areas that don't see any trail traffic for days or weeks on end. Some area I prefer to ride during hunting season because I like have motos around incase anything bad happens on the trail and I need assistance. NOTE: I do ride alone often. 

Dean


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Those who don't think a motorized shift lever has a motor are the same ones who extrapolate a 0.1 (that's one-tenth) horsepower bike (look at the Vivax 100w) to equate with a 300 horsepower motorcycle. They're happy as long as they make all the rules, and place their values on everyone else.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Hey, as I said, I'm ok with no motorized shifters. No problem.

I think continuing this line of argument really takes something away from your other more valid points, though. Give up on the "it's not a motor!" thing.

-Walt


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Those who don't think a motorized shift lever has a motor are the same ones who extrapolate a 0.1 (that's one-tenth) horsepower bike (look at the Vivax 100w) to equate with a 300 horsepower motorcycle. They're happy as long as they make all the rules, and place their values on everyone else.


that's silly.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> Well, it's fine with me if we ban Di2. What's your point? I can't imagine any land manager caring about shifting. I can imagine them caring about bikes that go much faster than they did before, though...
> 
> -Walt


My point is that oversimplification to ' motor' does nothing to highlight the dangers posed by and to cyclists. It also shows that the feder land managers are far behind bike technology. I still.go faster (as in reach higher speeds) on my non ebike as it is lighter and snappier on the descents.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

fos'l said:


> to equate with a 300 horsepower motorcycle.


Please link me to a 300HP dirt bike. I want to see that! LOL hope that's a typo.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Carl Mega said:


> Please link me to a 300HP dirt bike. I want to see that! LOL hope that's a typo.


I realize that most motorcycles that are dirt-worthy are 100 hp or less (look at Ducati for example), but motorcycles means just that to me; includes all motorcycles. However, you may reduce that figure to whatever the biggest dirt hill climbers (blown Harleys) have if you wish.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

fos'l said:


> I realize that most motorcycles that are dirt-worthy are 100 hp or less (look at Ducati for example), but motorcycles means just that to me; includes all motorcycles. However, you may reduce that figure to whatever the biggest dirt hill climbers (blown Harleys) have if you wish.


That is an insane comparison of motorcycles that are way out of each other's category. 100HP dirtbike... errrr. I've had liter+ street bikes that struggled to get that mark with top speed over 170mph. You might want to massage that down to a generous 40hp and leave out the supremely modded open class hill climb bikes. Frankly I don't think you are informed on moto at all.

Ps - combining Ducati and dirt worthy in context doesn't help your credibility.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Linktung said:


> My point is that oversimplification to ' motor' does nothing to highlight the dangers posed by and to cyclists. It also shows that the feder land managers are far behind bike technology. I still.go faster (as in reach higher speeds) on my non ebike as it is lighter and snappier on the descents.


Sure it does. If you increase speeds across the board (meaning, on the climbs and flat sections) you increase closing speeds with all other traffic. That's very, very bad. Hikers now have to watch *behind* them on an uphill section of trail? Nobody will put up with that for long.

There's a reason motorized/motor vehicles are prohibited lots of places (not just singletrack), and that reason is speed. Trying to argue against this by talking about Di2 is just silly.

What you really should be arguing for are:
-Strict power limits that can be enforced easily. If all e-bikes look basically alike, but some are 30mph 1000W machines and others are 250w with a cutoff at 15 or something, that's BAD for the future of e-bikes. I'd imagine the easiest thing to do would be just install some controller OS that has to be updated every few months back to factory settings or it stops the bike from working.
-Assist cutoff speeds MUCH lower than 20mph (which is faster than most people *descend*). 10mph cutoff would give you pro-level speed on the climbs if you wanted it and tons of range. 20 is insane.
-Allowing e-bikes on bike only and directional trails as a test case for a few years.

Those things would allay 90% of my concerns. Arguing about what constitutes a motor or saying that e-bikes should just be considered bicycles, full stop, does the opposite. And I'm one of the *most* reasonable people you'll deal with on this issue.

-Walt


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Because of all of the fairy tales that the ebike crowd keeps presenting I'm for a blanket ban. Deception doesn't make friends.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

The bike I ride is 1000w. I am safer towards bikers and hikers on it then when riding a non-e-bike. The places I spend most of ny time are in places where seeing other people is a rare occurance.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Good thing they're only being sold to perfect human beings who live in unpopulated areas, eh?



-W


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Perfect human being....correct

Unpopulated.....incorrect
Most cyclists are afraid to ride and explore cool trails because their bike setups are inferior. The wimpy trails are heavily overpopulated.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

There's another fella here who is top 10 in his state. You guys should hang out.

But you're definitely winning the argument on e-bikes for me, here. Nothing like calling mountain bikers out as wimps to get them excited to share trails with motorcycles...

-Walt


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Everything is a competition to you and that is what makes sharing so difficult.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktung said:


> Everything is a competition to you and that is what makes sharing so difficult.


Says the guy that rides a 1000 watt motorbike.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Linktung said:


> Everything is a competition to you and that is what makes sharing so difficult.


Says the guy who likes to call out the wimps... while riding a 1000w e-moto and bragging about what tough trails he has.

You can't make this stuff up, folks.

-Walt


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Linktung said:


> The bike I ride is 1000w. I am safer towards bikers and hikers on it then when riding a non-e-bike. The places I spend most of ny time are in places where seeing other people is a rare occurance.


 A 1000w what is your setup?? you using a Geared hub motor?? or a DD? mabey a middrive?? and for a battery??


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

PinoyMTBer said:


> From 2013-early summer of 2015, I was in my best physical riding condition. During that time I could care less about emtb, I didn't even look into any forum chatter about them. If I did, I would've been one of the "E-haters" and just call every ebikers Cheaters.
> 
> I went to Mammoth with my riding buddies and had a great time until I made a mistake on Recoil. I ended up shattering my right heel and ankle. Which is my dominant foot. To "fix it", the surgeon had to fuse my right ankle and install plates on both sides plus 9 pins. I did my best to rehabilitate my right leg for about a year. But after 30-40 minutes of sustained climbing I start feeling intense shooting pain from my "repaired" right foot. I've had numerous injuries before, but this is the most debilitating.
> 
> ...


Basically the underlying crtique is "why should I share?" Above is an excellent answer. Some of the more rabid anti-E folks should put themselves in your shoes 



tehllama said:


> Completely nailed it. Also consider that a 1000W, 750W, 500W, or 250W bike will look basically indistinguishable on the trail to users, land managers, and other stakeholders, and there you have it.
> 
> //Discussion


This is a tempest in a teapot. Walt already notes the overblown compaints about motorcyle damge to trails (whch is mostly confined to overly steep bits), and here you act like 250 vs 1000 is a big deal. 1000w is about 1.5hp. That punny power is also restricted to mtb design. Take a look at the average motorcycle 520 chain. Compare it to the chain on any e-mtb. The fact they are almost all using normal bicycle chain really shows how modest the power is even with 1K watts. The logical thing would be to stick with federal regs, at 750, or to adopt the euro class with the 20mph USA standard, which is 250w which does boost at times.

The only time the engine makes a difference is climbing, and the only place e-mtbs or mtbs are really a threat is descending.



emjayel said:


> Please explain how they are safer? On the surface my immediate reaction is to call B$, but guess I'd like to hear your reasoning.


I defy anyone riding normally to contradict this assertion in a direct comparison, which I have done. An e-mtb is far safer. I am not kidding. The difference is more than I anticipated.

"A tired rider is more likely to be hurt" You read this often, and does anyone deny it? With an e-mtb your reflexes, attention, and coordination are fully fresh. You can feel it. On top of that fundamental issue, there are alot less "almost" fall overs, where you could not quite pull off a climbing move and go down. E-mtb is way safer.



Walt said:


> Question, Fos'l - would my gas-gas be ok too? It's just as quiet, doesn't make any gross smoke or tear up the trail, and doesn't go any faster at top speed (downhill) than a mountain bike - just uphill and on flats. Same basic story.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> -Walt


It is not "just as quiet", Walt, sorry. Of course it makes "gross smoke", are you high? Have a friend ride up a trail in front of you on a bike and check back LOL As to the trails, yes the GG trials is FAR BETTER for the trails than a mtb of any description. That's because of the wide tires low pressure and smooth power.



Walt said:


> I have an idea, let's call things with motors... motor vehicles and deal with them accordingly. That seems like a nice easy distinction, eh?
> 
> -Walt


I have an idea, let's call them engines. A motorcycle has one (generally) and a e-mtb does not.

Crying to "define the class", or worrying that some super power e-mtb might slip through, is all pretty much academic if you fall back on the antiquated term "motorized" which defines no meaningful attributes at all when it comes to safety or impact.

E-mtb is fine really. If it's a mountain bike with all bike components, except a pedal assist at the crank or hub, then obviously "e-mtb" would apply. And there is not a single rational reason to restrict e-mtbs from a trail which allows mtbs. Every single 'reason' put forward is full of crazy speculation about huge motors, hordes of "fat" people, and DH types getting you from behind. Not a wit of data behind a single one of the assertions. 

Why then are the anti-E-mtb access people so fired up? Visit a kindergarten class and watch a boy when his bud reaches over to grab the truck he's playing with. Same outrage. "Those are MY trails" :madmax:

It's territorial instinct as seen in practically every creature with a spine, and many with out.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> "A tired rider is more likely to be hurt" You read this often, and does anyone deny it? With an e-mtb your reflexes, attention, and coordination are fully fresh. You can feel it. On top of that fundamental issue, there are alot less "almost" fall overs, where you could not quite pull off a climbing move and go down. E-mtb is way safer.


Man, you spew a lot of bs but this^ is right up there. I suppose if you're really gassed you might be more likely to crash but I'm rarely "tired" on a mtb ride, in fact my experience has shown that time spent while riding are my most keenly focused moments of the day. Do you even ride bicycles?

motors vs engines? lol......


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

uhoh7 said:


> Same outrage. :madmax:


No outrage, quiet determination.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Still no word on closing speeds, power limits, etc... just more complaining. Nice.

The getting hurt thing is rubbish, too. First, there's not an epidemic of people paralyzing themselves and requiring rescue because they crashed their mountain bikes. Second, crashes happen because of overconfidence/speed, or just bad luck. Can you be too exhausted to ride your bike? Sure, but most people will slow way down at that point. There's just not any issue with the personal safety of the rider here. 

There *IS* a potential safety issue for everyone else on the trail, of course, which is why I've proposed allowing e-bikes on bike-only and directional trails to see how they do with other users. Yet that seems to be too restrictive... making me think that really this is just a backdoor attempt to get motorcycles on the trails. 

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

So, we've been defending ouselves against illogical accusations that we're almost like motorcycles since the beginning of mtb time and now you expect that we should embrace motorized bicycles as our long lost brothers? Seriously?

Since our biggest actual problem in keeping access right now on non motorized single track is too much speed in all it's forms, strapping a motor on a bike that already goes plenty fast downhill so it can also go faster elsewhere is a good idea? And apparently it's safer too? Awesome.

Oh, wait. Everyone says they actually ride slower with a motor now. Which is why anyone who tests one comes back with a big e-grin, because who doesn't like the trifecta of heavier, slower and more expensive?



> On top of that fundamental issue, there are alot less "almost" fall overs, where you could not quite pull off a climbing move and go down.


:lol:

How often do you fall over and crash on a climb? I just stick a foot out and bail. In 30 years I've maybe hit the deck like that a 2 or 3 times.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

If you fall over every time you stall out on a climb, you have some issues that probably mean 2 wheeled vehicles aren't your best option. Uhoh in particular can somehow go on long downed-tree backwoods trials motorcycle adventures but has trouble falling over on his mountain bike? That's an amazing combination...

I think we have a nice group here:
-Backwoods moto guys.
-Regular non-backwoods moto/downhiller guys.
-People who want to shred faster.
-People who want their wife/girlfriend/boyfriend/grandma to shred faster.

And then some tiny fraction of people who have some actual physical condition that lets them ride an e-bike but not a normal bike, somehow. 

But they all have a common aspiration, which is that somehow they care more about going a little faster/farther/easier than they do about potentially not getting to ride at all anymore because their favorite trail got closed.

Lovely.

-Walt


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Lots of BS here from self appointed experts funny reading this stuff is (But they all have a common aspiration, which is that somehow they care more about going a little faster/farther/easier than they do about potentially not getting to ride at all anymore because their favorite trail got closed.

Lovely. ) Mabey your fav trail got closed because you ride like a as* and treat the trail as your race track how many trails do you know that are now closed to MT bikers ?? , and how many were closed because of e bike riding like you say we all do??. The fact is bad behaver by you guys got the trail closed not any thing to do with e bikes . Try and learn to ride politely maybe be a little more friendly to hikers and other trail users which now will include the 750w ebikes .


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

rider95 said:


> Lots of BS here from self appointed experts funny reading this stuff is (But they all have a common aspiration, which is that somehow they care more about going a little faster/farther/easier than they do about potentially not getting to ride at all anymore because their favorite trail got closed.
> 
> Lovely. ) Mabey your fav trail got closed because you ride like a as* and treat the trail as your race track how many trails do you know that are now closed to MT bikers ?? , and how many were closed because of e bike riding like you say we all do??. The fact is bad behaver by you guys got the trail closed not any thing to do with e bikes . Try and learn to ride politely maybe be a little more friendly to hikers and other trail users which now will include the 750w ebikes .


Proofreading is your friend, especially when you're trying to sway opinions of what are for the most part some pretty intelligent folks.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Accusing me of being a bad guy is not really going to help your cause, you know. I might be Satan incarnate, but that's not really relevant because you didn't address any of my actual points. At least I use my real name, so you can go see if I've run over any little old ladies lately.

We all know jerks are the problem. The issue is that making things faster and easier will attract more jerks, and let those jerks be jerkier. 

If someone can honestly say to me "more power and speed are going to be just fine for mountain bike trails" then we will just have to agree to disagree and move on. I've lived in several places where the existing speed differential and impression that mountain bikers are just thrill-seeking moto guys in disguise has gotten bikes banned without a single specific incident.

But that's not what any of you are saying, you're saying that somehow the people who ride e-bikes will all be perfect angels, and further that e-bikes aren't *really* faster (as Harry pointed out, heavier/slower/more expensive... seems like an odd combo to choose). Some of you guys are also trying to make the ridiculous claim that e-bikes aren't "motorized" which is just silly. I don't know *what* to make of Uhoh's "they're safer!" claim.

If the goal is to drown everyone in nonsense, you're doing great. 

Why not try the whole idea out on moto trails and some bike-only stuff? Give it a few years and see what develops? Why is there a pressing need to put faster powered vehicles on MUTs? In lots of places, mountain bikes are *already* too fast because usage is rising beyond the ability of the trail systems to handle it. 

The best way to prove you care about mountain biking overall, rather than just e-bikes/motos, is to accept up front that you're not talking about the same thing. E-bikes are a new, faster, and different animal. They will probably require very different management. Pushing for unlimited access is just a fast way to get everyone in trouble. 

-Walt


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

All this "technical mumbo jumbo" about closing speeds, going too fast into uphill corners and scaring hikers sounds like "pity me" garbage. I'll be the first to admit that my riding is average at best (don't claim to be a pro level anything), but it took about five minutes to get used to the different tactics an e-bike requires. I spent more time acclimating to a single speed MTB from a geared bike (probably took a whole 10 minutes). Like I've said, we're galaxies apart. Just ride your e-bike and let the legislators change the laws. We don't need to act; they're doing it for us.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

What does acclimating to how to ride an e-bike have to do with anything? 

Just answer me this: are jerks going to go faster with extra power, or not?

If yes, what are the consequences going to be?

Pretty simple. 

-Walt


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

E-Bike riders have a simple problem.

• The simple solution from a policy perspective is to ban all motorised vehicles from trails.

Now, clearly E-bike riders are going to be a spread of people ranging from sensible trail users, to idiots on 5 KW B-52s.

It is up to the sensible E-bike trail users to develop methods that will gain them access to the trail networks, while removing the problem of overpowered idiots.

This is all up to you E-bikers. You either sort yourselves out and establish what is accepted, or the idiots will get you banned from trails.

There's no point getting upset over Walt's or any other peoples' comments. This is a battle between you, the idiots, and the likely policy response.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Walt said:


> And then some tiny fraction of people who have some actual physical condition that lets them ride an e-bike but not a normal bike, somehow.


I've been thinking about this... I have been willing to accept e-bikes if the rider has a physical handicap, but I'm having second thoughts. If e-bikes aren't any faster than mountain bikes but are heavier, what physical disabilities would an e-bike compensate for? Every disability I can think of would be just as dangerous for the rider of an e-bike as a rider of a mountain bike. I'm starting to think e-bikes deserve a completely separate designation in all scenarios and should legally be easily distinguishable from mountain bikes.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

rider95 said:


> Mabey your fav trail got closed because you ride like a as* and treat the trail as your race track how many trails do you know that are now closed to MT bikers ??


I bet everybody worried about trail closures here is smart enough ride responsibly and has witnessed trails close for various reasons. Yes, some closures happen because a few mountain bikers are selfish. Others happen because of the potential for conflict or assumptions by influencial people. Why would mountain bikers be willing to open the door for even more of those closures?

Use your brain to decipher the legitimate arguments against e-bikes, and then try to respond to them in a comprehensible manner. Tip: Spell-check and punctuation are your friend.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

In the Dolomites E-mtbs are being used as much as, if not more then Mtbs, on hiking trails no less. Somehow, the Italians are far more evolved then Americans, showing off how accepting they are to new technology. 
It has been really interesting observing my stance on ebikes evolve from a place similar to Walt's to an opinion strongly in support of e-bikes. If you haven't pushed your limits on an e-bike, you might want to refrain from posting about them on the internet.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktung said:


> In the Dolomites E-mtbs are being used as much as, if not more then Mtbs, on hiking trails no less. Somehow, the Italians are far more evolved then Americans, showing off how accepting they are to new technology.
> It has been really interesting observing my stance on ebikes evolve from a place similar to Walt's to an opinion strongly in support of e-bikes. If you haven't pushed your limits on an e-bike, you might want to refrain from posting about them on the internet.


I would hazard to guess that the number of Mountain Bikers in Italy is a percentage point of a percentage point of the numbers of them in the U.S.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Linktung said:


> In the Dolomites E-mtbs are being used as much as, if not more then Mtbs, on hiking trails no less. Somehow, the Italians are far more evolved then Americans, showing off how accepting they are to new technology.
> It has been really interesting observing my stance on ebikes evolve from a place similar to Walt's to an opinion strongly in support of e-bikes. If you haven't pushed your limits on an e-bike, you might want to refrain from posting about them on the internet.


Meanwhile, in Australia (ACT), E-Bikes are banned from MTB trails, same as all other motorised vehicles. One of the reasons: Too much trail damage.

Your emotional framing of the argument ("more evolved" - lol) and your request for other groups to avoid comment on E-bikes (when you want to access the other groups trails), is silly. You are going to have to work on some solid arguments that address the points raised in my earlier post.


----------



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

Martin.au said:


> Meanwhile, in Australia (ACT), E-Bikes are banned from MTB trails, same as all other motorised vehicles. One of the reasons: Too much trail damage.


Obviously Australia has a lot of evolving to do, maybe someday when they become civilized and learn to accept new technology they'll pave all the trails so everyone can run Segways on them.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Walt said:


> The getting hurt thing is rubbish, too. First, there's not an epidemic of people paralyzing themselves and requiring rescue because they crashed their mountain bikes. Second, crashes happen because of overconfidence/speed, or just bad luck. Can you be too exhausted to ride your bike? Sure, but most people will slow way down at that point. There's just not any issue with the personal safety of the rider here.
> -Walt


Sorry not my experience. And I ride both systems. Mtb injury is extremely common as many threads here show. It's a combination of a very rickety vehicle, extreme exertion, and no protection.

If you are not pushing yourself hard riding your mtb you don't have serious climbs. Most mtb guys can not even speak in a hard climb. You don't think those heart rates effect your co-ordination? You are not wasted after a hard ride? Not only do I OFTEN ride my mtb, I see many others doing it too. Usually they are SPENT at the top of the climb. Yes they will recover to some degree, but no way on earth can you work so hard with no short term effect. Just walk around after your ride. Can't you feel it?

You think it makes no difference in a hard DH whether you are fresh or not? You ever watch tennis? Of two equal players, one coming from a hard match and one form a easy one, who has the advantage?

You think I am making this up so I can defend my e-bike? I don't lie to defend gear. Talking skis, cameras, or bikes, I don't care what I paid, I will test hard and tell the truth, why not?

Besides the OBVIOUS freshness issue: with a e-mtb you can wear more protection with less discomfort. Around here riding with no knee and shin protection is just asking for it. The regular mtb guys legs are cut to crap, and with mersa everywhere, that is no joke. I know MANY people who have had to deal with bad infections from simple mtb cuts.

Why don't they wear more? It's too hot. With a e-mtb you are not so hot and can easily run a knee shin guard.

You know how little tissue you have on your lower leg and how serious a bad cut can be?

Yes, the e-mtb is safer, and anybody who spends any time on one will find that fact very obvious. Of course if you have crap brakes or no dropper on your e-mtb, and a perfect mtb, then then comparison is more complicated. But all things equal: similar specs e-mtb vs mtb, it's no contest for safety.

That said, neither mtb, e-mtb, or full moto, are remotely safe. It's not a question of if you will need to deal with an injury, it's when and how bad.

OTB anyone?

Down Below by unoh7, on Flickr


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Ok, so where's the rash of horrible mountain bike injuries? This is a joke, right? If you want armor, throw some in your pack. Lots of people do that. 

But again - mountain biking is not very dangerous, as outdoor activities go. Your average rider might end up in the ER once a decade when something weird happens, and have 1-2/season bruised/scraped up no-big-deal crashes that can be fixed with a little extra beer post-ride. 

It's not carnage and broken limbs out there. I've been riding forever and racing professionally for almost 2 decades (riding very fast when very tired) and been to the ER one time. Boo hoo. 

There is simply no safety issue for mountain bikers overall riding up climbs or riding downhills when tired. Claiming there is, and that e-bikes will somehow solve it, is silly, and detracts from everything else you have to say because it's so obviously ridiculous. Crashes happen from riding beyond your abilities/operator error, and from bad luck of various kinds. E-bikes (and full bore motos) are just as prone to both of those things.

The MERSA-from-mountain-bike-scratches thing is the icing on the crazycake here, though. You have a lot of MERSA on the trails in the backcountry in Idaho? Either ID is way more dangerous than I thought or you've got no idea what you're talking about.

