# Stealth ebikes?



## Pain Freak (Dec 31, 2003)

I'm 60 years old and have a number of health issues that have me considering getting an ebike. I'm a long time mountain biker (20+ years) and still enjoy it immensely. But I'm now the anchor and have found myself limited to the trails and groups I can ride with. I still love the work out and everything that goes with mountain biking but I just need to catch up a little. A few of my aged riding buddies have switched to ebikes and are back up with the group and enjoying riding like they used to. I on the other hand have fallen off the back and see no other way to catch back up. Now I've been looking a lot at the bikes that are available and a few are very difficult for people to even guess that they're ebikes, the batteries are so well integrated into the frames that unless you were a knowledgeable mountain biker, you'd have no clue that they were pedal assisted. I've been reading all the controversy about the bikes and to tell the truth I don't get it. Like everything new we will eventually work it out. I'm in the group that hopes they get accepted by the LM's. It'd be a shame to limit myself to the local short rides. Most other trail users can't determine the difference between a racing road bike and a full on downhill bike so I doubt they'll see an ebike and know what it is.Riding with my old buddies we never get any questions until we come up on other mountain bikers and most of them understand and are quite accepting.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

And I'm in the group that hopes they get excluded from all non-motorized trails. Aging out is inevitable, emtorbikes aren't.


----------



## kneecap (Dec 20, 2003)

Pain Freak, I understand where you're coming from, at 71 I understand your sentiments,
I'll be there eventually as well. I love the outdoors, & not willing to give it up yet. Hopefully an e-bike will keep you out there on a bike with your old group.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

If you want to see stealth, look at the Surface 604 Oryx; the mid-drive is incorporated into the bottom bracket in such a way as to be pretty tough to distinguish. But, here we go again on an access issue; lots of positive and negative responses.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

If you truly have physical difficulties that will prevent you from riding, you should be able to easily get an ADA placard and ride at least most of the trails you want. Go see your doctor - no need to try to trick anyone. 

-Walt


----------



## jsalas2 (Nov 29, 2008)

I'm getting one for the same reasons. Been trying out my buddy's Specialized Levo, fully integrated battery and motor.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Pain Freak said:


> I'm 60 years old and have a number of health issues that have me considering getting an ebike. I'm a long time mountain biker (20+ years) and still enjoy it immensely. But I'm now the anchor and have found myself limited to the trails and groups I can ride with. I still love the work out and everything that goes with mountain biking but I just need to catch up a little. A few of my aged riding buddies have switched to ebikes and are back up with the group and enjoying riding like they used to. I on the other hand have fallen off the back and see no other way to catch back up. Now I've been looking a lot at the bikes that are available and a few are very difficult for people to even guess that they're ebikes, the batteries are so well integrated into the frames that unless you were a knowledgeable mountain biker, you'd have no clue that they were pedal assisted. I've been reading all the controversy about the bikes and to tell the truth I don't get it. Like everything new we will eventually work it out. I'm in the group that hopes they get accepted by the LM's. It'd be a shame to limit myself to the local short rides. Most other trail users can't determine the difference between a racing road bike and a full on downhill bike so I doubt they'll see an ebike and know what it is.Riding with my old buddies we never get any questions until we come up on other mountain bikers and most of them understand and are quite accepting.


 Heath issues? So you have a HP plate on your car? If so, the ADA accessibility rules should allow you access to most trails. The e bikes still require you to pedal, why would you be limited to short, local rides? Are motorized vehicles allowed on your local, multi use trails or where you ride your current bike? " Eventually work out" is what? Maybe be proactive instead of skirting the rules and laws? Everyone get old, at 53, I'm not even close to being the oldest in my riding group. Lots of people have health issues. And not every one is able to ride until their last breath. I find yoga, stretching and bike commuting a great way to keep mountain biking at a good level, and a big cup of HTFU.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

BTW, just to clarify since there are some who misconstrue my comments and send me scathing private messages, I AM NEITHER SUGGESTING NOR ADVOCATING POACHING, my comments on stealth just were to suggest that some bikes are more difficult to identify than others.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I've been limited by my own fitness and ability as far as trails I can ride and groups I can keep up with since I started riding. So has every other rider; you ride what you can ride and you keep up with who you can keep up with. It's the natural order. I don't see where it turns into an excuse to sneak a motor in. Odd mindset IMHO.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Please keep this civil, just because you might never feel the need to get an eBike does not mean you need to poopoo all over someone for desiring one.