-Walt


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Walt said:


> But again - mountain biking is not very dangerous, as outdoor activities go.
> 
> There is simply no safety issue for mountain bikers overall riding up climbs or riding downhills when tired. Claiming there is, and that e-bikes will somehow solve it, is silly, and detracts from everything else you have to say because it's so obviously ridiculous.
> 
> -Walt


First, I'm glad you have only been to ER one time, seriously.

Not very dangerous as outdoor activities go? Are you friggin kidding me? You don't read the war stories here? I guess you don't talk about crashes much with your buds, either. I cannot even count the number of local horror stories, and I know alot of athletes who were good riders but will not do it anymore because of the risk.

At the pro level, that has ended many a career.

Did I ever claim E-bikes were the solution? No, I said they were safer, not safe. Any person with simple observational skills and both type of bikes is going to agree on reflection. It's pretty obvious on a ride.

Walt, next time an orthopod walks in your shop, or you see one in a social situation, ask them: is mtb riding safe?

They will fall over over laughing. That includes those who ride


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

There are not tons of pro mountain bikers who quit because they crashed. I can't think of ANY, actually, other than Jake Watson and a few other pro DH riders - and that's a completely different sport (one in which they're wearing full armor and riding fresh, too). 

Seriously, you are completely full of it on this. I spent *years* as a pro cyclist. Road riders get hurt all the time in chain reaction pack crashes (and hit by cars). They go fast, and get hurt bad. Mountain bikers don't, and they quit when they get too slow to compete or they realize there's no money to be had. They don't crash out and quit because it's too dangerous, good lord. Do you know how many retired MTB pros there are riding every day? ALL OF THEM. 

My mid-60s retired neighbors (3 different couples!) all ride mountain bikes on a daily basis. It's very safe unless you want to really push the limits or ride beyond your abilities.

This is hilarious, though, so please keep going. I can't imagine how you could dig yourself a bigger credibility hole but you've exceeded expectations so far.

-Walt


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Think it might be time to remind the group that all this "pro" information about e-bikes is being produced by individuals who have never ridden one. Possibly the aspect where they're most "pro" is spreading fertilizer.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

fos'l said:


> Think it might be time to remind the group that all this "pro" information about e-bikes is being produced by individuals who have never ridden one. Possibly the aspect where they're most "pro" is spreading fertilizer.


So, let me get this right.
1) You want people who don't use E-bikes to be silent
2) You want access to the trail network these people use.

Have you thought about this?

Because if your response to the people who are assessing whether or not you should be allowed to ride E-bikes on their trail network is for them to STFU, then you aren't going to get very far.

I'm beginning to think E-bikers may be their own worst enemy.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> It's a combination of a very rickety vehicle, extreme exertion, and no protection.
> 
> The regular mtb guys legs are cut to crap, and with mersa everywhere, that is no joke. I know MANY people who have had to deal with bad infections from simple mtb cuts.
> 
> ...


It's become plainly obvious that you hate mountain bikes.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> If you are not pushing yourself hard riding your mtb you don't have serious climbs.


I've done plenty of rides with serious climbs and I can push myself, or not, depending on my mood. And yes, I can talk during a serious climb as long as I'm not gunning for a KOM.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

It's obvious that the outspoken e-holes are so invested, that they will say absolutely anything at this point. 

It's like trying to rationalize with 5 year olds, why they can't throw the ball in the house.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

If uhoh is the industry Point Man we've got this one in the bag. He's a gift to the anti motorbike side.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

d365 said:


> It's obvious that the outspoken e-holes are so invested, that they will say absolutely anything at this point.
> 
> It's like trying to rationalize with 5 year olds, why they can't throw the ball in the house.


Really? we say anything?? I have read so much bs from you e haters and the dangerously dumb just go back and read some of it , from compering a 750w e bike to a 100hp dirt bike to soon the woods will be filled with empty battery packs or the new low for the e haters NAMBL quote yes you e haters said that. I am so glade I don't ride with people like you , uhoh7 has tried to keep it friendly but that is not possible with this group . That's ok because e bikes are becoming more mainstream and the powers to be don't care what you e haters say the e bike is the next growth in MT biking like it or not . Uhoh isn't the e bike point man and the e haters don't speak for the MT bike industry that's clear .


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

rider95 said:


> and the e haters don't speak for the MT bike industry that's clear .


Uhhmmmm, you may be in for a very rude awakening.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

rider95 said:


> Really? we say anything?? I have read so much bs from you e haters and the dangerously dumb just go back and read some of it , from compering a 750w e bike to a 100hp dirt bike to soon the woods will be filled with empty battery packs or the new low for the e haters NAMBL quote yes you e haters said that. I am so glade I don't ride with people like you , uhoh7 has tried to keep it friendly but that is not possible with this group . That's ok because e bikes are becoming more mainstream and the powers to be don't care what you e haters say the e bike is the next growth in MT biking like it or not . Uhoh isn't the e bike point man and the e haters don't speak for the MT bike industry that's clear .


I love it when you drink and post.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I'd say claiming that e-bikes are a solution to the Idaho MERSA problem constitutes "saying anything", yes. That might be the most awesome thing I've ever read on MTBR.

The problem here really is that none of the pro-e-bike folks are trying to make allies here. I've proposed some VERY reasonable ways to test the impact of e-bikes, but nobody wants to listen. You simply want full access to all mountain bike trails and to be treated as normal bikes. That's crazy, and won't fly with other mountain bikers, LET ALONE land managers or the general public who are already unfriendly to mountain bikes because of their belief that we're all moto speed demons in disguise.

Let's all agree that:
-A motor is a motor.
-Motors make mountain bikes go faster overall, though not on every possible section of a trail.
-Access for mountain bikes is tenuous in many places and maintaining that access is more important than extra speed/range or making mountain biking easier to do. None of us want a future of riding on boring rail trails on amazing powered superbikes.
-There are very few people who are physically handicapped in a way that prevents mountain biking _but_ allows e-mountain-biking.

From there, I think we can come up with lots of room to agree. I'd much rather see people riding an e-bike up the road on the backside than shuttling in a truck (it's better for everyone). I'd love to see more moto guys getting an aerobic workout. I'd love to *have* an e-bike for commuting with the kids in the trailer and for riding torn-up jeep roads and moto trails.

-Walt


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

uhoh7 said:


> Sorry not my experience. And I ride both systems. Mtb injury is extremely common as many threads here show. It's a combination of a very rickety vehicle, extreme exertion, and no protection.


Just curious how you'd address the faster speeds and extra weight of ebikes using the exact same braking systems as a mountain bike? I know 30 extra lbs affects my braking - & throw in more speed - well, I think there's cognitive dissonance happening if you think this system is inherently 'safer'.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> I defy anyone riding normally to contradict this assertion in a direct comparison, which I have done. An e-mtb is far safer. I am not kidding. The difference is more than I anticipated.
> 
> "A tired rider is more likely to be hurt" You read this often, and does anyone deny it? With an e-mtb your reflexes, attention, and coordination are fully fresh. You can feel it. On top of that fundamental issue, there are alot less "almost" fall overs, where you could not quite pull off a climbing move and go down. E-mtb is way safer.


So the e-rider that was trying to make the argument that e-bikes give you MORE of a workout was completely off base then, correct?

Or was that you?


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Carl Mega said:


> I love it when you drink and post.


Its so funny some of the things you Dangerously Dumb say lol


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

rider95 said:


> Its so funny some of the things you Dangerously Dumb say lol


So can we agree that:

-A motor is a motor.
-Motors make mountain bikes go faster overall, though not on every possible section of a trail.
-Access for mountain bikes is tenuous in many places and maintaining that access is more important than extra speed/range or making mountain biking easier to do. None of us want a future of riding on boring rail trails on amazing powered superbikes.
-There are very few people who are physically handicapped in a way that prevents mountain biking but allows e-mountain-biking.

?

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

> The problem here really is that none of the pro-e-bike folks are trying to make allies here.


Nope. The claims of "the legislators will get us access" and "it'll all sort itself out" always make me smile since the first has little to no influence on the local level and letting the decisions get made by those currently making decisions will lead to little in favor of emtbs on non motorized trails.

When the public processes start, roundtables, master plans for open space, and the meetings that take place between the land managers and the stake holders representing user groups behind closed doors, who is going to defend ebikes? Equestrians and hikers? Nope, no way. Mountain bikers? I doubt it, no one I've spoken to that has influence will support them at all on non motorized. Motos? Yup, they probably would. They've lost so much access they'd welcome an ally.

When the backlash begins at some point in the future when there are enough emtbs to be a significant presence, who is going to fight the emtb's battles? Assuming that mountain bike groups will is naive, the difference between emtbs and mtbs will continue to grow with increases in power and technology. Adding motors only threatens mtb advocacy and brings nothing in return.

The industry? Please, they are barely involved with mtb advocacy on the national level let alone on the local. I wouldn't expect much from them except trying to move product.

A change to promoting emtbs as a new class of vehicle that should be ridden where it is appropriate instead of pretending they are bicycles would be much, much more successful in the long term.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Harryman said:


> Nope. The claims of "the legislators will get us access" and "it'll all sort itself out" always make me smile since the first has little to no influence on the local level and letting the decisions get made by those currently making decisions will lead to little in favor of emtbs on non motorized trails.
> 
> When the public processes start, roundtables, master plans for open space, and the meetings that take place between the land managers and the stake holders representing user groups behind closed doors, who is going to defend ebikes? Equestrians and hikers? Nope, no way. Mountain bikers? I doubt it, no one I've spoken to that has influence will support them at all on non motorized. Motos? Yup, they probably would. They've lost so much access they'd welcome an ally.
> 
> ...


To sum up the e-response:

HATER!!!!!!

In CA the they're the same as a bicycle!!!!!

You guys are mean!!!!

Someone else will do all our work for us!!!!


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Walt said:


> I'd say claiming that e-bikes are a solution to the Idaho MERSA problem constitutes "saying anything", yes. That might be the most awesome thing I've ever read on MTBR.
> 
> -Walt


Walt, it's rude to misquote, sorry. You constantly exaggerate my points: why not just use my words?

The e-mtb allows more protection to be worn comfortably, and there is good reason to have something besides a pair of socks on you lower legs riding a mtb or e-mtb in the backcountry.

Cuts are more serious now than ever before, or don't you realize that?

And again in regard to your assertion that MTB riding is TOTALLY SAFE (to use your method of quotation):

From another thread today:


honkinunit said:


> Wow. Talk about a blind spot. We actually have people who ride mountain bikes calling out people who ride on the road as being "stupid"? I have news for you. 98% of society have the same opinion about people who mountain bike. They see mountain biking as risky and dangerous, and it is. I have three hospital stays and a lot of other doctor visits that will attest to that, and if you include the rest of my family, that makes FIVE hospital stays.
> 
> "I don't give a crap what 98% of people think", you say. Guess what? That is how much we care about your opinion of our road riding.
> 
> See how that works?


This is also an example of how really E-bikes are not any more an acrimonious topic here than many others 

As to credibility? It's always a great excuse to disregard information: Oh, he is just crazy.

Yes 30 years in the backcountry on horses, foot, mtbs, and motos, I just have no clue  You are against e-mtbs obviously, unless they are on supercross tracks. You don't own a e-mtb. But you know all about them. I'd say it's you, sir, with credibility issues on the subject


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Hey, if you don't want to defend your point, don't. I wouldn't either if I were you, because your e-bikes-are-safer thing doesn't make any sense even *before* you (you!) brought MERSA into it. You're well into tinfoil-hat territory (or tinfoil full-body-armor) at this point. 

And let's not get into your hilarious claims about professional racers quitting the sport en masse due to mountain biking injuries. I don't know where you got that one... but the MERSA thing *still* tops it for sheer silliness. 

If you want to have a conversation about what kind of trails e-bikes might make sense on, and why, feel free to rejoin it whenever.

-Walt


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Walt said:


> Hey, if you don't want to defend your point, don't.
> -Walt


Why don't you have the courtesy to quote the point you want me to defend instead of your BS description?

"E-bikes are the solution to the Idaho Mersa problem", uhoh7 says

Great moderation 

Disrespect breeds the same.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Again, want to talk about where e-bikes fit and where they don't? Great.

Even the other pro-e-bike folks aren't backing you up on this lunatic safety tangent, because it doesn't make any sense and you've made some truly bizarre statements. 

So drop it. No bikes are perfectly safe, and e-bikes are not any different. Adding power and speed is *usually* not a way to make a vehicle safer, either. If you do something dumb, or get unlucky, you can crash. Duh. 

-Walt


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

Funnily enough I was never really against e-bikes. I was against just wily nily use of them on trails where access could be jeopardized and was against them because they are a wasteful pinnacle of our toy based hobby, just as people argue you don't need suspension and what-have-you, most do not need motors either. However as I watch the e-bike ambassadors ignore the rational behind many users objections to e-bikes which have been repeated over and over and are quite logical, throw out ludicrous justifications for e-bikes on mountain bike trails and generally act clueless as to why some users might have a negative opinion of their hobby, I have now formed an aversion to e-bikes based on what I can only define as the misguided reaction to objection by a person that bought an expensive toy that no one wants them using, an e-temper tantrum if you would like.

I saw my first e-bike on a trail this weekend, a free-ride skills park no less, and it got me searching and I found out that WA is explicit in both the King County parks and State Parks that e-bikes are not allowed. They have changed their terminology to include motor driven in lieu of other ambiguous terminology. King County includes electric motors as being explicitly banned on their trail systems. Aside from EPMD's which they also have specific and defined terms of use for on their trails, there will be no e-bikes on the trails I frequent and I can justifiably tell e-bike users that they are not supposed to be on these trails. I wonder if those shops that sell e-bikes for use on trails that there are very few locations or trails that they can use them on? 

So I suggest that the e-bike ambassadors take to heart that turning people against your cause will do nothing to further your cause.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

All this chatter about the E-bike pros and cons are not doing anything good to any of us! In fact, it's getting so bad now that some that used to be for it, are switching to against it! 

Ebikers: 

We are the new kids on the trails. If you get bullied out there on the trails or here in the forums. Just take it, don't let it get under your skin and start crying about it. Remember everything you guys say or type here is getting used against you. Better yet, just ride your bikes and enjoy it. When people see you enjoying your ride while being respectful and cool about it. That's how we'll win respect from all trail users, not just MTBers.

At the end of the day....its not the rigs we ride, but the pure enjoyment of the ride that we do!

MTBers:

Guys, give us a chance! The trails that you consider as your home trails, some of us have helped build those too! Some of the ebikers here are the same riders you rode with in the past and have shared some fun rides with. We are all passionate about riding on dirt trails, thats why we're here! Let's pick on roadies instead!

I am not trying to sway your opinion in any way at all. I just want to share this fact. 

I took delivery of my new Mountain E-Bike last Friday. So its my first time truly riding it as my own bike with all the customizations I like. I went to Camp Tamarancho to test its technical riding capability and I was blown away! Before this ebike, I used to ride the entire clockwise loop on average 1-1.5 hours. That would be 45-50 mins climbing(pure suffering), 15-20 mins descending and the rest to resting and taking pictures. With this Ebike, I was able to complete both the Clockwise and Counter-clockwise loops plus 3 session of the flow trail in 2 hours. It was pure riding bliss. I was respectful to everyone I passed, and yielded to uphill traffic plus hikers. Yeah I did get some flak from other MTBers when I was taking pictures of my rig. But I didn't let it offend me, because that time. I felt like I was the happiest guy in the whole place. I won't let anyone ruin my mood.

So, my point here is....you dont need to be injured, or lazy, or fat, or old to enjoy an ebike. You just need to love the flow...try it out and see for yourself.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

I'm all for ebikes, they're great as transportation and I used to be pro emtb as well. I've spent a fair amount of time in Europe and with the 250w/15.5mph limit as well as the apparent lack of HOHs, everyone seems to get along fine.

I thought that is what was being introduced here as well, but it is not. I'm sure you love your new bike and justifibly so, I'm sure it's a hoot to ride. It problably seems plenty powerful on the climbs, the people passing me in Europe certainly were cruising along quite quickly. The Levo I've ridden was laughably strong. Now imagine a bike with triple the power, triple the torque, and an easily bypassed speed limiter, that's what we have to look forward to. Closer to a moped than a bike and in Europe, they are already considered mopeds.

If emtbs are allowed on non motorized singletrack, how are you going to manage that? Emtb proponents only talk about 250w bikes, why ignore what's staring us all in the face?

They are not "our" trails, they are open to the public. I am very aware as a trail designer and advocate that we as mtb riders are one of many users of our trails and we need to behave like it's a shared space.

An important thing to remember is that while the public has a right to access public lands, we don't have a right to use them any way we would like. We don't have a right to bushwack where ever we want, camp, shoot guns, ride motorcycles, mtbs or emtbs or any other use we as individuals prefer. The people that manage the land grant the privledge of our specific use based on how appropriate mixing in with the other uses and how it impacts the land. So, I'm not worried about protecting "my" trails, but I am worried about protecting my and other mtb riders privledge to use those trails. It can be rescinded at any time if we as a group prove to not be suitable.

Given that e-tech will advance and become more attractive to the performance rider, how will the issue of adding more speed to already fast bikes be managed where there is no enforcement? The motors are already becoming more refined with the latest 250w Yamaha losing over a poind in weight, adding more torque and with a faster engagement to power out of corners faster.






Assure me that the impact of 750w emtb with a 20mph limit is the same as the Euro bikes and maybe I'd give you a chance. Or, ride your emtbs where they are legal and get back to me in a few years when there are plenty of e-riders and they are on 750w bikes, we can reasses then. As of now, I'm not sold on it.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Harryman, I agree with you 100%....There must be a way to regulate these machines. I am perfectly happy with my Class 1/2 ebike. But we cant let people just start modding they're rigs to go faster. There is NO NEED for them to be faster.

There must be a way for us to establish a common ground and work out a way to regulate this things. Carpet banning us (ebikers) from the trails is not the way. IMBA needs to helps us to get this done!


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

PinoyMTBer said:


> Harryman, I agree with you 100%....There must be a way to regulate these machines. I am perfectly happy with my Class 1/2 ebike. But we cant let people just start modding they're rigs to go faster. There is NO NEED for them to be faster.
> 
> There must be a way for us to establish a common ground and work out a way to regulate this things. Carpet banning us (ebikers) from the trails is not the way. IMBA needs to helps us to get this done!


Really? The IMBA? They already gave us over to the Sierra Club and will surely fumble anything else they attempt. Are they even solvent?


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

tiretracks said:


> Really? The IMBA? They already gave us over to the Sierra Club and will surely fumble anything else they attempt. Are they even solvent?


Unfortunately, IMBA is all we got for now. This is actually their opportunity to do good and unite us all. Plus regain MTB access to Wilderness designated parks. I also strongly agree the E-bikes should not have access to the Wilderness.I have my reasons for that!


----------



## emjayel (Apr 21, 2007)

*Oh Lordy Lordy Lordy...*



uhoh7 said:


> I defy anyone riding normally to contradict this assertion in a direct comparison, which I have done. An e-mtb is far safer. I am not kidding. The difference is more than I anticipated.
> 
> "A tired rider is more likely to be hurt" You read this often, and does anyone deny it? With an e-mtb your reflexes, attention, and coordination are fully fresh. You can feel it. On top of that fundamental issue, there are alot less "almost" fall overs, where you could not quite pull off a climbing move and go down. E-mtb is way safer.


Wow. Just. Wow. I sooo did not expect that answer!

Personally, in the final analysis, I don't give a rat's a$$ that an ebike makes it safer for you to be on your bike. If you want to be safer, then ride safer - stay well within your fitness/skills envelope! It's your choice. You don't want to be safer, though, else you would not be riding to the point of exhaustion or trying to clear that bit of uphill tech. So instead of getting more fit or increasing your skillset, you want to buy an ebike under the guise of 'it will make us all safer'.

We see the same illogical thinking in other aspects of our life, too. Cars are the easy example: we introduce more and more tech in the name of safety...and in the end we negate much of it by driving faster. If you really want to be safer, drive slower. But you won't, because part of the safety features that are built into a car are the ones that insulate you from the sense of speed. It's not you in particular, it's pretty well all of us. I don't know why, but we all seem to do it. To think it won't happen with ebikes is utter nonsense.

In the context of this forum, I don't at all see how an 'it's safer for me, the cyclist, to be on an ebike' bulletpoint will ever help gain or keep access to trails. It's not something hikers and other trail users are going to count as a positive for making their experience safer/better, etc. (back to the rat's a$$ thing)

An ebike will extend my range...and I will use it to extend my range and push my envelope (health, technical skills, etc) every time just like I do on my current bike. Most riders out there will do the very same thing. So you're point is mute. If you can't clear a section during a climb, then you need to increase your skills or your fitness, or both. Or you need to recognize that a section is over your head and walk it ... I think they'd call that wisdom?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

PinoyMTBer said:


> Unfortunately, IMBA is all we got for now. This is actually their opportunity to do good and unite us all. Plus regain MTB access to Wilderness designated parks. I also strongly agree the E-bikes should not have access to the Wilderness.I have my reasons for that!


I wouldn't hold my breath for IMBA, if they back ebikes they'll lose more chapters and members than they already have over the last 5 years. If there is to be a sensible compromise, it will have to come from the ebike community.

We've never had access to wilderness AFAIK, even in the beginning.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

To refer back to the OP's original question, emtbs don't appear to be fitting in here:

'Our trails aren't built for that': eBike riders risk fines in Canberra nature parks


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Harryman, For my IMBA comment; yeah i'm not holding my breath for that, but I'm still hopeful that they'll acknowledge it and somehow work out a way where we could co-exist on the same trails. Where both Ebikers and MTBers works together to protect trail access. We are stronger when there are more of us fighting for a common cause. 

Ebikers have a lot to learn from MTBers thats been in the front lines of trail access "battles" since the beginning. Letting us ride together, specially in a group ride, allows us to learn better trail etiquette and increase our riding skills. I'm pretty confident with my bike handling ability and can handle most situations, but I still have plenty to learn from better riders. With Ebikes gaining popularity, more and more novice road Ebikers will enter the dirt. Its better to teach them now, than resist the inevitable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Harryman said:


> To refer back to the OP's original question, emtbs don't appear to be fitting in here:
> 
> 'Our trails aren't built for that': eBike riders risk fines in Canberra nature parks


Thankfully I live in California where Ebikes have "more" access than the Aussies! Thank you AB-1096

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SeaBass_ (Apr 7, 2006)

PinoyMTBer said:


> Harryman, For my IMBA comment; yeah i'm not holding my breath for that, but I'm still hopeful that they'll acknowledge it and somehow work out a way where we could co-exist on the same trails. Where both Ebikers and MTBers works together to protect trail access. We are stronger when there are more of us fighting for a common cause.
> 
> Ebikers have a lot to learn from MTBers thats been in the front lines of trail access "battles" since the beginning. Letting us ride together, specially in a group ride, allows us to learn better trail etiquette and increase our riding skills. I'm pretty confident with my bike handling ability and can handle most situations, but I still have plenty to learn from better riders. With Ebikes gaining popularity, more and more novice road Ebikers will enter the dirt. Its better to teach them now, than resist the inevitable.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


There is no "we" and "us" no matter how many times you repeat it. There are human powered bicycles and then there are motorized vehicles. The only time this will change is when trails are closed due to us being lumped in with you.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

PinoyMTBer said:


> Thankfully I live in California where Ebikes have "more" access than the Aussies! Thank you AB-1096
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Where have they gained legal access to single track? This is a Land Management decision is it not?


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

SeaBass_ said:


> There is no "we" and "us" no matter how many times you repeat it. There are human powered bicycles and then there are motorized vehicles. The only time this will change is when trails are closed due to us being lumped in with you.


I guess I wont be riding with you then, have fun riding your bike bro!


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

tiretracks said:


> Where have they gained legal access to single track? This is a Land Management decision is it not?


Oh no, not this one again...You guys just love to argue, I won't let myself get roped into this one. If I run into you on one of these trails (unlikely), I will yield to you and I won't kill your flow...Happy trails bro!


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

PinoyMTBer said:


> Oh no, not this one again...You guys just love to argue, I won't let myself get roped into this one. If I run into you on one of these trails (unlikely), I will yield to you and I won't kill your flow...Happy trails bro!


Not trying to argue, want some factual information posted. Is this not the Land Managers decision? Has there been any access gained to single track? Easy, yes or no will suffice.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

The thing is, your comment is a "hook" to rile up the argument AKA debate about Ca ebike trail access laws. Or at least, thats how I see it, but I may be wrong too.

Quick answer: Yes on some (trails where bicycles are allowed) in Ca State Parks, No/Maybe on others. Enuff said


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

PinoyMTBer said:


> The thing is, your comment is a "hook" to rile up the argument AKA debate about Ca ebike trail access laws. Or at least, thats how I see it, but I may be wrong too.
> 
> Quick answer: Yes on some (trails where bicycles are allowed) in Ca State Parks, No/Maybe on others. Enuff said
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nice ambiguous answers. I'm not interested in a debate. When you decide to be forthcoming with factual, pointed information please feel free to chime in. Until then you are just another one trying to baffle with bovine excrement.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

tiretracks said:


> Nice ambiguous answers. I'm not interested in a debate. When you decide to be forthcoming with factual, pointed information please feel free to chime in. Until then you are just another one trying to baffle with bovine excrement.


***Shrug*** If you ever make it out here in NorCal and don't like "bovine excrements" don't go to Crockett Hills.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

I find it interesting to hear things like "you are not making any friends" etc, in response to logical and rational trail access arguments.

This forum is full of flame wars from one end to the other. There is no way to have any opinion here about anything without drawing ire from somebody.

I wanted to move my rear shifter to the left: you would think I was advocating revolution 

The fact is "non-motorized" is a NF and BLM concept created in response to particular vehicles with clear potential impacts: noise, smoke, and high power. 

That's why there are seasonal closures on many motorized trails in Idaho, for example. It has nothing to do with the theoretical concept of a motor. It's the actual impact of the actual vehicles. 

Now there is a new type of vehicle with a motor which was basically designed to address all these concerns. The 250w Pedelec e-mtb. You would think there would be a celebration. 

Nope. We get a very loud, rude and vocal minority of mtb thugs living up to all the things some hikers accuse them of. E-mtb is the spawn of the devil. E-mtb will cause us to loose trails (BS). E-mtb will put "fat sally" in my way. E-mtb = evil industry. E-mtbs don't deserve access to "our" trails (on public land). E-mtbs will cause reckless riding. 

I'm not interested in "making friends" with this sort of selfish, paranoid, and ignorant attitude. Every post in this vein makes the "community" look as creepy as the sierra club thinks it is. 

Go ahead, scream at anyone with a e-mtb on "your trails", turn them in to the police, because they are violating an out of date set of regulations. Just like a small faction of crazy hikers has done to the mtb riders, who not only poached on an epic scale but did and do continue to actually build illegal trails on public land. 

These same "guardians" of nothing (since e-mtb is as harmless as mtb), for the most part are totally ready to wink and partake if invited to a forbidden excursion, now or in the past, i.e. they are hypocrites. 

I was and am sympathetic to wider mtb access, including wilderness, so I certainly would not be "turning in" a mtb rider on a hiking trail (unless he was dangerous), but when the same advocates of mtb access rant at e-mtb access, and are suddenly great believers in every law (after a bowl), well it makes me puke, sorry. 

In a harsh world, what a waste of outrage. NIMBY is hard coded, I guess.  

So I will continue to report my experience honestly and call BS where it seems obvious. In return I expect ridicule and bad paraphrasing ad infinitum, just because that's how the intolerant roll. 

As I see more and more e-mtbs in town I know this is the beginning of a big new wave in backcountry biking and thanks to the e-hate faction it will be the cause of confrontation in the wilderness, a place were all should be on the same side on a personal level, since you never know when you will need help.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Here we go again! Im completely steering clear off this post from here on out. Let the battle begin....again...Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

And I make a prediction: within one decade at least half of the "stick em with the motorbikes" crowd will themselves be riding a e-mtb where they are not technically supposed to 

Today, as far as I can tell, already in Austria and Switzerland a class 1 e-mtb can be ridden anywhere a mtb can go: but check me on that if you have other evidence.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> This forum is full of flame wars from one end to the other. There is no way to have any opinion here about anything without drawing ire from somebody.
> 
> I wanted to move my rear shifter to the left: you would think I was advocating revolution


You might want to tone down your sensitivity levels if you read that as advocating revolution. I read that thread and there was no malice in any of the posts, only people explaining why it can't be done and a few saying why they didn't think it would be necessary anyway.

This might help explain some of your responses to posts in this thread, what you define as "ire" is just someone else's opinion.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

J.B. Weld said:


> You might want to tone down your sensitivity levels if you read that as advocating revolution. I read that thread and there was no malice in any of the posts, only people explaining why it can't be done and a few saying why they didn't think it would be necessary anyway.
> 
> This might help explain some of your responses to posts in this thread, what you define as "ire" is just someone else's opinion.


You mean I might be exaggerating? 

Impossible!


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> I find it interesting to hear things like "you are not making any friends" etc, in response to logical and rational trail access arguments.
> 
> This forum is full of flame wars from one end to the other. There is no way to have any opinion here about anything without drawing ire from somebody.
> 
> ...


Over 500 words, and not a single sentence on some key issues raised by myself and others. Just a rant about your perceived persecution.

As I've said before, the likely policy response to problematic e-bikes (eg: the guy riding his Stealth B52 on shared paths at 80km/h), is going to be a ban on motors, because there's no easy way to test whether an E-bike is a class 1, or has been boosted, modded, etc.

This battle is not between you and mountain bikers. You should be paying attention to mountain bikers as some of them have fought these battles over the years and understand the policy ramifications.

The battle is between sensible e-bike riders, the idiots on e-bikes, and the people in charge of trail management. You need to convince the trail management crowd that letting e-bikes onto trails means that they are going to be just like mountain bikes, and won't include idiots riding around on boosted e-bikes.

A quick browse through the E-bike general forum on endless-sphere shows a lot of chatter about 1500+ W motors, how to build a bike that can cover 72 miles in 3 hours, etc. Now convince trail management that those won't be showing up on trails if normal e-bikes are permitted.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

uhoh7 said:


> blah, blah blah......
> .......
> Now there is a new type of vehicle with a motor
> 
> ...


Finally, you are starting to make sense. Yes it is a vehicle with a motor.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

uhoh7 said:


> And I make a prediction: within one decade at least half of the "stick em with the motorbikes" crowd will themselves be riding a e-mtb where they are not technically supposed to
> 
> Today, as far as I can tell, already in Austria and Switzerland a class 1 e-mtb can be ridden anywhere a mtb can go: but check me on that if you have other evidence.


For some reason you believe that everyone that has embraced mountain biking will embrace electric biking.

I suggest you start a poll in the General discussion forum on whether e-bikes belong on mtbr.

Judging by the poll answer ratios, you will be able to tell if e-bikes will ever be accepted here, as will all other users.

And I suspect it will be a good gauge as to what to expect on the trails as well. I, for one, would be interested to see what people's opinions are outside of the e-bike forum on whether mtbr should cater to e-bikes.

For what it is worth I used to ride with some very old gentlemen and they never lament that they couldn't go faster, or needed a motor to enjoy mountain biking at their age, they just rode at the speed they could, until they were gone.

I would be opposed to adding a disposable electric commodity to my bicycle at any stage in life, as just tires, cables and hydro fluid is wasteful enough. Don't need lithium or nickel cadmium as well. Heck the life span of cellphones bums me out. Imagine an obsolete mountain bike.

sent


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

PinoyMTBer said:


> Thankfully I live in California where Ebikes have "more" access than the Aussies! Thank you AB-1096
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


They actually seem to have a fairly sensible outlook on them, they recognize that they are a new type of vehicle and think allowing them in certain areas to determine their impact is a good first step, even if they are only allowing Euro spec bikes. They face many of the same challenges with access that we do here.

All About e-Bikes - Mountain Biking Australia magazine - bike reviews, tips, news, training


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Pinoy, smart not getting sucked into a meaningless discussion again. It's evident, us and them. I've been riding my e-MTB a lot more lately, and still haven't encountered any resistance from other riders. Whether it's legal or e-bikes are just ignored, keep riding and enjoying. BTW, if two wrongs make a right, I'm going on a shuttle ride this weekend.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Harryman said:


> They actually seem to have a fairly sensible outlook on them, they recognize that they are a new type of vehicle and think allowing them in certain areas to determine their impact is a good first step, even if they are only allowing Euro spec bikes. They face many of the same challenges with access that we do here.
> 
> All About e-Bikes - Mountain Biking Australia magazine - bike reviews, tips, news, training


Thanks for pointing that out man. I've always thought with such a huge expanse of land they have out there. Trail access wouldn't be an issue at all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

fos'l said:


> Pinoy, smart not getting sucked into a meaningless discussion again. It's evident, us and them. I've been riding my e-MTB a lot more lately, and still haven't encountered any resistance from other riders. Whether it's legal or e-bikes are just ignored, keep riding and enjoying. BTW, if two wrongs make a right, I'm going on a shuttle ride this weekend.


I'm not letting myself sucked into those debates anymore man.

Funny my group is on the planning stages of going to Downieville, haha! Thats another shuttled ride. But its cool, we're supporting the local economy of that little town. On top of that, its one of the best shuttled rides period!

Enjoy your ride man!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Since it was suggested by a MOD no less, here it is, go vote and let everyone else know, let's find out what MTB members outside this forum thinks.
http://forums.mtbr.com/general-discussion/e-bikes-yes-no-1018073.html


----------



## Bikedriver (Jun 11, 2016)

uhoh7 said:


> And I make a prediction: within one decade at least half of the "stick em with the motorbikes" crowd will themselves be riding a e-mtb where they are not technically supposed to
> 
> Today, as far as I can tell, already in Austria and Switzerland a class 1 e-mtb can be ridden anywhere a mtb can go: but check me on that if you have other evidence.


Not sure if that's just a prediction, it's the truth that has already started at least 1-2 years ago from my experience, but it's sort of frowned upon by most to put it mildly among the "stick em with motorbikes" and "I don't actually ride ebikes, just judge and are scared of them " crowd.

What's interesting and so ironic to me is to see some of my friends who absolutely hated ...and I mean HATE, the idea of ebikes (but of course, never tried one). Seeing some of them having since "turned to the dark side" and now LOVING riding an ebike any chance they can is both amusing and ironic. Given the myths and peer pressure around the topic, they don't want most of their other "MTB friends" who they typically ride with to know they are riding an ebike....they try to do it in secret. OMG, what would they think! Funny. I personally don't care, people and riders can make fun of me all they want...the joke is on them, - I am having more Fun.

You are right about Switzerland and Austria, mixing bikes and ebikes works perfectly fine everywhere, I spend a lot of time there.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Had the same experience with a Haibike I rode for about a month. Everyone that tried it became an instant fan of e-MTB's, some purchasing one and others considering them, but as I've said before, it's us and them here. Harry is the only anti-MTB individual who has ridden one and makes a lot of sense with his comments. The thing that he and I disagree on is whether individuals will mod their new e-MTB's when you can build a rocket ship much more inexpensively (for about $1000 plus bike it's possible for a 40 mph MTB using a Cyclone mid-drive and 72V battery from Luna Cycle). The CA law allows e-bikes to be 750w and still Class 1 (20 mph PAS-only); this will be an interesting test since a much more powerful 20 mph bike is possible if the manufacturers decide to go that route.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

fos'l said:


> Had the same experience with a Haibike I rode for about a month. Everyone that tried it became an instant fan of e-MTB's, some purchasing one and others considering them, but as I've said before, it's us and them here. Harry is the only anti-MTB individual who has ridden one and makes a lot of sense with his comments. The thing that he and I disagree on is whether individuals will mod their new e-MTB's when you can build a rocket ship much more inexpensively (for about $1000 plus bike it's possible for a 40 mph MTB using a Cyclone mid-drive and 72V battery from Luna Cycle). The CA law allows e-bikes to be 750w and still Class 1 (20 mph PAS-only); this will be an interesting test since a much more powerful 20 mph bike is possible if the manufacturers decide to go that route.


I do think a certain % of people will delimit bikes, those that are into the sport for the performance, not those who just want a helping hand. I'm not sure if you consider that modding them. I don't think they will mod them in the sense of swapping out major components though until they hit the second hand market and people can buy beat up old bikes cheap.

Delimiting/tuning seems to be very popular especially in Germany for some reason, which I'm not sure why, there's a myriad of sellers. Maybe because in much of the country the terrain is limited to rolling forest trails without major climbing so you can carry more speed? Like this.






How popular will they be here? Time will tell ofc, there are some people doing it already even with the higher 20mph limit we have, so I think some would. I likely would, not because I want to rip around at 30mph all the time, but because I'd find it super annoying when you're hovering right around that 20mph mark, which is easy on the road for example.

Kit bikes are another story, since they are essentially completely unregulated, they have the potential to be the most visible problem. If it was me, I'd bolt on a kit to an old DH bike instead of buying new, but I like to build things and most people don't.

I thought this was a clever idea making the motor removable, so you can essentially have two bikes. I wouldn't be surprised to see more outside the box thinking in the future.






I haven't ridden in Switzerland and only a little in Austria, I'm not surprised that there's not a huge controversy over them there or elsewhere in the EU. While Switzerland has higher power limits (500w) than elsewhere, the speed limit is the same 15.5 mph and there's only a couple of swiss companies building 500w emtbs due to the limited market.

This is an interesting article and is an example of the seduction of power that we all are not immune from. S-pedelc emtbs are the fastest growing segment of emtbs in Switzerland, even though you can't ride them offroad. Wonder if anyone is riding them illegally? 



> Market share of speed-pedelecs
> Still unparalleled, with 26%, is the market share of speed-pedelecs in Switzerland. Surprisingly almost half of the e-mountain bikes sold in Switzerland or 9,410 units, are categorized as speed-pedelecs. Last year this category was accounted for separately in the statistics of the industry association for the first time. The total number of e-mountain bikes distributed on the Swiss market was 19,687 units.
> 
> E-mountain bikes
> *The leading MTB dealers have no explanation for the popularity of speed-pedelecs as they have to be registered as a moped in Switzerland. As such they are prohibited from forest and hiking trails and were considered almost unsaleable.* They also wondered that e-mountain bikes already account for almost 30% of all e-bikes sold as shown by these statistics. Not surprisingly the market for standard MTBs declined by almost 5,000 units. In total, with or without motor, slightly more MTBs were sold, or 131,931 units.


Switzerland Continues To Be Speed E-Bike Pioneer - Bike Europe

If you're not familiar, all you have to do is remove the reflectors, head and taillights and tag holders and they are identical. For the most part, they are the same bike as a pedelc, just with a higher limit set in the controller. Comparable to a class 3 bike here.

The EU has just implemented new regs for ebike type approval, sort of like our CPSA that defines what you can sell as an ebike with the power limits raised to 1000W. Like ours, it doesn't define where you can ride them, just what they are.

This is a telling comment in the article:

"There was a very strong opposition to this interpretation. Several stakeholders argued that only electric bicycles, of which the motor assists provided that the rider pedals, should have been categorized as L1e-A vehicles. They believed that bicycles that can work on the motor only should have been referred to category L1e-B.

Easier or more difficult type-approval
This was partly a philosophical discussion, partly an argumentation inspired by commercial motives. "

European Commission Confirmed Categorization Speed E-Bikes - Bike Europe

Based on human nature and the interests of the industry, I can't see a reason that we won't soon be pushing the legislative limits and for some people well beyond them. That's what I'm concerned about, not a bunch of old guy and their slow wives noodling around on 250w bikes. Those are just the early adopters.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Early adopter, high power modded, no speed limit, e-biker who is youngish and fit here. There is nothing to worry about on singletrack. I would feel much safer if all the mt bikers rode a modded ebike.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Harry what you say makes sense and is a definite consideration. I didn't think that buyers of complete bikes would mod them, but see that as a possibility after your post. That removable kit is interesting, but the guy must have had the battery in his backpack, and motor plus battery for the descent; not for me. 2017 models of e-bikes in CA need to be categorized as to class, but if it's a sticker, we know what will happen. I have no idea how they'll regulate DIY, although the 36V kits should qualify for a CA Class. BTW, I'm a builder-type too and converted my first three just because it brought the fun back to "constructing" bikes.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Early adopter, high power modded, no speed limit, e-biker who is youngish and fit here. There is nothing to worry about on singletrack. I would feel much safer if all the mt bikers rode a modded ebike.


So we should all just ride motorcycles.

^ This guy is the future as I see it. I appreciate your honesty, and hope that you stay away from non-motorized trails, but probably not.....


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

I hate motorcycles


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

Linktung said:


> I hate motorcycles


Does not compute. Look up: cognitive dissonance.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Since the super mod went ahead and tried to bury my poll in the site feedback forum citing it as site feedback, I have created a new poll, asking specifically about classification. http://forums.mtbr.com/general-disc...lassified-regular-mountain-bikes-1018125.html


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Who cares? Harry is the only anti-e participant with any knowledge of them, and the only one who responds without vitriol or rancor.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

fos'l said:


> Who cares? Harry is the only anti-e participant with any knowledge of them, and the only one who responds without vitriol or rancor.


Where have Walt or myself posted vitriol or rancor?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

fos'l said:


> Who cares? Harry is the only anti-e participant with any knowledge of them, and the only one who responds without vitriol or rancor.


You don't even know how much you don't know.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

fos'l said:


> Harry what you say makes sense and is a definite consideration. I didn't think that buyers of complete bikes would mod them, but see that as a possibility after your post. That removable kit is interesting, but the guy must have had the battery in his backpack, and motor plus battery for the descent; not for me. 2017 models of e-bikes in CA need to be categorized as to class, but if it's a sticker, we know what will happen. I have no idea how they'll regulate DIY, although the 36V kits should qualify for a CA Class. BTW, I'm a builder-type too and converted my first three just because it brought the fun back to "constructing" bikes.


Since dongles have been around for a number of years, you'd think that the manufacturers would address it somehow if they were upset about it. Bosch says that they have software that will detect them and void the warranty if you bring it into the shop with it attached and they tap into the CA. You'd have to be pretty stupid to do that though.

I know that the resellers are concerned since some shops will install them for you and that makes them all look bad.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Who cares? Harry is the only anti-e participant with any knowledge of them, and the only one who responds without vitriol or rancor.


Apparently you must consider any opinions that differ from yours to be vitriolic or rancorous because if you check my posts they don't fit the traditional definition of those words.


----------



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

Martin.au said:


> Where have Walt or myself posted vitriol or rancor?


Or me?


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> Or me?


Indeed. There are no doubt others too, but I forget. 
Apologies.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

I apologize to those of you who have opposed in a gentlemanly manner. I was wrong.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Carl Mega said:


> Does not compute. Look up: cognitive dissonance.


The rest of the world calls ebikes-ebikes and motorcycles-motorcycles. Quit being childish.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

So, Link, a hypothetical:
-I have a bike that I power by farting though a tube, producing the equivalent of 1/100 of 1W for propulsion.
-Said bike has 100,000W of assist available that is only activated when I fart.

Now, since there's no throttle on this bike, is it an e-bike? Or a motorcycle? Because I know you hate one and not the other.

My point, obviously, is that when you are generating a small minority of the power being used, what's the point of pedaling? And further, why should your vehicle be distinguished from one without pedals, if it can go the same speed and do the same things? If I put pedals in my Jeep and it only goes when I pedal, is it no longer a motorized vehicle?

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

The rest of the world will actually call our 750w ebikes mopeds. To clarify.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> So, Link, a hypothetical:
> -I have a bike that I power by farting though a tube, producing the equivalent of 1/100 of 1W for propulsion.
> -Said bike has 100,000W of assist available that is only activated when I fart.
> 
> ...


Childish and ignorant conversation


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Linktung said:


> Childish and ignorant conversation


Absolutely! Now, please answer the question.

_Walt


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Linktung said:


> The rest of the world calls ebikes-ebikes and motorcycles-motorcycles. Quit being childish.


Where's the limit? Is it 1000 w? 2000 w?
The requirement to pedal for power?

When does an e-bike become an electric motorcycle?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I've got it, gasoline is the difference!

Stand by for my coal-fired steam bicycle. Only slightly smelly. Stay back 200 feet if you don't want to be lightly cooked (only if I'm pedaling, it's an s-bike, not a train, and should not be regulated as a train).

-Walt


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

So Walt, take a side step and consider the use of gears or two wheels, in fact lets go real extreme and consider whether we need wheels at all.

I was telling my mother about my wife's new ebike and she says "that's cheating". So I say to mom: "how is that any different than riding a ski lift?". She didn't see the similarities.

I agree that we're splitting hairs, clearly there are differences in how each form of transportation impacts the trails.

I ride a fair number of moto trails, it's the majority trail type where I live. At a certain point in the summer the corners are blown, there's loose rock on straight shots, and the moondust gets deep.

Such is life when you're a biker sharing trails with motos.

But ebikes aren't motos, they're not even close, they don't have a throttle, they won't spin the rear wheel, and the only folks using them are the less physically inclined.