Sometimes if you do not have something positive to say, it is best to not say anything at all.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I'm all fine with someone riding an e-bike just because they want to. 
Not such a big fan of making lame half-excuses trying to validate sneaking them on to trails though. 
I'm not as fast as I wish I was either (probably most of us aren't); doesn't mean we all feel we should be able to flaunt the rules in order to make up for our decrepitude. 

:smallviolin:


----------



## kneecap (Dec 20, 2003)

Ha, i like that "decrepitude" . never heard that before, but i'm gonna get some mileage outa that


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Can use "advanced" in front of it for extra effect.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Stick with SHM; he's quite the wordsmith.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

fos'l said:


> BTW, just to clarify since there are some who misconstrue my comments and send me scathing private messages, I AM NEITHER SUGGESTING NOR ADVOCATING POACHING, my comments on stealth just were to suggest that some bikes are more difficult to identify than others.


More difficult to identify so you can poach.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

slapheadmofo said:


> Not such a big fan of making lame half-excuses trying to validate sneaking them on to trails though.


Please tell me you have never ridden any trail that does not allow mountain bikes (e.g., "poached").

If you have, what was your "lame half-excuse"? If you haven't, I respect your stance on the issue.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Empty_Beer said:


> Please tell me you have never ridden any trail that does not allow mountain bikes (e.g., "poached").
> 
> If you have, what was your "lame half-excuse"? If you haven't, I respect your stance on the issue.


Of course I have. I also still ride some grey areas on bikes and motos/snowmos etc (though I make sure to avoid 'red' and 'black' areas). My son rides his ATV almost daily and he's 100% illegal on it even in my own yard. I also did 95 in a 50mph zone in my T/A the other day, and have had lustful thoughts. 

I make no excuses for any of those things (or anything else for that matter). If you're gonna sneak and poach, just own it. Don't try to somehow justify things with "I had to because I'm slower than some other guys now" as if that's any sort of valid reason.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

^ wow. Too funny.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

I can see the reason for stealth. I was demo'ing an ebike on a trail that is open to motorcycles and mountain bikes and I still got heckled. Later, I bought a Specialized Levo that is colored flat black in an effort to blend in. It looks like a downhill bike because of the big tires.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

sfgiantsfan said:


> More difficult to identify so you can poach.


I stated explicitly that I don't advocate poaching and you misconstrued my comments deliberately. What's next big man, going to send me another private message to call me a name? If on the other hand you're as lame as your comments and really don't understand English, well I can't help that, except to tell you to get back under the rock you came from.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

fos'l said:


> I stated explicitly that I don't advocate poaching and you misconstrued my comments deliberately. What's next big man, going to send me another private message to call me a name? If on the other hand you're as lame as your comments and really don't understand English, well I can't help that, except to tell you to get back under the rock you came from.


Yes, he loves to share the negative rep. As far as "stealth" goes, mine is bright Moto orange with green pedals. I'm not hiding nothing. I bought my Levo to increase the action factor and cover more terrain. I almost always ride alone.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

The health reason thing I fully don't understand. For ME, IMO my Levo is harder to ride at slower speeds than my 6fattie. AND, if you push the bike and ride it hard, it WILL wear you out. Not, saying my mtb won't, but in either case you need to be healthy and athletic. The weight is way more upper body on the Levo.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

fos'l said:


> I stated explicitly that I don't advocate poaching and you misconstrued my comments deliberately. What's next big man, going to send me another private message to call me a name? If on the other hand you're as lame as your comments and really don't understand English, well I can't help that, except to tell you to get back under the rock you came from.


He's asking for a stealth bike so he can ride trails closed to ebikes, that's a poach. You told him about a bike that is very hard to identify as an ebike, to make it easier to poach. Do you think, like that other knucklhead that he means a color?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Just turn the bike off and pedal. No laws against that.


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> I've been limited by my own fitness and ability as far as trails I can ride and groups I can keep up with since I started riding. So has every other rider; you ride what you can ride and you keep up with who you can keep up with. It's the natural order. I don't see where it turns into an excuse to sneak a motor in. Odd mindset IMHO.


+1
...


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

The thing about poaching is that it gets mixed, but mostly negative responses at MTBR (understandably). I wouldn't expect that to be any different in the e-bike forum.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I don't think anybody is supporting poaching, I'm not.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

If the desire for a stealthy eBike is not for poaching non-moto trails, what is it for? Something not adding up here.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Mr Pig said:


> If the desire for a stealthy eBike is not for poaching non-moto trails, what is it for? Something not adding up here.