Worrying about ebikes ruining the trails is like worrying about what to do if Trump wins the election...don't worry about it, it ain't gonna happen


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

So you'd be ok limiting them to 10mph max assist, right? I'd get behind that in a hot second. Makes the climbs as easy as you want, no affect on flats/downhills. Allows the less able/fit to enjoy the trail, doesn't increase overall speeds for the shred-crowd.

Ski lift bike-park trails are not multiuse. They specifically forbid hiking and uphill traffic. On that kind of trail I have zero problem with e-bikes (or motos, basically). 

I never said I was worried about ruining trails. I'm worried about increased speed on MUTs, when speed is our #1 access problem already.

-Walt


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

rockcrusher said:


> For some reason you believe that everyone that has embraced mountain biking will embrace electric biking.
> 
> I suggest you start a poll in the General discussion forum on whether e-bikes belong on mtbr.
> 
> ...


The only way a poll like this makes sense is if the riders polled have tried a real mtb ebike.

I was a huge naysayer, and then I had an epiphany: for the past few years I've been dragging (literally) my lovely wife all over kingdom come on a tandem. Not only is it hard hell, but it just ain't that much fun.

So I got her a Specialied Fat 6 hardtail ebike. On the first ride she was able to stay with me on my local loop without atopping, then she wanted to do it again. She'd never been abke to complete the loop in the three years we've been riding it.

The next day she followed me and a buddy up an ugly steep doubletrack, she not only got the whole thing, but she still had some ateam for the run back down. This climb would have been hard for her to hike.

Then last night I suggested we hike the hill behind our house, it's another bruiser of a climb, I despise riding it on a bike, so I generally hike it. My wife has never ridden it and she despises hiking it. I suggested we go hike the hill, she decided to take the bike. Not only did she gave no trouble riding the hill, she did a repeat.

The best thing about an ebike is it makes it possible for the less physically inclined to join in on the fun.

Is it a moto? Not even close! She had to pedal and balance the whole ride, she even crashed while going up! She used the low power setting because high power is to hard to control while you pedal.

I don't see myself needing an ebike now, I'm a strong rider, but twenty years from now I may still aspire to big climbs and this product may be the ticket.

If you are so convinced of the evils of ebikes, go to your Specialied dealer and try one in the parking lot.

Don't say anymore, go try one, then speak from experience.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Walt said:


> So you'd be ok limiting them to 10mph max assist, right? I'd get behind that in a hot second. Makes the climbs as easy as you want, no affect on flats/downhills. Allows the less able/fit to enjoy the trail, doesn't increase overall speeds for the shred-crowd.
> 
> Ski lift bike-park trails are not multiuse. They specifically forbid hiking and uphill traffic. On that kind of trail I have zero problem with e-bikes (or motos, basically).
> 
> ...


They're not fast, it's really about the climb. She turns it off on flats and downs, the pysh of the motor is kind of wierd and annoying if you aren't peddling consistently (like when climbing)


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> They're not fast, it's really about the climb. She turns it off on flats and downs, the pysh of the motor is kind of wierd and annoying if you aren't peddling consistently (like when climbing)


There are "rules", like speed cut off and pedal speed cutoff, which limit utility to what you described, I'd oppose throttled, no pedaling options.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I totally agree, provided they are limited to 10mph assist (or at the outside, the EU 15mph/250W). That's more than enough (as your wife shows) to provide less physically able people the mountain bike experience. 

We also need some way to enforce that/identify compliant bikes. It would be pretty trivial to just have the controller software download an update for itself every night, for example. No update? Motor doesn't go. 

-Walt


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

15 mph wouldn't bother me if that was the rule. Don't know about other areas, but most parks around here (with a few exceptions) are very understaffed; some don't even have anyone at the front entrance; policing would be challenging. How the different classes will be identified will be interesting; should be a large badge riveted to the frame or something similar and not easily copied.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

A badge/sticker would be one way to go. But IMO given the state of the art electronics involved, why not just do it via software updates? 

Then again, I'm not a software guy. Maybe it's harder than I think. 

Regardless, 750W/20mph is insane. Nobody wants that. I would love to see physically less able folks enjoying the outdoors on bikes. I would NOT love to see otherwise fit/capable people treating the climbs like downhills with loads of extra power and speed, because that will just get bikes banned from trails (and with good reason). 

The e-bike industry needs to get out in front of this, yesterday.

-Walt


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Some of the manufacturers may realize this. Last year I rode a Felt fat bike that went 27 mph (cut off should have been at 28 AFAIK), but they "regulated" it to 20 mph for this year's model. 750w isn't necessary with a 20 mph cut off IMO. Hope that, since Europe is the big market, the manufacturers will focus their efforts on them and retain the 250-350w systems here.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Also, "rating" motors seems to be an arcane subject. AFAIK, it's supposed to be what power the motor can sustain "indefinitely". However, I have a 1000w motor that others have reported pumping 4kw into.


----------



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

Nurse Ben said:


> the only folks using them are the less physically inclined.


Really?

The ski lift analogy is like a downhill bike park. Not multi-use, private land, and nobody cares if electric bikes are there.

I have ridden electric bikes and they are fun. So are bumper cars, and water slides, and bicycles. IMO riding one is not the slightest bit necessary to determine whether or not they should be classified the same as a bicycle with the same access rights.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Nurse Ben said:


> The only way a poll like this makes sense is if the riders polled have tried a real mtb ebike.
> 
> I was a huge naysayer, and then I had an epiphany: for the past few years I've been dragging (literally) my lovely wife all over kingdom come on a tandem. Not only is it hard hell, but it just ain't that much fun.
> 
> ...


 AMEN I have been saying like wise tell your wife to keep riding she will improve not only will her biking skills improve but her muscle tone will too , do not let this forum discourage you from her E bike let the E haters walk in her shoes . You have found from riding and owning a e bike the truth its funny reading some of the BS from people preaching for the anti e bike group , when just a few rides on your e bike you have dispelled all these pages of BS and have found almost every argument angst e bikes is with out merit . And all it took was to ride one let alone the good e bikes do for people like your wife .


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

fos'l said:


> Also, "rating" motors seems to be an arcane subject. AFAIK, it's supposed to be what power the motor can sustain "indefinitely". However, I have a 1000w motor that others have reported pumping 4kw into.


Page after page defending e-mtbs usage. You question others credibility to oppose them. Yet, you ride an e-bike that is outside class 1. Why did you get a 1000w motor, when 250w is available and legal class 1? Are your trails legal for a 1000w motor?

Please explain this.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

d365 said:


> Page after page defending e-mtbs usage. You question others credibility to oppose them. Yet, you ride an e-bike that is outside class 1. Why did you get a 1000w motor, when 250w is available and legal class 1? Are your trails legal for a 1000w motor?
> 
> Please explain this.


 Well now that's what all this moaning is about and maybe some good will come from it , were trying to discuss not if e bikes are coming but how and were and what kind of and if we need to regulate them . Amazing some good has come from it Walt and harry man UHO7 all have made good points , like Fos my setup I currently use most likely wouldn't be trail legal . It will cost me about $800 to change my bike over but happy to do it as soon as I need too .


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

who else wants to come clean about their e-bike wattage? 

All this talk about responsible e-bike use, yet all the loudest proponents ride illegal bikes....


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

d365 said:


> who else wants to come clean about their e-bike wattage?
> 
> All this talk about responsible e-bike use, yet all the loudest proponents ride illegal bikes....


Quoted for posterity. And its painful truth.


----------



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

I think in the future most electric bike enthusiasts will demand lower powered bikes....


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

d365 said:


> who else wants to come clean about their e-bike wattage?
> 
> All this talk about responsible e-bike use, yet all the loudest proponents ride illegal bikes....


My bike is equipped with an EU speced 250W Yamaha motor with the speed limiter set to 15/mph. 80Nm of torque great for manualling over obstacles.

It will never be modded at all! There's really no need :thumbsup:


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

PinoyMTBer said:


> My bike is equipped with the speed limiter set to 15/mph.
> 
> It will never be modded at all!


Oh, do you promise, pinky swear?


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

d365 said:


> Oh, do you promise, pinky swear?


Pinky swear bro! I will NEVER mod this thing.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

PinoyMTBer said:


> "Pinky swear bro! I will NEVER mod this thing". - Bill Clinton


 ........


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Tiretracks, LOL! In Bill's defense, Being the most powerful leader in the free world could be very stressful. Too bad he didn't ride, so he had to relieve his frustrations another way. I guess Monica was the only option at the time...LOL!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

d365 said:


> Page after page defending e-mtbs usage. You question others credibility to oppose them. Yet, you ride an e-bike that is outside class 1. Why did you get a 1000w motor, when 250w is available and legal class 1? Are your trails legal for a 1000w motor?
> 
> Please explain this.


Because the overwhelmingly favorite motor for offroad kit bikes is the Bafang BBSHD which came out at the end of last year. It's a mid drive so the weight is centered and low like the OEM bikes. It's stamped by the manufacturer as 750w, although sold as a 1000w motor and considered by many to be a 1500w motor. That's pretty much the minimum starting point, they guys who want to go fast use even higher powered middrives. It's a cheap way to go, for $1000-$1500 you can have a pedalling optional emtb that rips with the only speed limits being those you choose to set yourself.

The whole motor classification thing is a joke, since it's vague in the regs and impossible to verify without testing. Most of the kit guys here will justify their higher rated motors by saying they only use lower PAS settings, or set up different profiles in their controllers, so one is class 1 legal, one class 3 legal. They unplug their throttles in some places, plug them in for others. It's impossible to regulate or enforce.


----------



## tehllama (Jul 18, 2013)

I don't know why it's so hard to distinguish whether or not a motor is providing MOTIVE FORCE. 
Quite literally: is there an energy conversion taking place that involves a resultant propulsive force on the vehicle?
That is what determines if it is motorized (not is there a servo or something involved in reconfiguring the powertrain), so it simplifies impressively right there.

The next determination is how much of that motive power is released at peak output - but this is shockingly hard to do for land managers, park rangers, or somebody observing a jackass on a motorized bike to do on a trail or at a trailhead. Whether or not this power is on par with what an unassisted human can provide is still a relevant aspect of the discussion if the trail system in question permits motorized bikes with power limitations (here: pedal assist requirement, maximum power restrictions, and maximum speed cutoffs for that power). Logically, this only comes AFTER determining if a motorized bike is permitted on that trail (with the deliberate exception of bikes intended to provide accessibility to individuals who would be very limited otherwise).

Again, anybody with some google-fu will easily find what I've been saying about eMTB's from the start - within a decade the power density will get to where they'll be the most fun vehicle possible on tight OHV trails. A ~50lb bike with 700-1000W peak output that can be pedaled to extend range would be totally rad, not to mention easier to maintain, quieter and cleaner to ride, and be light enough to make use of DH/FR componentry making it more maneuverable than a gas bike.

For use on trails designed, built, and maintained with non-motorized use in mind, they don't automatically make sense. In some instances eMTB's can make sense in use with other trail users, but if a trail doesn't make sense for motorized bicycles, then respect that that decision has been made, likely with the specter of de-regulated eBikes being in existence, and that over time they'll become even faster and more capable.



Walt said:


> Then again, I'm not a software guy. Maybe it's harder than I think.


I am a software guy. It's actually going to be EASIER than you think.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Nurse Ben said:


> So I got her a Specialied Fat 6 hardtail ebike. ....


Heartwarming story, variations which are presented all the time as a reason to reclassify non motorized trails to allow motorized bikes.

I've been with my wife for 30 years, we ride mtbs, hike, ski and backcountry ski. She's always slower than me and doesn't ride or ski the technical trails I like. We've never felt the need for a motorized solution to what isn't a problem. I just wait, it's my expectation going in that I'm going to wait. We sniff flowers and ride at a pace that is slower than when I ride with my friends. Big deal. I save the hard trails for my buddies and it works out fine.

If she can't ride because of a disability, awesome, get her an ebike. If she can't ride a mtb to your level, ride at her level. If there's a slow person in your group, wait. It's a simple and far less intrusive method than adding to the load land managers already carry and to those who maintain the trails by introducing a new class of vehicles just so your wife can keep up.

People ride ebikes so they can ride faster and with less effort. Period. That is fun and more fun for many people. That is a valid reason why people want to ride them, I'm not questioning that. Claiming that since they keep families together they should be allowed everywhere is nonsense.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

Linktung said:


> The rest of the world calls ebikes-ebikes and motorcycles-motorcycles. Quit being childish.


In fairness, you just described exactly a motor bike two posts prior:



Linktung said:


> Early adopter, high power modded, no speed limit, e-biker


"High power, modded, no speed limit". Your words. Sounds exactly like a electric motorcycle..then you said you hate motorcycles. Nothing childish about pointing out the contradiction.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

My dad is 76. He rides a real bike. 

Cry me a river.


----------



## donutnational (Jan 18, 2013)

Fo rthose who claim that e-bikes won't be used as a reason to prevent real bike access to dirt check this out ( from Friends of the Allegany Wilderness Facebook page):

Do You Want Electric Motorcycles in the Proposed Tracy Ridge Wilderness Area?
If mountain biking is allowed at Tracy Ridge, there WILL be motorized vehicles on those trails. That is the slippery slope we are dealing with now. Do electric mechanized mountain bikes seem like a safe vehicle for our younger hikers and campers to have to contend with on the quiet backcountry trails of the proposed Tracy Ridge Wilderness Area?
Here are links to the "scoping" documents to the hostile plan to radically alter the backcountry character of the largest inventoried roadless area in Pennsylvania:
http://www.pawild.org/pdfs/TRscopingletter.pdf
http://www.pawild.org/pdfs/TRscoping.pdf
Please submit comments to the Allegheny National Forest in opposition to this plan before August 30th by sending an email here:
[email protected]
Thank you!

It's already happening.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Wow, these E-bikes really are crazy.

Left my e-mtb on the charger all night. Next morning, There I was, pedaling away lightly on a nice little singletrack. Suddenly it flipped into turbo mode. More like super-turbo mode. Wheelie, roost, and it started screaming up the trail with an ear piercing whine. I could barely hang on. Various normal mtb riders were chugging away on the gentle climb. I tried to warn them with varied success. "Sorry about that," I muttered at the ones who fell off as I burned by them. "You E-bastard", one guy screamed. Up and up I went, past the "non-motorised" signs, past the "no mtbs" sign. HIt a pack of horses with one pregnant mare. She went into labor on the spot. How I hung one through all this I'll never know.

L1051175 by unoh7, on Flickr

Once I hit the top ridge there was a group of Sierra club ladies arguing about wild flowers, but they had to break off and run for cover as my high powered e-mtb spewed small rocks and bits of flowers everywhere. "Sorry ladies" I gasped, "Oh another rude mountain biker!" they called after me. I tried to correct them&#8230;."it's an e-bike" but the wind was whipping pretty good and I don't think they heard me. Soon after I began to run out of room, luckily there was an antique fire lookout, so I hit it:

L1051119 by unoh7, on Flickr

Now, that probably would not have saved me, but my battery ran out right then. Whew! Luckily it's all downhill now, I consoled myself. I decided to roll out on an alternate route down, so as not to deal with the e-carnage I had caused.

L1051185 by unoh7, on Flickr

Neverthess, as I neared the trailhead after a killer DH, there was a roadblock with fully armed FS cops calling me to a stop. I considered running the gauntlet, but like I said, my battery was dead. So I pulled up and asked innocently, "Whats up?" "Did you see a crazy nutcase on a high-powered motorbike?" He asked. "No officer." His buddy with a AR-15 said: "Well, you are lucky, he seems to hate mountain bikers, and no doubt he would have run you off the trail." "Oh! Goodness!", I replied trying to cover my battery with my leg.

"OK get going, but we advise you to stay off the motorised trails till he is apprehended"

"OK, Thanks" 

L1051184 by unoh7, on Flickr


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

uhoh7 said:


> Wow, these E-bikes really are crazy.


Yep, in the face of hard facts, redirect them with pretty pictures.


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

tiretracks said:


> Yep, in the face of hard facts, redirect them with pretty pictures.


 and BS.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

d365 said:


> who else wants to come clean about their e-bike wattage?
> 
> All this talk about responsible e-bike use, yet all the loudest proponents ride illegal bikes....


 That's just it in your eyes there all illegal once there is some guide lines which looks like it will be 750w for use on all your trails, my bike is 500w but I use a throttle planning my west coast trip now can't wait !


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

...and never, ever even make the slightest attempt to answer the legitimate concerns about how lumping them in with real bikes WILL create access issues for real bikers in many areas.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Harryman said:


> Heartwarming story, variations which are presented all the time as a reason to reclassify non motorized trails to allow motorized bikes.
> 
> I've been with my wife for 30 years, we ride mtbs, hike, ski and backcountry ski. She's always slower than me and doesn't ride or ski the technical trails I like. We've never felt the need for a motorized solution to what isn't a problem. I just wait, it's my expectation going in that I'm going to wait. We sniff flowers and ride at a pace that is slower than when I ride with my friends. Big deal. I save the hard trails for my buddies and it works out fine.
> 
> ...


I like my wife also. We go slow or fast, whatever she feels like. If you need to get your wife a e-bike so she will go somewhere with you, Her fitness level isn't the problem.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

donutnational said:


> Fo rthose who claim that e-bikes won't be used as a reason to prevent real bike access to dirt check this out ( from Friends of the Allegany Wilderness Facebook page):
> 
> Do You Want Electric Motorcycles in the Proposed Tracy Ridge Wilderness Area?
> If mountain biking is allowed at Tracy Ridge, there WILL be motorized vehicles on those trails. That is the slippery slope we are dealing with now. Do electric mechanized mountain bikes seem like a safe vehicle for our younger hikers and campers to have to contend with on the quiet backcountry trails of the proposed Tracy Ridge Wilderness Area?
> ...


These Allegany and Wilderness Watch fokkers wouldn't know a 1970's Schwinn 10 speed from a 2016 Specialized Levo, but they are smart enough to use ebikes against us.

BTW everyone reading this should email the district ranger in the scoping document to express your support for mountain biking in this forest, regardless of where you live. Literally takes 3 minutes.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> ...and never, ever even make the slightest attempt to answer the legitimate concerns about how lumping them in with real bikes WILL create access issues for real bikers in many areas.


You mean the dark fantasy this will happen?

Midnight in America, I guess.

Has there ever been a trail closed to mtbs ANYWHERE because of e-mtbs?

As to the "danger" at Tracy Ridge, let's see what happens. I would bet those trails are approved, despite the anti-e-style hyperbole of a Facebook poster.

Around here many people love the back country motorbikes because they cut out the trails and actually ride them, which is what often keeps them stable.

One person's ignorance does not justify another's


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

uhoh7 said:


> Has there ever been a trail closed to mtbs ANYWHERE because of e-mtbs?
> 
> As to the "danger" at Tracy Ridge, let's see what happens. I would bet those trails are approved, despite the anti-e-style hyperbole of a Facebook poster.


uhoh7: Write your letter in support of bicycle access to the district ranger. You don't have to be a PA citizen. (Leave out the ebike part. seriously). If you choose to bring up ebikes in your letter of support, you better have about $10M in support from the ebike industry to justify whatever it is you want to bring up about ebikes.

Your question about "Has there ever been a trail closed to mtbs ANYWHERE because of e-mtbs?" is ridiculous, given how new eMTBs are.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> Wow, these E-bikes really are crazy.
> 
> ...Loads of tripe...


So basically this then?






^Stealth B52 at 80km/h on shared paths. I suspect most have seen it before.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

No, you dumb idiot, it does not, I don't need to have tried an electric motor bike to know how it should be classified -* it has an electric motor, therefor, it is a MOTOR powered vehicle*, just like my uncles' 100% E-car is still 100% still a motor vehicle 

As to your lovely story about your less fit wife, yeah, so she can now climb on abike a hill that you have trouble climbing and you're way fitter than her, seems like a smart idea to me, give someone less fit and weak more power to get themselves into trouble 



Nurse Ben said:


> The only way a poll like this makes sense is if the riders polled have tried a real mtb ebike.


----------



## Welnic (Feb 6, 2013)

Martin.au said:


> So basically this then?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You've got no right to criticize riding 80kmh on an electric bike on a bike path unless you've done it yourself. Besides, he was pedaling.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Welnic said:


> You've got no right to criticize riding 80kmh on an electric bike on a bike path unless you've done it yourself. Besides, he was pedaling.


***Goes to see if there's a thumbs up emoji***


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

There ya go 



Martin.au said:


> ***Goes to see if there's a thumbs up emoji***
> 
> 
> Welnic said:
> ...


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

So, I've been wondering about the "you have to try it before you criticize!" argument. I don't think most of us would say that about, for example, methamphetamines.

It's pretty obvious to an outside observer (even one without specific similar expertise) in many cases when something is a bad idea. I watch near collisions happen on trails on a regular basis, because the traffic is *almost* (or, sometimes, just is) too fast for the terrain. So without actually riding a powered bike on those same trails, I can say with a great degree of confidence that adding more speed will be a bad thing. 

-Walt


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

It's just a stupid argument. There's no logic behind it. It's just an attempt to shut down valid criticism of e-bikes.

Do we need to ride one toknow they are faster? No.
Do we need to ride one to know that people will mod them to be outside class 1? No.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> You mean the dark fantasy this will happen?
> 
> Midnight in America, I guess.
> 
> ...


If motors of any sort were in the equation while in the process of gaining approval for many, many trails I've been involved with creating, those trails would not have happened. Or we mtbrs would've been stuck with an even more uphill battle than we already had, forced to advocate for something we have nothing at all to do with, and making public arguments such as the ones seen here: "a motor is not a motor".

Sounding like an idiot is NOT conducive to gaining the trust of land managers and local government committees. Motorized bikes being inherently approved anywhere real bikes can go will be a deal breaker thousands of times over. Anyone who's fought these battles knows this. I still don't understand why e-bikers are not willing to fight their own battles and feel the need to try to slide in on our coattails.

I have no problems with e-bikes in many, many places. I just don't want e-bike access tied to real bike access. Probably the 100th time I've said it, and others have as well. Why is that an issue with you guys?


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> If motors of any sort were in the equation while in the process of gaining approval for many, many trails I've been involved with creating, those trails would not have happened. Or we mtbrs would've been stuck with an even more uphill battle than we already had, forced to advocate for something we have nothing at all to do with, and making public arguments such as the ones seen here: "a motor is not a motor".


Class 1 Pedelec has a new motor style which addresses every concern of what caused people to ban "motor vehicles" from so many trails. That is simply a fact, and it's the main fact in this discussion.

Class 1 Pedelec can go on any mtb trail in Switzerland and Austria. They are selling like mad. Where are the horror stories?