My guess is it is more about not being ridiculed by fellow mt bikers (not in OP's riding group) than it is poaching trails that dirt bikes, ATV's and jeeps are not allowed on, since the only people who will raise a stink are mountain bikers.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Empty_Beer said:


> My guess is it is more about not being ridiculed by fellow mt bikers (not in OP's riding group) than it is poaching trails that dirt bikes, ATV's and jeeps are not allowed on, since the only people who will raise a stink are mountain bikers.


Exactly. I would like to be stealthy to avoid harassment. I don't have problems with hikers. They are usually interested in what I am riding and friendly. It is the mountain bikers who are rude.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Empty_Beer said:


> My guess is it is more about not being ridiculed by fellow mt bikers (not in OP's riding group) than it is poaching trails that dirt bikes, ATV's and jeeps are not allowed on, since the only people who will raise a stink are mountain bikers.


Probably not, nice try though.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

tiretracks said:


> Probably not, nice try though.


Good to know you don't poach.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

If I also owned a emtb, like I do, I'd want stealthy also, instead of some frankenbike. The OP is riding with a group of mixed riders in their 60's which is awesome. Go rip, this world has a lot larger fish to fry.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Empty_Beer said:


> Good to know you don't poach.


I don't.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

tiretracks said:


> I don't.


That's what I said. Thank you for representing!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

For heaven's sake, just go get an ADA placard and ride wherever you want. They give those things out to anybody.

If you feel like that's not something you're comfortable with, then maybe you should just keep riding your normal bike.

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Many mountain bikers are always going to look at e-bikes on the trail like many skateboarders and BMXers look at Razor scooters. It's just the natural pecking order.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

slapheadmofo said:


> Many mountain bikers are always going to look at e-bikes on the trail like many skateboarders and BMXers look at Razor scooters. It's just the natural pecking order.


You mean kinda like how hikers and equestrians look at mountain bikers? Cause I'm %$#! sick of that pecking order.


----------



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

Empty_Beer said:


> You mean kinda like how hikers and equestrians look at mountain bikers? Cause I'm %$#! sick of that pecking order.


I suppose I'm lucky because we're all on equal terms where I'm at, I always have pleasant or at worst neutral encounters with horses and hikers.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> I suppose I'm lucky because we're all on equal terms where I'm at, I always have pleasant or at worst neutral encounters with horses and hikers.


Yeah, pretty much the same. 
Matter of fact, lots of hikers love us due to all the trail creation and maintenance we've done. I get thanked regularly on our local trails.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Well, as the OP hasn't posted his thoughts I guess we'll have to continue inventing them!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> I suppose I'm lucky because we're all on equal terms where I'm at, I always have pleasant or at worst neutral encounters with horses and hikers.


Ditto. Many people are multisport here, we all get along for the most part. The problematic people show up at meetings during public process or try to spin things behind the scenes.

The industry is hell bent to make ebikes look identical to real bikes, get used to stealthy. Except for the ones who are going in new design directions of course or those coming from the moto industry.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Np with hikers or horses here as well. The problem I do have is with milfy moms distracting my lines!


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

As I came off spring creek and on to combine I encounted lots of hikers and the only hiker that I did not nod to or say hi said to me well excuse me , lol the one single hiker I failed to be polite too gets pissed at me .


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

What happened to my post? My post was deleted because I defended the OP in his choice. I demand a repost of my post at once.


----------



## legolloyd (Oct 8, 2008)

I am 67 and have been Mountain Biking for over 25 years. I had the same situation but with no health issues. Since July I have been riding the Levo S-Works and ride in any part of the group I want. Ebikes are here to stay and Specialized nailed theirs to a tee. By far the best bike I've ever ridden. I can now talk during the entire climb.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

legolloyd said:


> I am 67 and have been Mountain Biking for over 25 years. I had the same situation but with no health issues. Since July I have been riding the Levo S-Works and ride in any part of the group I want. Ebikes are here to stay and Specialized nailed theirs to a tee. By far the best bike I've ever ridden. I can now talk during the entire climb.


As long as you're riding it on legal trqils, then good for you! Personally, I mountain bike for the exercise, but to each his own.


----------



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

legolloyd said:


> I can now talk during the entire climb.


....and the world is now a better place.

jk, have fun dude!


----------



## cmg (Mar 13, 2012)

legolloyd said:


> I am 67 ......... I can now talk during the entire climb.


"back before we had mtb shorts, we had mtb pants, and an onion on our belts, it was the fashion at the time, we'd ride our loop in a foot of snow all up hill.....without shoes, because it was my brothers day to wear shoes"

also joking , ride on

Im not entirely sure where l stand on e-mtbs, havent seen any in our local trails, so atm lm ok with them


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

I guess what pisses me of the most with some (note the word some, please) ebike haters is the fact they only hate out of egoism. They want the trail to themselves, not willing to share, flinging around aggressive opposition and FUD, quoting whatever reason against ebikes in pure hypocrisy. A class 1 (pedelec 25kmh over here) assist bike is not causing most of the often cited issues. Neither can it go blazing fast across usual trails/forest, nor does it make any more noise pollution nor does it harm the ground that much more etc. It (the 25kmh pedelec) has absolutely nothing to do with an "engine" based motorcyvle, and yet the haters happily pretend it to be so, which I assume is just provocation, anger issues and FUD. The other explanation is ignorance, but I can't imagine so many cognitively challenged people. All this exaggerated fingerpointing, anger management fails, FUDding etc is so extremely tedious anf sad. I mean literally sad. I'm just appalled by people actively trying to sow unhappiness and trying to destroy community bonds based on false "facts". Shame on whoever fits into this shoe. (and again, I was talking solely about the Pedelec 25.not about Teslas on a trail)


----------



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

voon said:


> I guess what pisses me of the most with some (note the word some, please) ebike haters is the fact they only hate out of egoism. They want the trail to themselves, not willing to share........


Examples? Your entire post demonstrates your lack of understanding about why most people here oppose them (hint: they don't oppose the machines or the riders). I'll refrain from spewing slurs like "cognitively challenged" but you might want to think about who's really dishing out the anger and hate.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Class 1 ebikes here would not be considered Pedelecs where you live, they'd be mopeds. 

If we in the US had adopted the same common EU standards as to what can classified and sold as an ebike, there would be far less resistance against them.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Well to be honest the e bike thing has sent some into a tizzy in the end it will get worked out, the e bike wil be a big benefit to the MT bike community . Lets be patient


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

rider95 said:


> Well to be honest the e bike thing has sent some into a tizzy in the end it will get worked out, the e bike wil be a big benefit to the MT bike community . Lets be patient


They all have nothing but negative affect on Mtbs. If we are too patient they will all be banned on most trails.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

rider95 said:


> the e bike wil be a big benefit to the MT bike community.


How? Please explain.

I can only speak for where I live, but here:

The Land Managers dont want them.
The trail groups who maintain trails dont want them.
The hikers dont want them. 
The trail runners dont want them.
The equestrians dont want them.
At best, the majority of mountain bikers are nuetral, at worst, they dont want them.

A minority do, because they want to ride them. 
Bike shops want to sell them.

Will Ebikes bring more support from existing riders for trails? No, existing riders already dont support trails.

Will Ebikes bring more support from new riders for trails? No, new riders dont support trails.

Will the industry start spending more money on trails? Nope, they barely do now.

Will ebike technology trickle down to bikes? Nope, ebike tech will head in the other direction by necessity, stronger and heavier.

So, all I see is people who want ebikes for their personal benefit, no different than any other self centered bike rider. How does that become a big benefit for the mtb comunity?


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Just your opinion Harry your not spewing facts in my 3 plus yrs of riding and talking to forest rangers and other trail user I can say its been very positive for e bikes


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

voon said:


> I guess what pisses me of the most with some (note the word some, please) ebike haters is the fact they only hate out of egoism. They want the trail to themselves, not willing to share, flinging around aggressive opposition and FUD, quoting whatever reason against ebikes in pure hypocrisy. A class 1 (pedelec 25kmh over here) assist bike is not causing most of the often cited issues. Neither can it go blazing fast across usual trails/forest, nor does it make any more noise pollution nor does it harm the ground that much more etc. It (the 25kmh pedelec) has absolutely nothing to do with an "engine" based motorcyvle, and yet the haters happily pretend it to be so, which I assume is just provocation, anger issues and FUD. The other explanation is ignorance, but I can't imagine so many cognitively challenged people. All this exaggerated fingerpointing, anger management fails, FUDding etc is so extremely tedious anf sad. I mean literally sad. I'm just appalled by people actively trying to sow unhappiness and trying to destroy community bonds based on false "facts". Shame on whoever fits into this shoe. (and again, I was talking solely about the Pedelec 25.not about Teslas on a trail)


Here is what strikes me about your post (other than you sound like a crazy person IMO). In your rambling way, you seem to be implying that a 250-watt pedelec is fine, but something more is not fine (granted, it's hard to tell for certain). If you are not all-in with higher-wattage e-bikes, it seems to me that you fall into your own category of being a "hater". That word has had the life beaten out of it. At this point apparently it simply means "someone who disagrees with me."