Modders: look I can build a dragster and drive it to my 7/11. That's illegal and dangerous. So we should ban all vehicles? The modding thing is way overblown, anyway, as even 1000 watts is very low power. My KTM has 39,000 watts. So even if a few go over limit, unlikely you will be able to tell a thing on the trail. And again the euros have no problem with the issue I can ascertain.

You say you could not have made trail deals if emtbs were in the mix: how do you know? Because people hate motorcycles?

The Pedelecs are coming, like it or not, in a huge way. "Ban them all" might hold for a time, but pretty soon, some very normal and connected people will have them, and are going to get in fights with a few rabid mtb riders and it will be a big deal. Then the current definition of "motorized" will be re-evaluated, for good reason, as the mantra does not hold anymore.

So a better tactic would be to get behind "a line", which is probably 750w and 20mph, no throttle, and embrace the idea those rides can share most trails, as they already share the bikepaths, which according to many signs here are also "non-motorized".

We already know that in reality there is no actual impact based reason to ban these bikes from trails, instead there is anti-motor hysteria, which is ignorant of the new options.

People using public lands without big impacts: that's a good thing. You will always have some who think they need to protect the wild by banning others from it. Better to address those feelings with facts than to clutch the now meaningless (in terms of impact) and emotional motor mantra.

Again I bring up seasonal closures. On 8/29 we have hundreds of trails in Idaho which will close to motorcycles for the fall hunt because of noise. To apply that rule to silent e-mtbs makes no sense whatever.

The regulations and the mindsets are out of date, obviously.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

uhoh7 said:


> Bloviation about Europe and motorcycles


This isn't Europe and I fought the access battles and am well aware of the hatred that most Sierra Clubbers and their ilk have towards motorcycles. If you want to petition for access for your motorized bicycle feel free to do so, but don't count on getting much help from the human powered segment. By the way, you aren't changing anyone's opinion with your circular argument that never ends.


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

Wow, these threads keep going and going and going...

Kinda like the Energizer Bunny.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> Class 1 Pedelec can go on any mtb trail in Switzerland and Austria.


Have you considered moving to Switzerland? Or Austria?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I prefer electric motorcycles to gas ones too. I think there are plenty of trails out there that could be opened to electric motos that are closed to gas ones. 

But they're not bicycles. 

I could get behind pretty wide access for 250W/10-15mph limited e-bikes. That would give any average Jane or less fit individual the equivalent of pro racer power and would make all the climbs nice and easy. It wouldn't increase overall speeds, and it wouldn't be particularly attractive to the young fit folks who want to get their shred on. 

Now, I'm not about to rush out and advocate for any sort of trail access for motorbikes no matter how limited in power they are. If it seemed like the e-bike manufacturers had a plan in place to keep people from modding bikes, poaching trails, increasing user conflict, etc, I'd probably be neutral. But it looks to me like the reality is that the manufacturers want to sell motorcycles with pedals, and sneak through some state law loopholes. They don't appear to be making any effort at all to educate their buyers, nor to put their money to work to maintain or improve trail access for all bikes. 

So instead of neutral, I'm pretty much against *any* motors on MUTs. It could be different, but it would require some sort of evidence of good faith from the e-bike end. So far I have not seen that.

-Walt


----------



## Capt.Ogg (Jun 5, 2015)

Walt said:


> But it looks to me like the reality is that the manufacturers want to sell motorcycles with pedals


Please share what models are available from major manufacturers that fit your description?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> You say you could not have made trail deals if emtbs were in the mix: how do you know?


Thousands of hours of first hand, personal experience over a couple decades. How about yourself? How long have you been building and fighting for mtb trails and access?

Here's one of many articles regarding some of what we had to go through just for ~3/4 of a mile of trail in my neighborhood. It took us almost well over 5 years to win this battle. The group presenting it, fellsforever.org had changed their name a couple years previously. It used to be wheeledlocusts.org, to give you an idea how deep anti-bike sentiment runs in many places. It just scratches the surface as far as what we had to answer to. This type of stuff goes on ALL THE TIME, and we volunteers spend incredible amounts of time dealing with it. Not just in this aspect, but also to th level of trail sabotage, small town political turmoil, and even booby-trapping. You have no idea, obviously.

Biker cites DCR?s draft RMP faulty conclusion to justify new trail | FELLS BIKING PROBLEM

Out of your entire post, the only thing you typed remotely relevant to my only concern about e-bikes is in the form of a question. I have no argument with anything else you say, but I don't feel my access should be contingent upon my successfully making these arguments to people that are far more "anti" than anything you're ever going to see here. Again, I ask any of you to please explain why you feel I should be saddled with fighting your access battles in addition to my own.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

uhoh7 said:


> The Pedelecs are coming, like it or not, in a huge way. "Ban them all" might hold for a time


You must have missed the whole thread (lol), I'll help sum it up for you: Being against a blanket inclusion is different than advocating blanket ban. Most of the challenges are to the automatic inclusion and, until your side gets their own advocacy and categories worked out, stick to the trail systems where these motorized bikes are currently allowed.

For reference on a great, selective access progression - I refer you to Walt's layout:



Walt said:


> Hey, want to address my oft-proposed trail sharing solution? Nobody has so far. I'll post it again:
> -Moto trails: anything goes.
> -Bike only directional trails: open to e-bikes
> -Bike only bidirectional trails: open on a trial/case by case basis
> -MUTs: no e-bikes


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Carl Mega said:


> You must have missed the whole thread (lol), I'll help sum it up for you: Being against a blanket inclusion is different than advocating blanket ban. Most of the challenges are to the automatic inclusion


Precisely.

I wouldn't show up to voice my opposition to e-mtbs. I would very likely actually say the opposite - that as a long time mtb'er and trail builder/maintainer, I really don't see any sort of issue with low-power e-bike usage. But that's as far as I would be willing to take it; I don't want to be forced to adopt someone else's battle.

Please tell me how exactly that is an unreasonable or 'anti' stance in any way, shape or form? And please tell me how much time any of you spend fighting for access for user groups you are not a part of. I'm pretty comfortable in assuming the answer is "none whatsoever".

People love to *****, moan, whine and demand things, but very few are actually willing to put their time, sweat, and money where their mouths are. Which group do you guys belong to? Think about it.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Best suggestion yet. Still must spread some rep around before the electric motor bike knuckle head can get some :skep: If only they could come up with something new and different like maybe, I dunno, something realistic like water and soil are the same since they both have in minerals and other such stuff  Enough already electric MOTOR, is a MOTOR,if it is attached to anything that thing becomes......drum roll please...a motorised vehicle :skep:



J.B. Weld said:


> Have you considered moving to Switzerland? Or Austria?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I dunno, I do think there is a distinction between low powered electric vs high powered...whatever. If facts bear out that there is no major difference in trail wear and safety issues (which I believe will be the case for the most part) I could really give a damn whether e-bikes share appropriate trails with mtbs. I just want to make sure that a clear distinction remains in place.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

I first heard 250 watt, now it's 750 watt. And a 20 mph limit. Singletrack aside can you imagine a fat smoker who lost his licence for a DUI ripping along a multiuse trail at 20 mph. Kids and old ladies will be screaming.
A lot of the advocates for e-bikes here are probably responsible riders but they learned to be that way slowly by pedaling. Think about the new rider, either inexperienced or from a moto background. I feel this is who will buy e-bikes. Most mountain bikers wont be on one, seriously, they are mopeds and your friends will laugh at you.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> Class 1 Pedelec can go on any mtb trail in Switzerland and Austria. They are selling like mad. Where are the horror stories?


Maybe you missed my post in the other thread?

http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/new-e-bike-specific-inverted-fork-magura-1018066.html#post12745361

Yes, they are selling well in Europe, and not just in Switzerland and Austria. I expect them to sell well here generally, with locally it depending on access. I don't have any horror stories of ebike rampage causing trail closures, I coulnd't find much relating to mtb bans either except for the recent Strava closures which generated lots of drama. IME, when there are trail access issues, they are very local and don't make the news. It happens in meetings or signs simply go up.

I find this interesting since presumably, the majority of the cyclists are riding 250w/15.5 mph emtbs, not the 750w/20mph bikes that are legal here. I think someone who lives there would have a more accurate idea of any local issues than you or I would, don't you?



Swissam said:


> R
> 
> What part of Europe are ou talkng about? I know that here in Switzerland, Austria, Italy and France any motorized vehicle (unless used by forestry) is banned from any trail that's not classified as a road. The canton of Graubunden (Lenzerheide) is already "unofficially" separating Ebike trails from normal trails. You can see this in their tour guide literature where they have special Emtb tours which are mostly on forest roads or specially built trials that are basically paved by dirt. Emtb do trail damage. Period. I've seen it with my own eyes, my trail guide friend says they same. Graubunden would like to ban Ebikes from all single trails (according to my guide friend) but they can't because of tourism economics. This is why they are making special trails for Emtb, once they have enough trials they plan to ban all Ebikes from the normal single trails.
> I do agree that electric assist is the future but they should not be on the same trails until they can reduce the weight and maintain a reasonable power output.. Yes Emtb's have full access here in Europe at the moment, but that will change, it's already being planned by certain cantons here in the Alps.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> Class 1 Pedelec has a new motor style which addresses every concern of what caused people to ban "motor vehicles" from so many trails. That is simply a fact, and it's the main fact in this discussion.
> 
> Class 1 Pedelec can go on any mtb trail in Switzerland and Austria. They are selling like mad. Where are the horror stories?
> 
> ...


And once again, uhoh7 has ignored one of the primary arguments against e-bikes. An argument that will get e-bikes banned from trails, and potentially mountain bikes too.

Ok, so we choose a line, 250 w, 15 mph, 750 w, 20 mph, whatever. Now, how do you police that? Endlesssphere provides many examples of:
1) People modding and beefing up their bikes (or never planning to stick under the power limit in the first place.
2) People investigating how to get around the limits, so that their bikes can be "legal", until they aren't being scrutinised.

The end result is people on "legal" bikes, that become illegal 5 minutes into the trail, when they switch their controller settings, or plug in a throttle, followed shortly thereafter by complaints by other trail users, followed by banning.


----------



## Capt.Ogg (Jun 5, 2015)

Harryman said:


> I find this interesting since presumably, the majority of the cyclists are riding 250w/15.5 mph emtbs, not the 750w/20mph bikes that are legal here. I think someone who lives there would have a more accurate idea of any local issues than you or I would, don't you?


I ride both, and I absolute fail to see with my own eyes how 250W, 15.5mph emtb can make any more trail damage than regular mtb. We have freedom to roam (including pedals assist max 250W ebikes). No problems from emtbs yet. You can rarely even see them. Most of the emtbs seem to be ridden on streets  But I am worried about powerfull DIY bikes hitting the trails. "Luckily" our trails are technical rocks&roots type, which keeps speeds down and street riders on streets.

Maybe it's different where Swissam is located. Perhaps the problem is increased traffic that causes damage as he seems to be located in a busy tourist destination.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Capt.Ogg said:


> But I am worried about powerfull DIY bikes hitting the trails.


Exactly the point. NON MOTORIZED MEANS NO MOTOR.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

and how the fvck they won't admit that this is a real issue is beyond me.



d365 said:


> Exactly the point. NON MOTORIZED MEANS NO MOTOR.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Capt.Ogg said:


> I ride both, and I absolute fail to see with my own eyes how 250W, 15.5mph emtb can make any more trail damage than regular mtb. We have freedom to roam (including pedals assist max 250W ebikes). No problems from emtbs yet. You can rarely even see them. Most of the emtbs seem to be ridden on streets  But I am worried about powerfull DIY bikes hitting the trails. "Luckily" our trails are technical rocks&roots type, which keeps speeds down and street riders on streets.
> 
> Maybe it's different where Swissam is located. Perhaps the problem is increased traffic that causes damage as he seems to be located in a busy tourist destination.


I don't think anyone is arguing that EU-spec bikes are going to do trail damage or any particular harm to trail access. Especially somewhere where you can literally go wherever you want.

But in the US, the "limits" such as they are, are 750W and 20mph. That's a huge difference, and our access issues are very different.

As I've said before, I'd be ok with EU-spec e-bikes. But I don't think that's what we'll get (either here or in the EU) since there's no easy way to test the bikes, nor money to perform such tests at the trailhead. Unless the manufacturers find a way (I've suggested mandatory controller software patches downloaded nightly) to limit them and prevent tampering, it's only a matter of time before we have basically just motorcycles on the trails.

E-bikes for going slowly and exploring places you otherwise wouldn't get to are fine with me. E-bikes that are just much faster/more powerful mountain bikes are not because they will inevitably cause normal mountain bikes problems with trail access.

-Walt


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

LyNx said:


> and how the fvck they won't admit that this is a real issue is beyond me.


because they are already invested, and there is no realistic way to monitor wattage/speed cut off/throttles. There is no argument to be made.

As has already been pointed out, more than a few of the members here ride illegal bikes outside of class 1. why would anyone think it would be different on a larger scale?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Capt.Ogg said:


> I ride both, and I absolute fail to see with my own eyes how 250W, 15.5mph emtb can make any more trail damage than regular mtb. We have freedom to roam (including pedals assist max 250W ebikes). No problems from emtbs yet. You can rarely even see them. Most of the emtbs seem to be ridden on streets  But I am worried about powerfull DIY bikes hitting the trails. "Luckily" our trails are technical rocks&roots type, which keeps speeds down and street riders on streets.
> 
> Maybe it's different where Swissam is located. Perhaps the problem is increased traffic that causes damage as he seems to be located in a busy tourist destination.


I'll agree with you for the most part, that 250w bikes don't cause significantly different damage than a mtb. I do think there is a difference in overall impact though due to the fact that there would be more new riders who otherwise wouldn't be on the trails as the proponents always suggest, and experienced riders will ride farther which is more impact per rider. I don't think either is a huge problem, but the the impact to a trail system is not identical.

I'm more concerned about speed than damage as proper trail design can mitigate all users impact. User conflict, which is what we have been fighting since day one, is caused primarily by excess or percived excess speed.

Put the ebike riders on 750w/20mph bikes instead of 250w/15.5mph and the issues will only be intensified.

I'd be interested to hear what the situation is where you are concerning anti mountain bike sentiment? Is there any? Is it bad? Good?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Martin.au said:


> And once again, uhoh7 has ignored one of the primary arguments against e-bikes. An argument that will get e-bikes banned from trails, and potentially mountain bikes too.
> 
> Ok, so we choose a line, 250 w, 15 mph, 750 w, 20 mph, whatever. Now, how do you police that? Endlesssphere provides many examples of:
> 1) People modding and beefing up their bikes (or never planning to stick under the power limit in the first place.
> ...


ES is definitely on the far edge of the ebike spectrum, since they almost without exception consider bikes and the people who ride them to be far behind and beneath them. They don't consider themselves part of the cycling comunity in any way, their rides to be bicycles, or that pedaling is necessary in the slightest. Pedalling is only useful to blend in. Ride what you want, as fast as you want, where ever you want.

The other ebike forums are more balanced since they are also much more populated by people riding OEM bikes and those with cycling backgrounds. There's still a general acceptance of modding and skirting the laws, but also some who question the desires for more speed and power.

I agree with your points though, there's no effective way to police the difference between emtbs, it would be hard enough to enforce a separation between emtbs and mtbs.

And, why all this effort on the part of people who don't want them or ride them? Anyone seeing the ebike community stepping up with the plans and funding to make it happen?


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> Thousands of hours of first hand, personal experience over a couple decades. How about yourself? How long have you been building and fighting for mtb trails and access?


How does this past experience apply to e-mtbs, which are nearly brand new?

No, I have not built trails, though I've cut out many. Instead I tired to stem the MPB attack on Whitebark pines with a verbenone patch campaign over 3 years. I patched over 2000 trees in 3 years, and spend about 14k of my own money on the project. No, I am not rich. And I hesitate to even mention the work because bragging about volunteer stuff and shaming others is not how my momma taught me to roll, sorry.

What have you done for the forest itself? (Sorry Mom }

White Bark at 10k by unoh7, on Flickr



Martin.au said:


> And once again, uhoh7 has ignored one of the primary arguments against e-bikes. An argument that will get e-bikes banned from trails, and potentially mountain bikes too.
> 
> Ok, so we choose a line, 250 w, 15 mph, 750 w, 20 mph, whatever. Now, how do you police that? Endlesssphere provides many examples of:
> 1) People modding and beefing up their bikes (or never planning to stick under the power limit in the first place.
> ...


Oh yes, how can we possibly cope? Switzerland and Austria cope perfectly fine, and the US seems to cope perfectly well on the bike paths.

Your logic of "some will break the rules so let's ban them all", where have I heard that before?

Some mtb riders are reckless so let's ban them all. I've certainly heard that before, so now I guess I know where this current intolerant view comes from. Hypocrisy.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

uhoh7 said:


> Hypocrisy.


Experience. Pragmatism. The hard facts don't change just because you keep posting photos. Your credibility is approaching a zero sum.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> How does this past experience apply to e-mtbs, which are nearly brand new?


Seriously? He's spent a decade working within the bureaucracy to gain access for mountain bike trails and you don't think that applies to e-mtbs? The emtb community should be asking those of us who have the experience for pointers on how to improve their access, not falsely believing no one will care.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> How does this past experience apply to e-mtbs, which are nearly brand new?
> 
> No, I have not built trails, though I've cut out many. Instead I tired to stem the MPB attack on Whitebark pines with a verbenone patch campaign over 3 years. I patched over 2000 trees in 3 years, and spend about 14k of my own money on the project. No, I am not rich. And I hesitate to even mention the work because bragging about volunteer stuff and shaming others is not how my momma taught me to roll, sorry.


Then why do you even mention it, since it's not remotely related to the subject at hand in any way, shape or form? Your momma would be ashamed.

So do you have any sort of actual response or suggestions as to what I personally see as the major issue with e-bikes? I'm not looking to ban anything, so you can't cry about hypocrisy. I don't care if I get passed on climbs by elderly overweight people with cigarettes in their mouths, so you can skip the whole 'fragile ego' thing, I don't care what wattage you run as long as you utilize it in a way that doesn't trash trails make things unsafe for others. Hell, I'll even back you guys up at hearings if asked nicely. But no way am I willing to have my access hinged upon e-bike access. So...

How many times can the same question be repeated before even a single one of you even make any sort of attempt to actually address it?

*"Again, I ask any of you to please explain why you feel I should be saddled with fighting your access battles in addition to my own."*

If you are unable to scroll back a few posts and read the original posts which very clearly explain how this relates to e-bikes, I really don't know what to say. You're either quite dim or being deliberately obtuse. Which is it? If you truly can't make the connections, I'll be happy to explain everything in a much simpler way. I think though that you know my point is completely valid, but don't want to admit it because you have nothing to stand on.

Feel free to prove me wrong with a well thought out, relevant response. Or just keep talking about trees.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Harryman said:


> Seriously? He's spent a decade working within the bureaucracy to gain access for mountain bike trails and you don't think that applies to e-mtbs? The emtb community should be asking those of us who have the experience for pointers on how to improve their access, not falsely believing no one will care.


Almost 2 decades actually. 

Now a bunch of Johnny-come-lately newbs to the access game seem to be under the impression that I (and many others) somehow owe it to them to fight their battles for them, at significant cost to us in money, time and trail opportunities, even as they insult us to our faces.

Yeah, okay..let me get right on that.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

uhoh7 said:


> Modders: look I can build a dragster and drive it to my 7/11. That's illegal and dangerous. So we should ban all vehicles? The modding thing is way overblown, anyway, as even 1000 watts is very low power. My KTM has 39,000 watts. So even if a few go over limit, unlikely you will be able to tell a thing on the trail. And again the euros have no problem with the issue I can ascertain.
> 
> I don't know what your problem is.
> 
> Dragsters are not illegal, that is the whole point. They are just illegal on the street. There are places where you can drive all the dragsters you want. There are places you can drive motorbikes all you want. Vehicles with motors do not belong on every trail.


----------



## aborgman (Apr 18, 2016)

Walt said:


> If I put pedals in my Jeep and it only goes when I pedal, is it no longer a motorized vehicle?


It is whatever relevant statute defines it as.

Is an air rifle a firearm? Under the law in Michigan, yes.


----------



## aborgman (Apr 18, 2016)

Walt said:


> So you'd be ok limiting them to 10mph max assist, right?


Sure... as long as all trail users are limited in a similar way.

If speed is the problem - everyone should be governed.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

tiretracks said:


> Experience. Pragmatism. The hard facts don't change just because you keep posting photos. Your credibility is approaching a zero sum.


I guess that still has me 20 points over the vitriol you like to spew. One nasty post after another from you on a subject about which you have no personal interest. It's like me joining a new mommies forum so I can lecture them about birth control 

@Harry:
I asked the question, which since the e-mtb is a totally new vehicle on public lands, does not seem so far "out there".

I see people here often use their volunteer work to justify their opinions and conclusions. I also see people use their other mtb bike building experience to do the same. Both are fine pursuits, but I think a viewpoint should stand on it's own.

Yes there have been fights for mtb access, and they have not gone that well nationally, since the "wilderness areas" are increasing and mtb riders are shut out. But I don't question his hard work to get trails going, I do question the "e-mtb" threat to those trails.

Sure there are hysterical people who think they are motorcycles, there always will be.

We should let our strategies be driven by hysteria?

Oh wait, I know TT likes pics 


Dead Whitebarks by unoh7, on Flickr


----------



## aborgman (Apr 18, 2016)

d365 said:


> Exactly the point. NON MOTORIZED MEANS NO MOTOR.


No, it means whatever the people making the rules decide it means.

If the lawmakers declare tomorrow that a mtb is a motor vehicle... it is. If lawmakers declare tomorrow that anything with less than 50HP isn't a motor vehicle... it isn't.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> I see people here often use their volunteer work to justify their opinions and conclusions. I also see people use their other mtb bike building experience to do the same. Both are fine pursuits, but I think a viewpoint should stand on it's own.
> r


My reference to to the volunteer work I've done was made specifically in response to your question. Do you not recall asking it? Here you go:

"You say you could not have made trail deals if emtbs were in the mix: how do you know? "

Let me know if you are unable to go back and re-read anything else and I'll be happy to spoon feed you the entire conversation.

E-bikers spend endless energy equivocating e-bikes with real bikes, including yourself. Then you do a complete 180 and now say they're nothing like real bikes when it comes to access issues. How does that make any sense? Specially coming from someone that likes to throw around the 'hypocrite' label.

Oh, and again, you completely avoid the issue and put up a picture of a tree.

*"Again, I ask any of you to please explain why you feel I should be saddled with fighting your access battles in addition to my own."*


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> But I don't question his hard work to get trails going, I do question the "e-mtb" threat to those trails.