Where do you feel we should draw the line in classifying vehicles differently than a pedal-powered mountain bike? Is it 250 watts? Surely 270 is fine? Is 400 really such a big deal?

I'm trying to point out that we are really just disagreeing on the how the categories of 2-wheeled vehicles should be defined for use on off-road trails. You have to draw the line somewhere. I see having a motor as an important distinction, for reasons I've posted in this forum ad nauseum. Apparently that offends you, but many other reasonable people feel the same.


----------



## tony_mm (Dec 1, 2016)

I am 50 and train regularly so that I hope not being obliged to ride an ebike when I get older 

Nothing against ebikes or ebikers however.

Unless too many people buy an ebike and we have to many bikers everywhere


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

J.B. Weld said:


> Examples? Your entire post demonstrates your lack of understanding about why most people here oppose them (hint: they don't oppose the machines or the riders). I'll refrain from spewing slurs like "cognitively challenged" but you might want to think about who's really dishing out the anger and hate.


I'll happily listen to what you consider why most people oppose them. I mostly only see opposition, not carefully laid out arguments.



JACKL said:


> Here is what strikes me about your post (other than you sound like a crazy person IMO). In your rambling way, you seem to be implying that a 250-watt pedelec is fine, but something more is not fine (granted, it's hard to tell for certain). If you are not all-in with higher-wattage e-bikes, it seems to me that you fall into your own category of being a "hater". That word has had the life beaten out of it. At this point apparently it simply means "someone who disagrees with me."
> 
> Where do you feel we should draw the line in classifying vehicles differently than a pedal-powered mountain bike? Is it 250 watts? Surely 270 is fine? Is 400 really such a big deal?
> 
> I'm trying to point out that we are really just disagreeing on the how the categories of 2-wheeled vehicles should be defined for use on off-road trails. You have to draw the line somewhere. I see having a motor as an important distinction, for reasons I've posted in this forum ad nauseum. Apparently that offends you, but many other reasonable people feel the same.


Crazy? Yeah must be that.

The 25 Pedelec is the allowed limit where I live. Also, I specifically named 250 Watters because they, for most of the MTB usage, behave exactly like an unassisted bike. They're faster on the commuterlane and uphill on a broader gravel road, but on the trail, their speeds is governed by the trail, not the maximum the assist can dish out usually. I find it really tedious, that people try to sell me an assisted pedalling 250W Pedelec as the same thing as a gasolinepowered, no-assist highpower motocross motorcycle. The two are so obviously, blatantly different, that naming them the same is just flat out silly. I can see where someone is having a different trail experience, if he's surrounded by loud, stinking machines, when he's trying to see a "close to nature" experience. But since the 25er is not doing that, I have a hard time seeing reasonable reasons against them other than "this trail is mine, go away".



Harryman said:


> The Land Managers dont want them.
> The trail groups who maintain trails dont want them.
> The hikers dont want them.
> The trail runners dont want them.
> ...


And most of these people have absolutly no issues with motorless MTBs on their space in general?


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

voon said:


> I'll happily listen to what you consider why most people oppose them.
> 
> I find it really tedious, that people try to sell me an assisted pedalling 250W Pedelec as the same thing as a gasolinepowered, no-assist highpower motocross motorcycle. The two are so obviously, blatantly different, that naming them the same is just flat out silly.


Since you are either ignoring all of the well stated reasons people oppose e-bikes or just haven't been paying attention, I'll tell exactly why I'm against them. It's not that I think e-bikes are evil or anything like that. I think e-bikes are absolutely wonderful, and they have the potential to revolutionize transportation in certain environments. What I, and I'm speaking for myself here, don't support is classifying e-bikes as regular bicycles. While a pedal-assist bike is not a motorcycle, it is also not a bicycle. E-bikes allow for faster climbing and increased speeds on flattish sections, which undoubtably leads to increased closing speeds between riders traveling in opposite directions. This also creates more negative encounters with hikers and equestrians, which is already the main cause of trail closures and access issues in the United States. The other concern I have with allowing e-bikes on all mountain bike trails is the "possibility" of modifying low-power pedal-assist e-bikes into a bike with more power and a throttle. It's goig to ge an issue, and that is going to lead to trail damage, user conflicts, and more trail closures for mountain bikes.