Where exactly did I mention any sort of threat to the trails? 
Did you miss the many, many times I've said I don't see them as a problem? 
Do you need me to go back and re-post it all for you?

Seriously, do you have some sort of cognitive issues? Because I feel bad busting your balls if you actually do have some sort of condition.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> My reference to to the volunteer work I've done was made specifically in response to your question. Do you not recall asking it? Here you go:
> 
> "You say you could not have made trail deals if emtbs were in the mix: how do you know? "
> 
> Let me know if you are unable to go back and re-read anything else and I'll be happy to spoon feed you the entire conversation.


Thanks for the sarcasm. Mark of a true advocate. I guess you missed the point of the question.

The answer is clear: you don't know how e-mtbs would affect your previous battles since they were not a part of it.

As to "the saddle". You don't have to fight for e-mtbs. Nobody is asking you to. What would be nice is to give them the courtesy you'd like to have from the sierra club. I.E. the benefit of the doubt in a reasonable access scheme as we already see in Switzerland and Austria.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> But I don't question his hard work to get trails going, I do question the "e-mtb" threat to those trails.


Where exactly did I mention any sort of threat to the trails? 
Did you miss the many, many times I've said I don't see them as a problem? 
Do you need me to go back and re-post it all for you?



uhoh7 said:


> Sure there are hysterical people who think they are motorcycles, there always will be.
> 
> We should let our strategies be driven by hysteria?


There you go again "our strategies". "Our". Why is this issue somehow thrown in my lap? I have no motor. It is not my problem. Fight your own fight. Seems to me your major strategy is just to be 100% parasitic on MTB advocacy efforts. Disagree? Please, do explain.

Seriously, do you have some sort of cognitive issues? Because I feel bad busting your balls if you actually do have some sort of condition.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> Seriously, do you have some sort of cognitive issues? Because I feel bad busting your balls if you actually do have some sort of condition.


I do find sanctimonious rants a tax on cognition. 


Wet Coat by unoh7, on Flickr


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> The answer is clear: you don't know how e-mtbs would affect your previous battles since they were not a part of it.
> .


Do you not realize how many years it has taken for mountain bikers to clearly distinguish themselves from any and all motorized users? Do you know how many times we've had to present in-depth studies about the differences in order to get trail approvals? Now many e-bikers want to erase that line by saying that e-bikes should be given blanket access anywhere real bikes are allowed. So are you now on the record agreeing with my stance that e-bikes should be treated as a new and separate user group, rather than given blanket access on the coat-tails of real bikes?

Listen, it's obvious you know nothing about trail advocacy. That's fine, not a lot of people do. But maybe if you're going to start questioning those of us that have been at it for a long time, you could do us all a favor and educate yourself a little on the subject before wading into a debate about it.

Or, you could be honest with yourself, realize you don't know anything, and look for education instead argument. You guys are doing absolutely nothing but shooting yourselves in the foot with your approach to all this with your paranoia and entitled attitudes. Seriously. Grow up.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> Do you not realize how many years it has taken for mountain bikers to clearly distinguish themselves from any and all motorized users? Do you know how many times we've had to present in-depth studies about the differences in order to get trail approvals? Now many e-bikers want to erase that line by saying that e-bikes should be given blanket access anywhere real bikes are allowed. So are you now on the record agreeing with my stance that e-bikes should be treated as a new and separate user group, rather than given blanket access on the coat-tails of real bikes?
> 
> Listen, it's obvious you know nothing about trail advocacy. That's fine, not a lot of people do. But maybe if you're going to start questioning those of us that have been at it for a long time, you could do us all a favor and educate yourself a little on the subject before wading into a debate about it.
> 
> Or, you could be honest with yourself, realize you don't know anything, and look for education instead argument. You guys are doing absolutely nothing but shooting yourselves in the foot with your approach to all this with your paranoia and entitled attitudes. Seriously. Grow up.


Oh, you are so grown up with your sarcasm and insults, I can't wait get to that level. 

I ask a question, not sarcastic (how could you know?), and instead of a answer which would be fair enough, I get a rant. How dare I question one of the great advocates of out time? I'm a parasite. etc.

Great attitude. And your empathy to other users is really exemplary as well. 

But maybe you have gone OTB one too many times and this impatient aggression is just a symptom of that?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> I guess that still has me 20 points over the vitriol you like to spew. One nasty post after another from you on a subject about which you have no personal interest. It's like me joining a new mommies forum so I can lecture them about birth control
> 
> @Harry:
> I asked the question, which since the e-mtb is a totally new vehicle on public lands, does not seem so far "out there".
> ...


Ok, then. As you said, it's a new vehicle on our public lands and many of us are in favor of them being treated as such. Only legal on motorized and where specifically allowed on non motorized would give us all a chance for emtbs to be integrated into MUT trails and a chance to determine their true impact, especially as the motors continue to get more powerful.

We have a different political climate than I believe they have in Europe, so I don't believe motorized mountain bikes will be as easily accepted by other users as they have been there. Based on my history in advocacy, I can guarantee you that with the arguments coming from those that oppose us, that mtbs are just a short step away from motorcycles, by adding an actual motor to them, regardless of size, will only increase the opposition. I don't have to have argued for ebikes in the past for this to be crystal clear to me. If you don't believe me, just wait a year or two. While other user groups as well as ours don't make the decisions directly regarding access, they do have influence.

Unless you know of legislation coming that will limit emtbs to 250w, the arguments that 250w emtbs have no impact are valueless when we are discussing the future of emtbs. Show me a population of 750w bikes and that they have the same impact as a mtb, and you'll have a point worth considering.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> But maybe you have gone OTB one too many times and this impatient aggression is just a symptom of that?


Nope, I just come from a long line of folks with little tolerance for BS.

Again, you completely avoid anything germane to the subject and just cry "victim".
What would your momma think about that?


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Harryman said:


> Show me a population of 750w bikes and that they have the same impact as a mtb, and you'll have a point worth considering.


Hi Harry, appreciate the civil tone

I use 750 because that is the current federal designation. 250 of course would be OK with me personally, since my bike is euro 250, but a 750 watt pedelec does not seem like it's going to be a trail eating monster.

In fact many in the discussion are already on record that "trail impact is not the issue", because they realize even far more power motorbikes are often good for stabilizing trails. They are not so good if the trail is really steep.

As to the "population" I think we need one. I've advocated already a permit system to get the true facts. 

Best to you 



slapheadmofo said:


> Nope, I just come from a long line of folks with little tolerance for BS.


Your 4000 posts here seems to contradict that assertion.

But goes along way to explain your online manners. 

Something you often read at a Idaho trailhead: Respect gets Respect. :thumbsup:

PS, and that was not "any tree". You don't recognize it?


----------



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

slapheadmofo said:


> E-bikers spend endless energy equivocating e-bikes with real bikes, including yourself.


If all that energy were redirected it might be enough to pedal a bicycle.


----------



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

European studies have shown that prolonged exposure to electric bikes can cause certain types of cancer, and possibly contribute to erectile disfunction.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> Respect gets Respect. :thumbsup:


Exactly. Now go back and re-read our exchange starting at post #427, two pages back. Let me know where the disrespect started. Hint: it was when you, based on your non-existent expertise re: the subject of mtb trail advocacy, smugly proclaimed a very legitimate concern a "dark fantasy", etc. Go from there; let me know how much respect you think you've earned.

And you STILL are avoiding the question.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> I use 750 because that is the current federal designation. 250 of course would be OK with me personally, since my bike is euro 250, but a 750 watt pedelec does not seem like it's going to be a trail eating monster.


I don't think they are trail eating monsters, but they do have enough power and torque that you don't have to pedal at all if you have a throttle and only ghost pedal if you have PAS. Which only means more speed while climbing which is not something we need. As you well know, 250w is plenty to get you up anything you might want to climb, a 750 will get you up a climb at an even higher speed if you have the skill. You should go check out some of the threads on ES, it's full of non pedalling emtbs.

Woodland claims his emtb is Class 1 legal, hey, the motor is stamped "750" but it certainly doesn't seem to ride like any bike I've ever pedalled or any 250w emtb I've seen. No way do I want a trail system full of these.



WoodlandHills said:


> I have attempted to gear my hard tail so that it will climb any hill I find in the lowest gear and on PAS 1. At that motor RPM I can assist the electric motor over any ruts or berms during the climb, but it mostly runs on its own at about 5.5 to 6.4 mph. This is a BBSHD, and a 42granny/30t mighty mini with the basic Luna 30a programming. On its own the cadence is always a bit ahead of me, so to speak, but when we come to an obstacle, the motor RPM drops and my feet catch up with the crank. I then keep the pressure on and RPM up until we have traversed the stream bed or berm or whatever and the bike speeds up and I can no longer input torque to the crank at a reasonable cadence. If the hill is extremely steep long I'll go up to PAS 3 or 4 out of the 9 available. Vertical stair steps and the like, I do standing on the pedals and using full throttle!!!


https://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=74706&start=75

Sounds like he's pretty much along for the ride doesn't it?



uhoh7 said:


> In fact many in the discussion are already on record that "trail impact is not the issue", because they realize even far more power motorbikes are often good for stabilizing trails. They are not so good if the trail is really steep.


Huh? In this discussion? It's said about 250w bikes here not motos. And I've never heard that claim about motos before except from you. Where I live they beat the crap out of trails, maybe it's different there.



uhoh7 said:


> As to the "population" I think we need one. I've advocated already a permit system to get the true facts.


Like a census?


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> Oh yes, how can we possibly cope? Switzerland and Austria cope perfectly fine, and the US seems to cope perfectly well on the bike paths.
> 
> Your logic of "some will break the rules so let's ban them all", where have I heard that before?
> 
> Some mtb riders are reckless so let's ban them all. I've certainly heard that before, so now I guess I know where this current intolerant view comes from. Hypocrisy.


Australia copes well too. The ACT has banned all e-bikes from the national park trails. I wouldn't be surprise if that is how it plays out elsewhere too.

Like I said. Stop carrying on with your false equivalency, equivocation and whinging and think about the likely policy response.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Speculation aside:
1) Every e-MTB rider that I know or have met is a long time MTB rider.
2) None of the twenty five or so (probably more) acquaintances, all long time MTB'ers, who I've shown my e-MTB's or allowed to ride has made anything but positive remarks. Some have purchased one; some are planning an acquisition.
3) Wife and I rode in the mountains (for us 8,000-9,000' is high since we reside at sea level) on MTB's this weekend. Encountered no e-MTB's, but some ICE MC's. They're never going to be able to police e-MTB's since they can't even stop ICE activity.

Rhetorical question for someone with brains (Harry), and not trying to be snarky. I agree there will be individuals who will "boost" their e-bikes. Considering that it's possible to produce an e-MTB that is nearly indistinguishable from an MTB, how will they be banned or even regulated? In CA there are some areas that don't even have anyone at the entrance.


----------



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

fos'l said:


> Rhetorical question for someone with brains (Harry), and not trying to be snarky.


Using snarkiness while asking for a non-snarky reply? ¿pot/kettle?

Intellectually challenged individual here so please bear with me. Motorbikes & atv's aren't allowed on the trails I frequent and if one were encountered there they would surely be informed of their faux pas. People around here are mostly law abiding and basic human nature prevents them from blatantly breaking the rules under scrutinous eyes. As far as incognito e-bikes I believe that any of them powerful enough to be of consequence will be plenty conspicuous.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

fos'l said:


> Speculation aside:
> 1) Every e-MTB rider that I know or have met is a long time MTB rider.
> 2) None of the twenty five or so (probably more) acquaintances, all long time MTB'ers, who I've shown my e-MTB's or allowed to ride has made anything but positive remarks. Some have purchased one; some are planning an acquisition.
> 3) Wife and I rode in the mountains (for us 8,000-9,000' is high since we reside at sea level) on MTB's this weekend. Encountered no e-MTB's, but some ICE MC's. They're never going to be able to police e-MTB's since they can't even stop ICE activity.
> ...


We don't generally have people at park entrances either. Here, illegal bike usage (such as motorbikes, petrol powered bicycles, and potentially E-bikes) is monitored, and every so often there will be a crackdown on offenders - usually with huge fines.

Basically, trail users report them, and rangers/police/etc respond.
eg:
Trail bike crackdown - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Police to target trail bike riders

An E-bike is hard to distinguish from a normal bike at a distance, but they're easy to identify on trails, where you are passing in close proximity.

Having said that, most of us don't have a problem with class 1 e-bikes on trails. There's a few concerns with closing speed and stuff like that, but I don't think of them as major issues. Those sort of things can be dealt with at a local level.

The problem is idiots. Yes, you may ride a class 1 e-bike, but others won't. Even a bunch of people in this forum ride non-class 1 e-bikes. Now, when trail users start reporting in that some idiot belted past them at high speed on an e-bike, and other trail users report in damaged tracks, then where do you think the policy line will be drawn? It's much easier to either ban e-bikes, or ban all bikes, than for rangers/police to try and define whether a bike is class 1 or not while out on the trail.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Martin.au said:


> It's much easier to either ban e-bikes, or ban all bikes, than for rangers/police to try gand define whether a bike is class 1 or not while out on the trail.


That's the basic issue in a nutshell. Excellent post.

Here's another way to look at it, since I doubt this will get any serious responses. In many places, dogs must be on a leash, because somebody has either been bitten or the threat of somebody being bitten is a concern. Even if your dog has had all the shots, all the training, and a perfect record, it will need to wear a leash. Why? Because who is going to take the time to determine which dogs need to be on leashes? It's just easier to require all dogs to wear a leash. Lumping e-bikes and mountain bikes together, or even just the existance of e-bikes, would likely make us all dogs.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

The easy way to enforce it:

Ban all bikes from a trail or trails.

Which is what the Sierra Club, etc. are already starting to do. 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Le Duke said:


> The easy way to enforce it:
> 
> Ban all bikes from a trail or trails.


Correct, which is why all mtbikers need to support access for e-bikers. Banning e-bikes is a slippery slope to banning all bikes.

You can easily tell if an e-biker is using a throttle so the cutoff will be Pedal-assist-only allowed.

E-bikers yield to everyone.

Tickets and scoldings should be given for poor manners to all bikers regardless of whether a bike is motorized or not.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Or a blanket ban of emotorbikes. Enforce it with extremely punitive fines and forfeitures. I feel zero need to divide my time to advocate for motorbikes.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

fos'l said:


> I have a 1000w motor that others have reported pumping 4kw into.


I was just wondering if you could explain why you bought a 1000w motor, when legal e-bikes are available? Are your trails legal for 1000w e-bikes?

Thanks.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

tiretracks said:


> Or a blanket ban of emotorbikes. Enforce it with extremely punitive fines and forfeitures. I feel zero need to divide my time to advocate for motorbikes.


That's cool but how is a ranger going to know if your mt bike has one of these or not:

vivax assist - vom Bike zum leichten E-Bike

If mt bikers truly want e-assist banned the only way to do it is to ban all bikes.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Correct, which is why all mtbikers need to support access for e-bikers. Banning e-bikes is a slippery slope to banning all bikes.
> 
> You can easily tell if an e-biker is using a throttle so the cutoff will be Pedal-assist-only allowed.
> 
> ...


Errr. No.

MTBers have a much better likelihood of gaining and keeping trail access using the human power only mantra. That puts us in with hikers - a dominant force in trail access.

The best thing MTBers can do for their trail access in this circumstance is to throw E-bikes under a bus and lump E-bikes, motorcycles, etc into the powered vehicle class.

Which is why I keep pointing out that the argument is between sensible e-bike riders, idiots on e-bikes, and trail management.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Linktung said:


> That's cool but how is a ranger going to know if your mt bike has one of these or not:
> 
> vivax assist - vom Bike zum leichten E-Bike
> 
> If mt bikers truly want e-assist banned the only way to do it is to ban all bikes.


I think most people consider those devices to be a fairly insignificant concern.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Martin.au said:


> I think most people consider those devices to be a fairly insignificant concern.


I agree, e-bikes are a fairly insignificant concern, stravatards on the other hand...


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktung said:


> That's cool but how is a ranger going to know if your mt bike has one of these or not:
> 
> vivax assist - vom Bike zum leichten E-Bike
> 
> If mt bikers truly want e-assist banned the only way to do it is to ban all bikes.


Nice fairy tale but you're going to find it tough sledding getting bikes banned by your sketchy logic. And you guys wonder why you get friction from us. If you want to advocate for your own access go right ahead but you are in no way shape or form entitled to piggyback on our successes. The entitlement is the primary reason I am advocating a ban. You want an all or none solution, my solution is that you get none.If you think you are going to try to leverage that position with threats to our access you are going to find yourself on the wrong end of that equation in a very short amount of time.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Martin.au said:


> Errr. No.
> 
> MTBers have a much better likelihood of gaining and keeping trail access using the human power only mantra. That puts us in with hikers - a dominant force in trail access.
> 
> ...


To hikers e-bikes are the same as bikes, only mt bikers notice a difference. When you encounter a walker/hiker the only thing they notice is if you yield or not. They probably prefer e-bikers as they smell better.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

tiretracks said:


> Nice fairy tale but you're going to find it tough sledding getting bikes banned by your sketchy logic. And you guys wonder why you get friction from us. If you want to advocate for your own access go right ahead but you are in no way shape or form entitled to piggyback on our successes. The entitlement is the primary reason I am advocating a ban. You want an all or none solution, my solution is that you get none.If you think you are going to try to leverage that position with threats to our access you are going to find yourself on the wrong end of that equation in a very short amount of time.


That's cool bro, just don't take my access to trails on my non-e-bike with you. Cut off your nose to spite your face.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktung said:


> That's cool bro, just don't take my access to trails on my non-e-bike with you. Cut off your nose to spite your face.


Funny, that's the point we've been trying to get you to understand, don't take our access with you when you get banned. Its coming, there are already prohibitions in the works.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

tiretracks said:


> Funny, that's the point we've been trying to get you to understand, don't take our access with you when you get banned. Its coming, there are already prohibitions in the works.


'Prohibitions are coming'...they are already here. You couldn't significantly ban them in the states any more then they are. Unless you are referring to prohibitions in places like Italy, Swiss, Austria, and other places that have embraced e-biking with little consequence.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Linktung said:


> I agree, e-bikes are a fairly insignificant concern, stravatards on the other hand...


Seriously? Grow up. Don't quote me out of context, stupid child.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

All the rangers have to do is stand at the top of a hill instead of the bottom. Ticket all the fat guys that aren't sweating


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Early adopter, high power modded, no speed limit, e-biker who is youngish and fit here.


The hypocrisy in this forum is just unbearable. You are the exact reason why all e-bikes should be banned from non motorized trails.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Martin.au said:


> Seriously? Grow up. Don't quote me out of context, stupid child.


Sorry, it looked like you were talking about e-bikes, my bad...this thread is about e-bikes perhaps you are lost.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktung said:


> 'Prohibitions are coming'...they are already here. You couldn't significantly ban them in the states any more then they are. Unless you are referring to prohibitions in places like Italy, Swiss, Austria, and other places that have embraced e-biking with little consequence.


We are not discussing Italy, Switzerland, Austria or any of these other magical places.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Linktung said:


> 'Prohibitions are coming'...they are already here. You couldn't significantly ban them in the states any more then they are. Unless you are referring to prohibitions in places like Italy, Swiss, Austria, and other places that have embraced e-biking with little consequence.


They are BANNED on trails in Switzerland...

And Austria.

So, how is their increasing popularity in those countries relevant to actual mountain biking?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

d365 said:


> The hypocrisy in this forum is just unbearable. You are the exact reason why all e-bikes should be banned from non motorized trails.


And yet you still follow this ebike forum....The self-control of non-e-bikers gets called into question once again.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

tiretracks said:


> We are not discussing Italy, Switzerland, Austria or any of these other magical places.


Okay so America?


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Sorry, it looked like you were talking about e-bikes, my bad...this thread is about e-bikes perhaps you are lost.


Nope. You knew the context of my reply and intentionally manipulated my quote out of context.

Very childish behaviour.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Linktung said:


> To hikers e-bikes are the same as bikes, only mt bikers notice a difference. When you encounter a walker/hiker the only thing they notice is if you yield or not. They probably prefer e-bikers as they smell better.


Nope.

Mountain bikers, hikers and trail management have a long, occasionally tempestuous, but generally conversational relationship with regard to trail access.

E-bikes don't, and their existence threatens this relationship.

Just remember it's far easier from a policy perspective to lump e-bikes in with other motorised vehicles. It's up to you to provide good arguments as to why this shouldn't be done. Using terrible arguments against mountain bikes just decreases the number of potential allies that you may have when you are trying to gain trail access.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Martin.au said:


> Nope.
> 
> Mountain bikers, hikers and trail management have a long, occasionally tempestuous, but generally conversational relationship with regard to trail access.
> 
> E-bikes don't, and their existence threatens this relationship.


Who do you think are riding these new e-mtbs, Martians?

EVERY e-mtb owner I have met is a mtb rider for many years 

@Le Duck: Banned in Switzerland?

As of Thursday, April 26, 2012, Electric bikes with a motor output of up to 500 watts and pedal assistance of up to 25 kilometers will now be classified as bicycles instead of mopeds in Switzerland.

The move is a win for the European Two Wheel Retailers' Association (ETRA), which has been lobbying the European Parliament to loosen restrictions in order to open up the market to more e-bikes. Currently, European legislation limits power output to a maximum of 250 watts for a pedelec to still be considered a bicycle.

Vehicles with a motor output between 500 and 1,000 watts and/or assistance up to 45 kilometers per hour (28-MPH) are considered an S-Pedelec, and carry more stringent and expensive regulations before they can be sold in shops. In many countries, riders must also have a license, insurance, and wear a helmet to drive an S-Pedelec (S = Schnell, meaning "Fast").

Austria is the only other EU country that has relaxed the EU requirements. There, electric bikes with a speed limit of 20 miles per hour (32 kph) and a motor output up to 600 watts are still considered bicycles."

The future 

Harry, you a want a "population": there it is. Now, somebody find us some horror stories which show the folly of this policy.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

JB, good answer; for some reason, when I log on I can't locate posts in order to reply with quote, but your answer about the peer group being "law-abiding" is excellent and you should have no problems associated with e-MTB's.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Martin.au said:


> We don't generally have people at park entrances either. Here, illegal bike usage (such as motorbikes, petrol powered bicycles, and potentially E-bikes) is monitored, and every so often there will be a crackdown on offenders - usually with huge fines.
> 
> Basically, trail users report them, and rangers/police/etc respond.
> eg:
> ...


Agree with what you say, but the only trail crackdown we've had in socal was related to MTB'ers riding on a Marine Base. Should have expected what they received since the Marines had to suspend training at times if riders were on the "course", not to mention the problems with security.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

The reason that I asked the question about how to designate e-MTB's from MTB's is there are fewer differences and those are diminishing. When batteries take the next quantum leap smaller, it will be really difficult to tell one from the other. The only way to designate IMO is by some distinguishing mark ("Scarlet Letter" anyone?).


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I don't see pressing need for a blanket ban on e-bikes. Numbers are small enough that I see them as in a sort of trial period now, where a wink and a nod are good enough in many cases. I've done a lot of riding and building on that basis myself. But realize that the terms 'human powered' and 'passive recreation' are at the heart of getting a lot of mtb trails approved. Do mountain biking a favor and drop the whole "I'm entitled to go anywhere a regular bike can go" line. It's no good for either user group.


----------



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

I borrowed this quote from another thread because I didn't want to pollute that one.



PinoyMTBer said:


> I do average about 15-20mph, but that also includes the descent....when it comes to controlling a heavy ebike, speed and momentum is what keeps you upright.


More evidence that they're too fast to be in the same category as bicycles and not appropriate on many multi-use trails, I believe PinoyMTBer mentioned that he's more or less an average rider and that's at least double the speed of the average mountain biker.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Don't know whether the line about access was directed at me, but as said before, I'll go where not prohibited and the trail will be so devoid of people, probably won't see anyone.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

It was directed at the e-bike population in general.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

fos'l said:


> Speculation aside:
> 1) Every e-MTB rider that I know or have met is a long time MTB rider.
> 2) None of the twenty five or so (probably more) acquaintances, all long time MTB'ers, who I've shown my e-MTB's or allowed to ride has made anything but positive remarks. Some have purchased one; some are planning an acquisition.
> 3) Wife and I rode in the mountains (for us 8,000-9,000' is high since we reside at sea level) on MTB's this weekend. Encountered no e-MTB's, but some ICE MC's. They're never going to be able to police e-MTB's since they can't even stop ICE activity.
> ...


1&2 Your personal experience with other riders, just like mine, is a poor indicator of the attitudes and makeup of the rest of the riding population and other user groups as a whole. I'm not doubting what your saying, but I'd venture that as emtb exposure grows, new riders will become a more significant percentage than what we see now.

I doubt anywhere near the majority since the natural crossover is from existing. If I based the extent of anti mtb sentiment on what I experience on the trails, I'd say everyone likes us. I smile and say hello, almost everyone smiles and says hello back, I've only had a few people ever actually act with any animosity towards me because I was on a bike in 30 years. However in meetings, behind the scenes and with the emails I've seen sent to our parks dept, you'd think the place is swarming with them. The fact is, most people who are anti bike will just smile or nod while inside they are fuming. It's the same with emtbs, I'd venture that most people will never say boo to you directly, also since you don't seem like the type to be making an ass of yourself.

Strict enforcement by management is near impossible in much of the US due to the open nature of our places to ride. As others have said however, pressure from individuals is pretty effective. We have some non motorized that tie into moto trails and once every few years I''ll see moto tracks where someone has ridden in. The trails are heavily traveled and I'd expect that they get told every 500 ft that they shouldn't be there, so its annoying enough that they don't return.

Other than that, if the chances of being caught by the authorities is low and the fines are low, say $150, no one will care. You'd rationalize it as the cost of riding if you got caught once every 5 or 10 years. If the fines were hefty though, even if the chances were very low, you'd think twice. Like this:

'Our trails aren't built for that': eBike riders risk fines in Canberra nature parks

$1500? $3000? I know its not USD, but that would make me reevaluate where I was willing to ride.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> Who do you think are riding these new e-mtbs, Martians?
> 
> EVERY e-mtb owner I have met is a mtb rider for many years
> 
> ...


They actually are defined as powered cycles or two wheeled mopeds, not bicycles.  Like the CPSA here, this only defines what can be sold, not where they can be used, that is left up to the member states as well as the power limits within the defined parameters.

EUR-Lex - 32013R0168 - EN - EUR-Lex

New Type-Approval for Speed E-Bikes Now Effective - Bike Europe

L1e-a Pedelecs (powered cycles) are under 1000w and 15.5 mph limit, L1e-b S-Pedelcs (two wheeled mopeds) are under 4000w and 28mph. Like Class 1 in CA, Pedelecs are free to ride off road with bicycles, like Class 3, S-pedelecs are road and bike lane only.

Yep, the power limits are higher in Switzerland and Austria, like here though, there doesn't seem to be any OEM emtbs yet that I could find to take advantage of it. It's hard to tell the impact of those higher limits if eveyone is still riding 250w/15.5 emtbs.

Let me know when you find a place where everyone rides 750w/20mph emtbs, I'd be curious to see what we're in for.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> I borrowed this quote from another thread because I didn't want to pollute that one.
> 
> More evidence that they're too fast to be in the same category as bicycles and not appropriate on many multi-use trails, I believe PinoyMTBer mentioned that he's more or less an average rider and that's at least double the speed of the average mountain biker.


These bikes should not be on any trails with hikers or horses. 
I ride a loop around where I live that is less than 12 miles and has 1k of climbing, and he is 2x the averagte speed of the KOM on strava for his 30 mile 5k of climbing.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Harry, really good points in that people may not say what they think, plus I've known a lot of them for years, been to meetings, trail work, whatever. Also, may have to do with the area; we have no problem with land here, so attitudes could differ. Guess you're correct that the only deterrent to illegal use is peer pressure, which will be different in diverse areas because of land availability and how much other groups are fighting MTB's. Out here we seem to have arrived at a "live and let live" junction (for now); haven't been to a contentious meeting in 10 or so years.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

J.B. Weld said:


> More evidence that they're too fast to be in the same category as bicycles and not appropriate on many multi-use trails, I believe PinoyMTBer mentioned that he's more or less an average rider and that's at least double the speed of the average mountain biker.


Sry, JB, a post on a internet forum is not "evidence", for anything. Grab a turbo levo or the like for a day, and then tells us how dangerous they are. The class one bikes are already sharing trails all over Austria and Switzerland with hikers and mtb riders. I still can find no reports of issues.

The sky is not falling, it's the sun coming out


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

uhoh7 said:


> Sry, JB, a post on a internet forum is not "evidence", for anything. Grab a turbo levo or the like for a day, and then tells us how dangerous they are. The class one bikes are already sharing trails all over Austria and Switzerland with hikers and mtb riders. I still can find no reports of issues.
> 
> The sky is not falling, it's the sun coming out


Personnel observations on the internet are not evidence either.


----------



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

uhoh7 said:


> Sry, JB, a post on a internet forum is not "evidence", for anything.


Really? You're constantly posting anecdotal evidence based on your limited experience with them so I figured it was fair game.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

Who do you think are riding these new e-mtbs, Martians?

EVERY e-mtb owner I have met is a mtb rider for many years.

So please tell me why someone who is a long time MTB'r wants to buy a e-bike? I came to mountain biking from a moto background. I enjoy training hard and setting personal goals. I consider myself a Athelete. Mountain biking gives me the adrenaline junkie aspect I need also. The thought of a e-bike takes away from both of these things. I mean you wont be setting personal goals and from the discussion they are slower on the downhills. If you want to get further into the backcountry why would you want a docile e-bike. Why not go full moto?
I understand the hybrid/commuter bike, but we are talking MTB here.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

I was posting anecdotal "evidence" too; just polarized on my area. Might be valuable if others expressed what they're experiencing where they ride. FWIT (nothing) I enjoy building bikes and really got enthused when I "discovered" e-bikes. Also like to see how different bikes respond to the same environment. E-bikes add another variable. Can easily see how this might not enthrall others.


----------



## Capt.Ogg (Jun 5, 2015)

Harryman said:


> They actually are defined as powered cycles or two wheeled mopeds, not bicycles.  Like the CPSA here, this only defines what can be sold, not where they can be used, that is left up to the member states as well as the power limits within the defined parameters.


Within EU it goes basically like this (from 1.1.2016):

Max 250W, pedal assist only, max assisted speed 25kph -> considered a bicycle and can be ridden pretty much anywhere a bicycle is allowed (including trails - depends of country and their access laws)

250-1000W, pedal assist or throttle, max assisted speed 25kph (L1e-A) -> powered bicycle. Can be ridden on bike lanes and streets but not trails. Insurance required, but no license plate.

National variations may apply. And Switzerland is not part of the EU.

Also because of this, e-mtbs from European manufacturers are not going to be over 250W.


----------



## whoda*huck (Feb 12, 2005)

Sorry if I'm repeating, but as a local trail builder/maintainer the problem I see with ebikes is the additional trail use/abuse they allow. A biker that can barely make it up to the top of the local flow trail will make one, maybe two trips down in a day. Give him an ebike and suddenly he can spend a half day spinning up and trashing the trail with his 50 pound bike, exponentially accelerating the wear on the trail.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

whoda*huck said:


> Sorry if I'm repeating, but as a local trail builder/maintainer the problem I see with ebikes is the additional trail use/abuse they allow. A biker that can barely make it up to the top of the local flow trail will make one, maybe two trips down in a day. Give him an ebike and suddenly he can spend a half day spinning up and trashing the trail with his 50 pound bike, exponentially accelerating the wear on the trail.


This is simply not borne out by reality, so far. Both in testing and with the rules in actual practice in europe.

In fact the biggest complaint about e-mtbs is they are SLOWER DH. Wheelspin at 250w is reduced from a normal mtb, in my own experience.

Add this to the fact: how many do you think are actually going to show up at your flow trail?

With respect, there is simply zero evidence for your concerns at the moment.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

whoda*huck said:


> Sorry if I'm repeating, but as a local trail builder/maintainer the problem I see with ebikes is the additional trail use/abuse they allow. A biker that can barely make it up to the top of the local flow trail will make one, maybe two trips down in a day. Give him an ebike and suddenly he can spend a half day spinning up and trashing the trail with his 50 pound bike, exponentially accelerating the wear on the trail.


 More funny stuff from some one who obviously knows little about e bikes he thinks my ebike is a yz450 and runs half a day going up hill lol


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

So going twice as fast uphill doesn't mean that you can do more loops after all. And here I was thinking physics had some merit in this discussion.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Apparently common sense is taking a backseat to the personal exoerience if a single rider and the lack of data. Typical.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Fun Fact my e bike has a 12.5 ah battery which is on the big side for a e bike when I ride I am constantly monitoring my AH used and mileage, on a fairly flat trail I can go about 12mi on the rd maybe 25mi . But if your going up hill like you guys seem to think you could you would very quickly use up your battery . So your not gonna do loops up and down like you guys seem to think and battery's are expensive so having a spare not likely .


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> This is simply not borne out by reality, so far. Both in testing and with the rules in actual practice in europe.


Any other testing other than IMBA's limited field test? I don't know of any. Here's what they surmised and then found:



> FIELD STUDY HYPOTHESES AND INITIAL RESULTS
> IMBA developed these hypotheses for this small initial
> study (one site, with one set of environmental conditions):
> • Physical impacts to trails from eMTBs will likely fall
> ...


https://www.imba.com/sites/default/files/eMTB Study Fact Sheet .pdf

They did see a small increase in trail impact from emtbs, over mtbs, not enough to get me all riled up, but there is a difference non the less.

I guess you can discount the anecdotal claims from the Swiss rider that they are causing enough damage that they are having to change management plans to cope with it.

And the fact that while there is only a small difference in impact per foot ridden, a rider on an ebike will ride what, twice as far in the same amount of time? You guys tell me. More feet per ride for sure.

And, as always, these are not 750w ebikes that have been ridden or studied, only 250w ebikes.



uhoh7 said:


> In fact the biggest complaint about e-mtbs is they are SLOWER DH.


Actually, the biggest complaint is that they have a motor. 



uhoh7 said:


> Add this to the fact: how many do you think are actually going to show up at your flow trail?


If it's legal, a lot. Why wouldn't they?



uhoh7 said:


> With respect, there is simply zero evidence for your concerns at the moment.


Not quite zero.

'Our trails aren't built for that': eBike riders risk fines in Canberra nature parks

They claim it's because of trail damage and up until a year ago, only 200w bikes were legal. I can't wait for 750w bikes can you?

Since you're a fan of 250w bikes and I as well think they are far closer to the true meaning of a pedal assist mountain bike as opposed to the emopeds that are coming, lets agree to create legislation to limit emtbs to 250w and 15.5 mph like the Euros. It's not perfect, but it does work pretty well over there.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Never mind. Off topic.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

rider95 said:


> Fun Fact my e bike has a 12.5 ah battery which is on the big side for a e bike when I ride I am constantly monitoring my AH used and mileage, on a fairly flat trail I can go about 12mi on the rd maybe 25mi . But if your going up hill like you guys seem to think you could you would very quickly use up your battery . So your not gonna do loops up and down like you guys seem to think and battery's are expensive so having a spare not likely .


So why do you own it? If you can't shuttle runs or go farther than you could pedal then it sounds like a bad investment.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Pinoy has posted GPS maps of his ~30 mile, 5000' climbing ride. So how is it that your setup only goes 12 miles? I thought it was an ID backcountry trailwork rescue sorta rig? Those volunteer firefighters might want their money back if they find that out...

-Walt


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

Walt said:


> Pinoy has posted GPS maps of his ~30 mile, 5000' climbing ride.


Just for clarification, That GPS map that a friend posted was 23.8 miles/3821' elevation to be exact. We took it easy because it was an eMTB group ride and some of us had "range anxiety". I go further, harder and higher when I ride solo. Since I know my usual haunts very well. Plus, I will never post my GPS coordinates on any website at all, out of respect for the trails that the builders want to keep hidden.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

That's pretty impressive that's the new store bought middrives and ridden by a in shape younger experienced rider , I really have to try one but my setup is the old school 500w mac hub motor that I built almost 3 y ago .


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Range anxiety !! lol boy do I understand what that means .


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Harryman said:


> 'Our trails aren't built for that': eBike riders risk fines in Canberra nature parks
> 
> They claim it's because of trail damage and up until a year ago, only 200w bikes were legal. I can't wait for 750w bikes can you?
> 
> Since you're a fan of 250w bikes and I as well think they are far closer to the true meaning of a pedal assist mountain bike as opposed to the emopeds that are coming, lets agree to create legislation to limit emtbs to 250w and 15.5 mph like the Euros. It's not perfect, but it does work pretty well over there.


Zero details on that one, Harry. No way to access anything, and since in Australia there is the same level of anti-E as here, I would suspect the conclusion is highly suspect. 

But I would amend my view on real evidence. And it's not like I don't have any myself. I'm riding a e-mtb every day now. Trail impact? It's much better for trails than my mtb. Why? My e-mtb has 27+ and wheelspin is a fraction of what I have riding my mtb, where I spin a bit pretty often on the technical bits.

We both know there can be many explantations for what they blame on the e-bikes....and maybe there are some illegals riding high powered ones, for all I know.

I would bet it's just a traffic issue. Canberra Nature Park, do you think that place might be popular?

Again as to 250 vs 750, I do not see the threat. But I don't have nor have I ridden a 750w e-mtb. We see these threads full of know it alls. Walt says "I don't need to try meth" to know it's effects. LOL Great analogy Walt, we know where you stand. 

E-mtb is not a dangerous drug. They are safe to try and gain experience 

That would be alot less boring that all the ranting from a clinched A-spot we hear here.


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

rider95 said:


> Range anxiety !! lol boy do I understand what that means .


Haha! Yeah I felt that too during the group ride. Cause I had no idea about the route we were taking and all the climbs we took we're so steep!

You should definitely try the new middrive bikes that are coming out now. They're amazing!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rockhoppermtb (Jul 21, 2016)

I test rode the new specialized FSR e bike and it was borderline addictive on a 15 mile ride. That being said it definitely felt like cheating. I liked the assist on the super steep sections, but even then it just didn't feel right. It was borderline hard to climb the really steep sections with. I'll stick to a 27lb or less bike everyday over the 40ish lb e bike. I like the challenge, especially on my regular fast and hilly 6 mile loop. I don't want to see these e bikes on my local tails unless they are being used by people with physical disabilities.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

This is something I have a hard time understanding: this whole "cheating" thing........ Is this something that the horseback set have to contend with as they share trails? With pedal assist I am putting out a lot more energy per mile than any horse rider, so why do I get singled out for "cheating"?

And just who am I "cheating" on my usual 17mi loop? I am 63 and get my cardio from my daily 2+ mi hikes in the mountain trails with my dog, the eMTB is just to enable deeper access to the backcountry and for the sheer pleasure of being on two wheels. Where does the "cheating" come in?


----------



## chuckha62 (Jul 11, 2006)

He just said it felt like he was cheating. Cheating himself presumably, since he's not competing in a race. Probably no need to over analyze it though. A buddy of mine (an avid mtb rider) was on a borrowed Levo and described the same feeling on a climb. Sounds like it's just a personal feeling given that they normally have to work harder on the same climb on a non assist bike.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> Where does the "cheating" come in?


It's cheating if you're one of those that try to pretend an e-bike is the same thing as a real bike. Long as you out of the closet as a being motorized user, you don't have to worry about it. Soon as you try to say it's the same as a mountain bike, you're cheating, because real mountain bikes don't have motors.

See? Simple!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

It depends on the relationship you have with your mtb. If you already have it worked out between you that you can ride other *ahem* augmented bikes, and let her know you'll be safe and back on time, then it's not cheating. Sneaking off without letting her know though, or seeing one in a buddy's garage and one thing leads to another and you're definitely cheating. Good luck explaining your way out of that one.


----------



## rockhoppermtb (Jul 21, 2016)

WoodlandHills said:


> This is something I have a hard time understanding: this whole "cheating" thing........ Is this something that the horseback set have to contend with as they share trails? With pedal assist I am putting out a lot more energy per mile than any horse rider, so why do I get singled out for "cheating"?
> 
> And just who am I "cheating" on my usual 17mi loop? I am 63 and get my cardio from my daily 2+ mi hikes in the mountain trails with my dog, the eMTB is just to enable deeper access to the backcountry and for the sheer pleasure of being on two wheels. Where does the "cheating" come in?


I didn't mean it for anyone other than myself. I used to race and I am still in my 30s hoping to get back into racing. That's why it felt like cheating to me. I didn't mean any disrespect to anyone else. I applaud you for still getting out there and riding! I have no issues with the assist part for people who may have difficulty, but it's the younger people who basically don't even bother pedaling on the hills that kind of irk me. I'll more than likely end up with an e-bike in the future as my knees are so bad I know I'll probably have to get a replacement surgery or two before I'm 50. They are cool and fun bikes and it will be great to see the further evolution of our sport.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

rockhoppermtb said:


> further evolution of our sport.


Sorry, but this is wrong. Adding a motor means it's not the same sport, but something new and distinct. E-biking is NOT mountain biking, just like motocross isn't BMX. Never pretend that adding a motor doesn't change the entire premise; it does (and I have nothing against motors; own lots of toys with them, but mountain bikes don't have them, period.)


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

WoodlandHills said:


> This is something I have a hard time understanding: this whole "cheating" thing........ Is this something that the horseback set have to contend with as they share trails? With pedal assist I am putting out a lot more energy per mile than any horse rider, so why do I get singled out for "cheating"?
> 
> And just who am I "cheating" on my usual 17mi loop? I am 63 and get my cardio from my daily 2+ mi hikes in the mountain trails with my dog, the eMTB is just to enable deeper access to the backcountry and for the sheer pleasure of being on two wheels. Where does the "cheating" come in?


 Goes back to the whole human, outdoorsman concept. Under your own power. With all your own equipment. Hike mt washington or take the tram up? Bike tour with your own gear or have a van shuttle your stuff? Just a different perspective.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rockhoppermtb said:


> I didn't mean it for anyone other than myself. I used to race and I am still in my 30s hoping to get back into racing. That's why it felt like cheating to me. I didn't mean any disrespect to anyone else. I applaud you for still getting out there and riding! I have no issues with the assist part for people who may have difficulty, but it's the younger people who basically don't even bother pedaling on the hills that kind of irk me. I'll more than likely end up with an e-bike in the future as my knees are so bad I know I'll probably have to get a replacement surgery or two before I'm 50. They are cool and fun bikes and it will be great to see the further evolution of our sport.


 The "sport" doesn't have motors. Let me know when the tour de france uses motors.


----------



## rockhoppermtb (Jul 21, 2016)

leeboh said:


> Goes back to the whole human, outdoorsman concept. Under your own power. With all your own equipment. Hike mt washington or take the tram up? Bike tour with your own gear or have a van shuttle your stuff? Just a different perspective.


Most of us will take the lift to the top of a mountain just to ride down it don't we? How many of us have actually ridden to the top of a bike park?


----------



## rockhoppermtb (Jul 21, 2016)

leeboh said:


> The "sport" doesn't have motors. Let me know when the tour de france uses motors.


Well said, I completely agree no bicycle racing events should ever include motors.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

leeboh said:


> The "sport" doesn't have motors. Let me know when the tour de france uses motors.


 There are enough being used in the TdF that the officials have special equipment to try and find out them......... It's funny how those at the highest echelons of the "sport" have the least respect for its rules and traditions (but not its long and deep history of cheating).


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

I understood that the op was speaking of himself, but, on the other hand it IS a common response when other riders see that I have an eMTB. It's always been said in humor, but there it is..... 

Although I did recently (last week) have someone slap/tap me as they passed going downhill as part of a pack of a dozen or so and holler something unintelligible. He waved and tried to block me on the following ascent, but I swerved by him without responding to his calls and shouts and left him behind at 18mph. The rest of the group ignored me as I went past.

Now I carry pepper spray because this is LA county and I can't carry anything more effective. I guess I was naive about the "live and let live" thing and was expecting a change in the rules to result in acceptance. Riding on a Friday evening when there were more knuckleheads off work and on the trail didn't help either I suppose, but Class 1 is legal all through the state park on any day of the week.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

WoodlandHills said:


> There are enough being used in the TdF that the officials have special equipment to try and find out them......... It's funny how those at the highest echelons of the "sport" have the least respect for its rules and traditions (but not its long and deep history of cheating).


And exactly how many did they find please?


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

tiretracks said:


> And exactly how many did they find please?


 How many Russians tested positive for doping at the last Olympics? How many TdFs did Lance win before the truth came out? Just because they haven't found any yet (that we know of) does not mean that it has not happened, it just means they haven't told us about finding one, yet. Or do you think it's all just a Snipe Hunt? Cycling officials seem think its possible enough to spend a ton of money to try and catch them...... At least no human is poisoning themselves just to win when they mechanically dope.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

WoodlandHills said:


> and left him behind at 18mph.