I've been mountain biking and fighting for trail access for 25 years. I know what it's like to do trail work, create proposals to land managers, and lose access to trails. It's not easy, and I refuse to let e-bikes threaten that. It is already difficult to distinguish an e-bike from a mountain bike, which many land managers will consider reason enough to just ban all bicycles. There is little time, money, and incentive to try and enforce different regulations for mountain bikes, low power pedal-assist, high poer pedal-assist, and electric powered e-bikes.

I want to make this very clear. Again. It's not that e-bikes are bad. It's that e-bikes are bad for mountain bikers in many places. If somebody has physical limitations that allow them to use an e-bike on public trails, then that's fine. If land managers are accepting of e-bikes on their trails, then that's great. However, that's not always the case.


----------



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

voon said:


> I'll happily listen to what you consider why most people oppose them. I mostly only see opposition, not carefully laid out arguments.


I don't like repeating myself. This pretty much sums up how electric bikes differ from bicycles though-



Giant Warp said:


> Absolutely love getting in a 20 mile ride in half the time.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Last Sunday on our local trail which is in a st park we had a fat tire biker hit a child walking with his mon n dad , the kid was crying and mon n dad were pissed gonna talk to the ranger . I did not see it but if I had I would have chased the guy down ( apparently he did not even stop) and had a little talk with him . That kinda of riding is what threatens our trails but you guys all do it bomb past hikers I see it all the time , with a e bike you can easily stop and then get going again no need to try n carry speed coming down a hill my e bike is safer and in control making the trail not only safer for me but others too .


----------



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

My favorite part about the electric bike forum is all of the fantastical stories, keep them coming!


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

"Closing speeds between riders traveling in opposite directions" ...

Have you ever seen or been on a 25 kmh pedelec going uphill? It's faster, not fast. If you crash into a P25 uphiller, you have been going to fast. No P25 is going to cause you a bigger problem uphill with the "speed" argument, they simply don't pop around a corner at 50 mph so suddenly, that you could use that as a sensible argument. not even remotley. That's just annoyingly grabbing straws. Draw me a situation, where this could be a sane argument.

To me "dangerous speeds" is a pseudo argument concerning low power pedelecs. If you meant a motocross powerbike with 2000W as a fuel replacement, you're right. but that's not what a P25 is. Again, not even remotley. 

A pedelec at 250W with just pedalling assist is not causing any dangerous closing speeds on narrow trails, where touching each other is a concern. Nobody on a 250W pedelec is racing upwards at speeds, that make, certainly not on a technical trail .. the speed difference to a normal bike going uphill won't cause a heavier accident. The big speed delta in those situation is coming from the guy coming downhill, who's quite probably way faster, than the uphiller, no matter on wether he sits on a P25 or a normal bike. 

As for "trail safety":

If the opposing people were that interested in making the trails safe, you'd prohibit *any* bike on it, since the downhiller without engine is already an issue to a hiker. The only thing that could cause an issue with ebikes is the fact, that you'll simply have more bikers on the trails now. The problem is not a P25 pedal assisted bike, it's a few of the MTB drivers being bad examples on trails and irritating everybody.

As for laying the ground for faster, bigger, "motorcycle" stlye machines: That's up to your local politics ... here it's not allowed, hence a non-issue. There would also be way to much opposition to motorcross style power on trails here, so this never will be an issue. If you fear a harmless P25 is the entrypoint towards engine powered motocrossers jumping over your heads and crashing into you at 50 mph uphill, then you need to adress that and not paint all P25 eMTBers the devil.

And calling ebikes "wonderful" while immediatly excluding all eMTBers, no matter what they drive, is just hypocrisy. By that logic you have to stop driving a car. They're fine on race tracks, but way to dangerous for areas with people around. Obviously. i think there's far more deaths by cars than a pedelec going uphill.

We got eMTBers in the discussion here, not grocery buyers or ecodrivers for carreplacement. You're fine with them, because they're not eMTBers and thus not where you are. 

I understand losing access to trails. We have had that story since half a decade here as well, since the beginning of MTBs. Caused by ruthless drivers downhillign fast, that call any trail their own, not minding hikers, equestrians, bypassing the way to close unannounced etc. They're just very few, but enough to cause pain for the large group of good bikers. You're probably scared the eBikes will cause a huge **** stirring in that discussion again. 

But the Problem is not the P25 biker, who rightfully opposes. it's the public not making a difference between these low powered assist bikes and large machines, and the people/law/politics throwing everything in the same pot.

There's just to much FUD, bad information going around and egoism at hand in the whole discussion.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

"Closing speeds between riders traveling in opposite directions" ...