Damn, you're a fast old dude on the climbs. :thumbsup:


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

WoodlandHills said:


> Although I did recently (last week) have someone slap/tap me as they passed going downhill as part of a pack of a dozen or so and holler something unintelligible. He waved and tried to block me on the following ascent, but I swerved by him without responding to his calls and shouts and left him behind at 18mph. The rest of the group ignored me as I went past..


So...they do go fast uphill.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

WoodlandHills said:


> He waved and tried to block me on the following ascent, but I swerved by him without responding to his calls and shouts and left him behind at 18mph.


1. Guy sounds like an ass.
2. 18mph on the climbs is going to be a huge problem for multiuse. Glad to see someone finally admit they can haul ass uphill with a motor, though. I was getting really tired of this "I can only go 5mph on the climbs even with the assist" nonsense.

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

rockhoppermtb said:


> Most of us will take the lift to the top of a mountain just to ride down it don't we? How many of us have actually ridden to the top of a bike park?


I have. A number of them.
Used to have a thing about climbing a mtn under my own power before I'd take a lift up it. Also, it's often the only way to get some pre/post season runs in.


----------



## rockhoppermtb (Jul 21, 2016)

slapheadmofo said:


> I have. A number of them.
> Used to have a thing about climbing a mtn under my own power before I'd take a lift up it. Also, it's often the only way to get some pre/post season runs in.


 not too many people I've ridden with even consider it. So I'm glad to see someone else has. I'll say though climbing 1500-2000' at 8000' elevation is one of the toughest things I've done and it's why I mostly stick to lifts now. I'll still do some XC in addition to the downhill, but mostly lifts to the top for me now.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Walt said:


> 1. Guy sounds like an ass.
> 2. 18mph on the climbs is going to be a huge problem for multiuse. Glad to see someone finally admit they can haul ass uphill with a motor, though. I was getting really tired of this "I can only go 5mph on the climbs even with the assist" nonsense.
> 
> -Walt


Yep, we have this guy and PinoyMtb as the only two I have seen admit it. I know I could fly uphill on one of those motor bikes


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

rockhoppermtb said:


> Most of us will take the lift to the top of a mountain just to ride down it don't we? How many of us have actually ridden to the top of a bike park?


I've actually never taken the lift up, not that I have anything against it, I'm just a cheap bastard and I usually only ride ski areas as part of other rides. If I had a DH bike and was doing laps I certainly would. We've only got a couple of shuttle rides here, and unless you want to climb 7500 feet at a minimum, which a good number of people do, it's the only viable way to complete them.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Wife and I have ridden every lift or shuttle trail (on MTB) except once at Mammoth Mountain in CA when we purchased a lift ticket, but only descended during the AM, rode trails all PM; and I'm a part time "cheater" --- except don't know who I'm cheating since nobody else is around. Possibly cheating myself, but I forgive me.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Yep, we have this guy and PinoyMtb as the only two I have seen admit it. I know I could fly uphill on one of those motor bikes


My 12 y/o son was ripping around on a demo Levo a couple weeks ago. He couldn't believe how easy it was to get it moving fast.

Anybody that says you can't fly on one with a bare minimum of effort is full of ****.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rockhoppermtb said:


> Most of us will take the lift to the top of a mountain just to ride down it don't we? How many of us have actually ridden to the top of a bike park?


 Not a shuttle or downhill kind of guy. One can take a lift @ Kingdom Trails' Burke mt or ride up the xc trails. I prefer the later. YRMV. Nothing wrong with a shuttle or lift, just a different way of looking at pedaling. On my bike tours, I do avail myself of stuff like washing machines and such, but I only sleep outside, even if offered a bed.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rockhoppermtb said:


> Most of us will take the lift to the top of a mountain just to ride down it don't we? How many of us have actually ridden to the top of a bike park?


 Here in MA and most of New England, we have hills, ridges and an small mountains. Not big vert like out west. Other than going to a DH bike park like Thunder mt or Highland, it's pedal up and pedal down. Also a few ski areas have started to do lifts, not that many though. It's called a mt bike for a reason. Again, just a different perspective.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> Here in MA and most of New England.... Also a few ski areas have started to do lifts,


Off topic, but I'm pretty sure we've got about the highest concentration of lift serviced riding almost anywhere (not to mention some of the longest running - Sunday River has been doing it since the very early 90's, and Mt Snow since the 80's).

In addition to those, and the aforementioned Burke, Thunder and Highland, within decent driving distance there's Killington, Stowe, Jiminy, Attitash, Bretton Woods, Okemo, Sugarbush, Plattekill, Windham, Whiteface, Gore, Waterville, Mountain Creek, and also number of mountains that don't open regularly but do host races occasionally, like Pat's Peak, Sunapee, Camden, Shawnee, etc, etc. Probably another half-dozen that have done it at one time or another in the past (Bolton Valley, Ragged Mt, JTenney, etc) and a good handful more that I missed.

Time to start mixing it up - you're missing out on LOTS of great trails.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Harryman said:


> Damn, you're a fast old dude on the climbs. :thumbsup:


 I have short pedals, 125mm, and was in PAS 9. My cadence was so high I must have looked like a roadrunner cartoon when I passed him! That's what adrenalin will do for you...... I'm healing from a broken collarbone and that's nearly my speed limit, up or down hill! Around 23 or 24 I start to get on the brakes, my comfort zone is usually no more than 10 or 12 on the flats and much less on the climbs, but this guy scared me given that we were about 8 miles from the nearest paved road and it was dusk. BTW he was between me and my home on the only road out.

The trail itself is a dirt fire road built for heavy equipment access during brushfires and is thus 1 1/2 lanes wide and gets graded a couple of times a year. My ebike is Class 1 legal which means it is geared for a maximum of 20mph on a flat road at full power: this means that if I am pedaling my ass off up a moderate grade at full assist it will go almost its top speed. And yes, I do believe I was in violation of the 15mph speed limit for a 100 yards or so, guilty as charged.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> The trail itself is a dirt fire road built for heavy equipment access during brushfires and is thus 1 1/2 lanes wide and gets graded a couple of times a year. My ebike is Class 1 legal which means it is geared for a maximum of 20mph on a flat road at full power: this means that if I am pedaling my ass off up a moderate grade at full assist it will go almost its top speed. And yes, I do believe I was in violation of the 15mph speed limit for a 100 yards or so, guilty as charged.


Is it a trail or a road? I don't think the 15mph speed limit applies on a dirt Road, only on multi-use trails.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

If some jackass was threatening me with pepper spray you can be damn sure I wouldn't be concerned about any speed limits.

Glad you're ok.

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Walt said:


> If some jackass was threatening me with pepper spray you can be damn sure I wouldn't be concerned about any speed limits.
> 
> Glad you're ok.
> 
> -Walt


Actually, WoodlandHills was the one with the pepper spray.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

WoodlandHills said:


> My ebike is Class 1 legal...


Sometimes 

Glad you escaped the idiot.


----------



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

WoodlandHills said:


> I have short pedals, 125mm, and was in PAS 9. My cadence was so high I must have looked like a roadrunner cartoon when I passed him! That's what adrenalin will do for you...... I'm healing from a broken collarbone and that's nearly my speed limit, up or down hill!


Sounds a little road-ragey. I'm glad everything turned out ok too but it seems like it would have been best to just let it go.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Klurejr said:


> Is it a trail or a road? I don't think the 15mph speed limit applies on a dirt Road, only on multi-use trails.


 Most of the MUTs in Topanga State Park are fire access roads that are designated as Multi Use. There is also connecting single track that is posted MUT as well as some foot traffic only trails.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Sounds a little road-ragey. I'm glad everything turned out ok too but it seems like it would have been best to just let it go.


 The guy was on the only access road going home and it was getting on past dusk. My concern was that since I had seen this group over on the Pacific Ocean side of the summit earlier, they would turn around and come back past me on their way home. I didn't want a confrontation on the trail in the near dark so I just hauled ass home passing him and them on a hill where I could put some distance between us.

I wonder if I was violating some trail ettiquite in the way I was cruising downhill that offended them? Should I yield to those passing me, pull off of the trail....? Or is it the responsibility of the faster rider to make a safe pass and I just keep my speed and line?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Generally the rider being overtaken is expected to yield the trail. The exception would be racing, where the passing rider is responsible for making a safe pass (and the rider in front can, within reason, try to prevent that).

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Yeah, it's good etiquette to let people by if you're holding them up. Take a second and pull off to the side where it's safe and wave them on by. If they don't say thanks, or at the very least give you a nod, then bust out the pepper spray!


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

They came up on me so fast that I didn't hear the first guy until he sped past. It startled me so much that I gave a little swerve, honestly I think he came by a little close and that surprised me. Is there any obligation to ring a bell or make any kind of noise to let others know you are coming? Looking back it seems like they kinda dive bombed me and the last one by gave me a little tap on the arm as he went past. 

I don't see how I was holding anyone up since the road was at least 25 feet wide at that point and they were all able to blast past at full speed. I thought then and I think now that they didn't have to pass so close. 

Anyway, I'm gonna stick to riding during the hot part of the day when I haven't been harassed and when the folks I meet seem to not have an attitude. It's a bummer that some people have to create an unfriendly environment when the temps cool down and it's more comfortable to ride.


----------



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

WoodlandHills said:


> Anyway, I'm gonna stick to riding during the hot part of the day when I haven't been harassed and when the folks I meet seem to not have an attitude.


If stuff like that is actually happening on a regular basis then I guess you gotta do what you gotta do. However if it was an isolated incident i think you should just blow it off and continue to be friendly and courteous to everyone you encounter, and avoid judging the next group of riders based on that.

I feel fortunate to live where I do,. Everyone is friendly or at worst neutral, and I don't believe I've ever been passed on a downhill. Due to the sparsely populated country here of course, not my downhill prowess.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> They came up on me so fast that I didn't hear the first guy until he sped past. It startled me so much that I gave a little swerve, honestly I think he came by a little close and that surprised me. Is there any obligation to ring a bell or make any kind of noise to let others know you are coming? Looking back it seems like they kinda dive bombed me and the last one by gave me a little tap on the arm as he went past.
> 
> I don't see how I was holding anyone up since the road was at least 25 feet wide at that point and they were all able to blast past at full speed. I thought then and I think now that they didn't have to pass so close.


Sounds like a bunch of ***** in that case.


----------



## ImaBum (Jun 1, 2014)

I think biking is exactly like driving!!! 

Those people who cut you off, serve into your lane, pull out slowly in front of you... it's going to happen everywhere. 

Thankfully this is a hobby to most and there is a higher level of respect behind others within that same hobby group so you'll have better experience with a hobby group but still bad apples out there!


----------



## rockhoppermtb (Jul 21, 2016)

There definitely is an etiquette to passing not to mention riding here on the central coast of California. Our local IMBA chapter works our asses off to make sure bells are always available and to do trail and education tours. Always let a rider know you intend to pass regardless of where you are, it's a matter of everyone's safety.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

WoodlandHills said:


> They came up on me so fast that I didn't hear the first guy until he sped past. It startled me so much that I gave a little swerve, honestly I think he came by a little close and that surprised me. Is there any obligation to ring a bell or make any kind of noise to let others know you are coming? Looking back it seems like they kinda dive bombed me and the last one by gave me a little tap on the arm as he went past.


So youre best idea was to blow by them on the next climb. Why not just chill for a bit instead of blowing by them at 18 on the next climb. 
Smells a little like BS to me. Nice try though


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

WoodlandHills said:


> I understood that the op was speaking of himself, but, on the other hand it IS a common response when other riders see that I have an eMTB. It's always been said in humor, but there it is.....
> 
> Although I did recently (last week) have someone slap/tap me as they passed going downhill as part of a pack of a dozen or so and holler something unintelligible. He waved and tried to block me on the following ascent, but I swerved by him without responding to his calls and shouts and left him behind at 18mph. The rest of the group ignored me as I went past.
> 
> Now I carry pepper spray because this is LA county and I can't carry anything more effective. I guess I was naive about the "live and let live" thing and was expecting a change in the rules to result in acceptance. Riding on a Friday evening when there were more knuckleheads off work and on the trail didn't help either I suppose, but Class 1 is legal all through the state park on any day of the week.


And what would you like to carry after this incident of someone possible tapping you while passing? Pepper spray not enough? Pistol, shotgun, grenade? Maybe you could carry your own E chair and fry those mfers


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

What would be your response to being sworn at and then slapped while out on the trail miles from anywhere by a group of people 30 years younger than you? Stop them and have a reasoned discussion? Pull off of the trail and hide in a ditch for a few hours until they pass back by and I can get home w/o passing through them again? Or pass them on a hill and hope I don't get a pump in my spokes......? 

And how would you deal with this reality in the coming weeks? Stop riding? Or try to pick a time when the knuckleheads are all at work or when it's too hot for a pMTB to be out? As far as the pepper spray goes, I have been carrying it in my camelback for years and my wife carries it whenever we walk the trails or when she walks alone. This is not something new: LA is a big city with all sorts of crime and there are over 30,000 gangbangers in the SFV within 15mi of my home. It would be just plain stupid to not be concerned about personal safety and foolish to not carry some sort of deterrent. While living in Tucson I always open carried a pistol with snake shot loads on my belt while out desert walking and I have dispatched more than one rattler with it in my time. I see nothing unusual or strange about an armed American and I would do the same here in CA if it was allowed. Sometimes, the snakes have two legs........


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> I see nothing unusual or strange about an armed American and I would do the same here in CA if it was allowed.


Just another reason to stay the hell out of CA.


----------



## kneecap (Dec 20, 2003)

WoodlandHills said:


> What would be your response to being sworn at and then slapped while out on the trail miles from anywhere by a group of people 30 years younger than you? Stop them and have a reasoned discussion? Pull off of the trail and hide in a ditch for a few hours until they pass back by and I can get home w/o passing through them again? Or pass them on a hill and hope I don't get a pump in my spokes......?
> 
> And how would you deal with this reality in the coming weeks? Stop riding? Or try to pick a time when the knuckleheads are all at work or when it's too hot for a pMTB to be out? As far as the pepper spray goes, I have been carrying it in my camelback for years and my wife carries it whenever we walk the trails or when she walks alone. This is not something new: LA is a big city with all sorts of crime and there are over 30,000 gangbangers in the SFV within 15mi of my home. It would be just plain stupid to not be concerned about personal safety and foolish to not carry some sort of deterrent. While living in Tucson I always open carried a pistol with snake shot loads on my belt while out desert walking and I have dispatched more than one rattler with it in my time. I see nothing unusual or strange about an armed American and I would do the same here in CA if it was allowed. Sometimes, the snakes have two legs........


I agree with you 100% & have lived in So Cal longer than "any" of you others, & no plans to live elsewhere.
However, I tend to be at times a grouchy old fart, ha


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

kneecap said:


> I agree with you 100% & have lived in So Cal longer than "any" of you others, & no plans to live elsewhere.
> However, I tend to be at times a grouchy old fart, ha


I was born and raised here and have visited many other states and find very little draw to leave the climate in this state.


----------



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

WoodlandHills said:


> While living in Tucson I always open carried a pistol with snake shot loads on my belt while out desert walking and I have dispatched more than one rattler with it in my time.


Now why would you go and do a thing like that? The desert is their home, you're just a visitor there.

I can understand killing one that was on your property and a threat but shooting them just for fun is low class IMHO. Tucson doesn't miss you.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Yep, we wondered why Tucson got better all of a sudden.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Now why would you go and do a thing like that? The desert is their home, you're just a visitor there.
> 
> I can understand killing one that was on your property and a threat but shooting them just for fun is low class IMHO. Tucson doesn't miss you.


 The last one I shot had just bitten (and eventually killed) one of my rescue dogs. The previous were at the request of ranchers who wanted me to help out with pest control during walks on their land. You all sound like some sort of city people or easterners who don't really understand life on the border and especially don't understand ranch life. If you had ever seen a cow or horse after a snakebite or had to put down a sheep or watch a beloved pet suffer and die, you might have a clue about the need for snake control. Does the fact that vipers dont distinguish between your livestock and your children make any difference to your self-righteous and totally misplaced indignation.......?

BTW, if you think CA is full of armed citizens and it's too scary to visit: where do YOU live? I can't think of a western state with more restrictive gun laws and less public acceptance of firearms...... If you live in New England, what do you do during deer season, hide under the bed? The woods are filled with heavily armed Americans.........


----------



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

WoodlandHills said:


> You all sound like some sort of city people or easterners who don't really understand life on the border and especially don't understand ranch life...........................................


John Wayne? I lived in the foothills of Tucson for 20 years, I've killed a few rattlers and probably relocated well over 100 to the open desert to replace the ones being shot for the hell of it. My cat got bitten once and nearly died.

I live in a much more remote desert now see them in my "yard" quite often. I've dispatched a few, the rest I relocate.

I don't want to further convolute this convoluted thread by adding yet another political drama but I will say that Western ranchers basically borrow (for a pittance) vast quantities of public (which includes me) land for their hooved locusts to lumber about on so as far as I'm concerned it's up to the cows to keep their eyes open and their wits about. And I'm sincerely sorry about your dog but you can't really blame the snake, snakes bite dogs because dogs get in their face. I don't blame or condemn you for dispatching that one but unless it's on your land it doesn't do much good after the fact.

Anyway I'm sensing a pattern. E-bike rage, Ca, motors, shooting things.....


----------



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

WoodlandHills said:


> Does the fact that vipers dont distinguish between your livestock and your children make any difference to your self-righteous and totally misplaced indignation.......?


Do your children live in the desert? Do you plan on exterminating all of them? (the snakes, not the children)

-and btw I did qualify with IMHO, whose response is chock full of self righteous misplaced indignation again?


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

If you are one of the ranchers who asked me to shoot snakes if I came across them, then, yes, your children do live in the desert. You also live many miles from the nearest hospital or clinic/ER and you do plan on trying to exterminate all the snakes on your land if you can. The same way you step on scorpions whenever you see them. It's called common sense........


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> John Wayne? I lived in the foothills of Tucson for 20 years, I've killed a few rattlers and probably relocated well over 100 to the open desert to replace the ones being shot for the hell of it. My cat got bitten once and nearly died.
> 
> I live in a much more remote desert now see them in my "yard" quite often. I've dispatched a few, the rest I relocate.
> 
> ...


 Who had the ebike rage? Me? I was the one with the fear of the ebike haters if you recall. The one who did not want to get assaulted by a bunch of loud mouthed rowdies who did not like ebikes. How does that turn into "ebike rage" on my part? You are just making carp up now.......

I moved to the Tucson foothills in 1973 and even by then it was just a suburb full of tract homes with mesquite and palo verde, a place for out of staters to retire and talk about the desert to their northern relatives. From Oracle to Sabino Canyon the entire foothills north of Skyline was converted from desert into resorts and developments, about as far from ranch life as it is possible to get. Now they are filling it up between Skyline, Ina and River Road with more tracts and cul de sac developments.....with cactus!!!!

Try asking down in Douglas or in Cochise county if you should shoot snakes or even better let them know how you feel about their cattle and how you don't care how many die. Ask a Mom who lives out in Arivaca if her kids are more important than rattlesnakes...... I bet I know the answer.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

since i also lived in tucson for 20 years and relocated many snakes and taught my children and dogs to understand where rattlers lived and how to avoid them and I am responding to a thread about e-bikes, I'd say that this thread has officially jumped the shark. 

I wonder how many of the ranchers you helped with their snake problem ended up with a packrat problem? Killing apex predators only opens up areas to smaller species which tend to bring things like hanta virus, ticks, and parasites and fire dangers, all of which probably cause much more damage and required maintenance than the overall negative effect of the potential to get bitten by a rattler.

That said wasn't this thread about something related to mountain biking?


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

rockcrusher said:


> since i also lived in tucson for 20 years and relocated many snakes and taught my children and dogs to understand where rattlers lived and how to avoid them and I am responding to a thread about e-bikes, I'd say that this thread has officially jumped the shark.
> 
> I wonder how many of the ranchers you helped with their snake problem ended up with a packrat problem? Killing apex predators only opens up areas to smaller species which tend to bring things like hanta virus, ticks, and parasites and fire dangers, all of which probably cause much more damage and required maintenance than the overall negative effect of the potential to get bitten by a rattler.
> 
> That said wasn't this thread about something related to mountain biking?


 Probably true, but when a man lets me hike his land and asks me to shoot any snakes I see in exchange for that permission I follow his wishes. That's common sense too, as well as respectful. I figure that he's a lot closer to the problem than I am and it's his land........


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> If you live in New England, what do you do during deer season, hide under the bed? The woods are filled with heavily armed Americans.........


Oh, you get me wrong...I was saying I disagreed with you NOT being allowed to do it. 

Plenty of hunting/shooting going on around my neighborhood; doesn't bother me at all. I throw on my orange and ride right through deer season (of course at that time of year, I mostly get out at night anyway as it gets dark early that time of year). Even made a couple attempts at 'pushing' by bike for some buddies. If there were rattles all over the place here, I'd be popping them too.

:eekster:


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

slapheadmofo said:


> Oh, you get me wrong...I was saying I disagreed with you NOT being allowed to do it.
> 
> Plenty of hunting/shooting going on around my neighborhood; doesn't bother me at all. I throw on my orange and ride right through deer season (of course at that time of year, I mostly get out at night anyway as it gets dark early that time of year). Even made a couple attempts at 'pushing' by bike for some buddies. If there were rattles all over the place here, I'd be popping them too.
> 
> :eekster:


 Sorry, I misunderstood you. There should be a sarcasm emoji...... There probably is and I just don't know it. It's interesting that people with such deep disagreements can also find common ground on completely different matters. Without conversation or interaction of some sort, that's impossible and we are all a bit worse off in the long run.......


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> Sorry, I misunderstood you. There should be a sarcasm emoji...... There probably is and I just don't know it. It's interesting that people with such deep disagreements can also find common ground on completely different matters. Without conversation or interaction of some sort, that's impossible and we are all a bit worse off in the long run.......


IMHO, a HUGE part of the issue is a tendency most of the e-bikers here seem to share - you see anybody that isn't completly onboard with the dream-world version of bike-equivalent access as not only an 'opponent', but also as someone who has no idea what they're talking about. A lot of you seem to love to play 'victim', and are quite unwilling to listen to those with tons of experience re: trail access issues even if all we've done is try to point out the facts.

I have no 'deep disagreement' with someone enjoying motorized recreation at all. i do it myself, regularly. Said tons of times I don't have a problem sharing trails with e-bikes in many situations. Yet you all freak out and go into hyper-defensive mode anytime anything that is not 10000% pro-ebike is even mentioned. You guys should f'ing relax a little and try to learn something instead of screaming 'victim' all the time. It's hard to talk to people like that.


----------