Have you ever seen or been on a 25 kmh pedelec going uphill? It's fast*er*, not fast. If you crash into a P25 uphiller, you have been going to fast. No P25 is going to cause you a bigger problem uphill with the "speed" argument, they simply don't pop around a corner at 50 mph so suddenly, that you could use that as a sensible argument. not even remotley. That's just annoyingly grabbing straws. Draw me a situation, where this could be a sane argument.

To me "dangerous speeds" is a pseudo argument concerning low power pedelecs. If you meant a motocross powerbike with 2000W as a fuel replacement, you're right. but that's not what a P25 is. Again, not even remotley.

A pedelec at 250W with just pedalling assist is not causing any dangerous closing speeds on narrow trails, where touching each other is a concern. Nobody on a 250W pedelec is racing upwards at speeds, that make, certainly not on a technical trail .. the speed difference to a normal bike going uphill won't cause a heavier accident. The big speed delta in those situation is coming from the guy coming downhill, who's quite probably way faster, than the uphiller, no matter on wether he sits on a P25 or a normal bike.

As for "trail safety":

If the opposing people were that interested in making the trails safe, you'd prohibit *any* bike on it, since the downhiller without engine is already an issue to a hiker. The only thing that could cause an issue with ebikes is the fact, that you'll simply have more bikers on the trails now. The problem is not a P25 pedal assisted bike, it's a few of the MTB drivers being bad examples on trails and irritating everybody.

As for laying the ground for faster, bigger, "motorcycle" stlye machines: That's up to your local politics ... here it's not allowed, hence a non-issue. There would also be way to much opposition to motorcross style power on trails here, so this never will be an issue. If you fear a harmless P25 is the entrypoint towards engine powered motocrossers jumping over your heads and crashing into you at 50 mph uphill, then you need to adress that and not paint all P25 eMTBers the devil.

And calling ebikes "wonderful" while immediatly excluding all eMTBers, no matter what they drive, is just hypocrisy. By that logic you have to stop driving a car. They're fine on race tracks, but way to dangerous for areas with people around. Obviously. i think there's far more deaths by cars than a pedelec going uphill.

We got eMTBers in the discussion here, not grocery buyers or ecodrivers for carreplacement. You're fine with them, because they're not eMTBers and thus not where you are.

I understand losing access to trails. We have had that story since half a decade here as well, since the beginning of MTBs. Caused by ruthless drivers downhillign fast, that call any trail their own, not minding hikers, equestrians, bypassing the way to close unannounced etc. They're just very few, but enough to cause pain for the large group of good bikers. You're probably scared the eBikes will cause a huge **** stirring in that discussion again.

But the Problem is not the P25 biker, who rightfully opposes. it's the public not making a difference between these low powered assist bikes and large machines, and the people/law/politics throwing everything in the same pot.

There's just to much FUD, bad information going around and egoism at hand in the whole discussion.



J.B. Weld said:


> I don't like repeating myself. This pretty much sums up how electric bikes differ from bicycles though-


I see. So how exactly is this a problem? Someone drove uphill at 8kmh instead of 4 and that causes an issue to you?


----------



## cmg (Mar 13, 2012)

rider95 said:


> Last Sunday on our local trail which is in a st park we had a fat tire biker hit a child walking with his mon n dad , the kid was crying and mon n dad were pissed gonna talk to the ranger . I did not see it but if I had I would have chased the guy down ( apparently he did not even stop) and had a little talk with him . That kinda of riding is what threatens our trails but you guys all do it bomb past hikers I see it all the time , with a e bike you can easily stop and then get going again no need to try n carry speed coming down a hill my e bike is safer and in control making the trail not only safer for me but others too .


I think kids like dogs should be leashed, and families need to make room for mtb'rs, and the female members of the family should make themselves sexually available to passing mtb'rs, and when finished give them a sandwich (gotta keep energy levels up you know)

btw, this post is in the vain of yours, full of fantastical bullsh!t, l feel dumber for reading your post, really.


----------



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

voon said:


> I see. So how exactly is this a problem?


Not necessarily a problem, only countering your claim that electric bikes are the same as bicycles.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

How about 750W, though? Because that's what the industry has decided they want to be able to do. And who's going to make sure your bike is only X watts?

-W


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

voon said:


> it's the public not making a difference between these low powered assist bikes and large machines, and the people/law/politics throwing everything in the same pot.


The distinctions between a little motor and a big motor are precisely the type of thing e-bikers need to address with LM's going forward if they want to expand access. But mountain bikes do not have motors at all, so there's absolutely no reason whatsover for us to be pulled into the same pot with motorized users at all, including e-bikers. The distinction must remain crystal clear that mountain biking is a strictly human powered activity or we WILL lose access.

As far as distinguishing e-bikes from full-on motos, that's not our fight. You guys need to be working on carving out your own niche rather than trying to take ride the coattails of mountain biking. E-bikes are a new and distinct vehicle for the trails; why not just deal with that reality and move forward instead of trying to force everyone to pretend they're mountain bikes?


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

Hard to say .. I'm not a propagator for 750W. But hoenstly, I can't see an immense advantage of giant engines on a technical singletrail ... smashing into walls and dropping into ravines isn't much fun. But since this is not a problem around here due to laws, I'm not really having the issue.

As for checking: Same issue as with any law. Does a falling tree make a sound if noone is there to witness it? Illegal car tuning leads to extremely high fines in Switzerland. High enough to discourage even the rich from doing it (percentage fines). That engine tuning isn't visible from the outside, either (although car tuenrs tend to add all kinds of visual bling to make themselves suspicious to law enforcement). Although if we want to live in a sane world, we can't just forbid anything, that has a possibility for misuse, or we'll quickly be in 1984.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

slapheadmofo said:


> The distinctions between a little motor and a big motor are precisely the type of thing e-bikers need to address with LM's going forward if they want to expand access. But mountain bikes do not have motors at all, so there's absolutely no reason whatsover for us to be pulled into the same pot with motorized users at all, including e-bikers. The distinction must remain crystal clear that mountain biking is a strictly human powered activity or we WILL lose access.
> 
> As far as distinguishing e-bikes from full-on motos, that's not our fight. You guys need to be working on carving out your own niche rather than trying to take ride the coattails of mountain biking. E-bikes are a new and distinct vehicle for the trails; why not just deal with that reality and move forward instead of trying to force everyone to pretend they're mountain bikes?


But that is the crux: Motorless bikers are not happy to be thrown in the same pot (which is fine). But have no issues at all with lowpower bikes to be thrown into the same pot as highpowered bikes (which is not fine).

A low power pedal assist MTB (which to me is the 250W pedal assisted bike limited to 25 kmh) is *much* closer to a nonpowered one, than it is to a motorcycle. Which is why assisted lowpower bikers are raging up the walls if you throw them in the same pot as some motocrosspower empowered throttle-motorbiker.

Where I live, things are pretty cool, though. Lowpower is considered a normal bike by law. Highpowered ones are falling under moped law and are not allowed on trail & forests.

That solved all sane issues. I'm fine with that. I really don't care if anyone considers a lowpowerbike a normal bike or not, as long as I can drive it under the same law as the nonmotored one


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

voon said:


> I guess what pisses me of the most with some (note the word some, please) ebike haters is the fact they only hate out of egoism. They want the trail to themselves, not willing to share, flinging around aggressive opposition and FUD, quoting whatever reason against ebikes in pure hypocrisy. A class 1 (pedelec 25kmh over here) assist bike is not causing most of the often cited issues. Neither can it go blazing fast across usual trails/forest, nor does it make any more noise pollution nor does it harm the ground that much more etc. It (the 25kmh pedelec) has absolutely nothing to do with an "engine" based motorcyvle, and yet the haters happily pretend it to be so, which I assume is just provocation, anger issues and FUD. The other explanation is ignorance, but I can't imagine so many cognitively challenged people. All this exaggerated fingerpointing, anger management fails, FUDding etc is so extremely tedious anf sad. I mean literally sad. I'm just appalled by people actively trying to sow unhappiness and trying to destroy community bonds based on false "facts". Shame on whoever fits into this shoe. (and again, I was talking solely about the Pedelec 25.not about Teslas on a trail)


 No hate, just not legal where I ride in MA, for the most part. We will send them all to you in the Alps. The US has far and wide different rules and regs that vary by town, county, state and federal areas. And bikes don't have motors.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

Please don't ... the US has far far far more space than we do .... Switzerland is cramped enough AND we manage to get along  Well. Mostly.

But the alp resorts are in fact expanding on fatbike/snow or summer trails, marked etc. With global warming and snow issues, they're going to new markets. Hikers will have to adapt. But the more dangerous areas have been changed, som trails are hiker only, while the bikers are routed a separate trail ... fine enough on the small parts, where this happens. The source of that is MTB, not eBike tho, happened longer ago.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

voon said:


> Please don't ... the US has far far far more space than we do ....


But you probably have more open trails for MTB.

Trail access in this country is a very difficult thing. Between Private land ownership and Wilderness area's that ban all mechanized travel, other user groups (hikers and horseback riders) fighting against MTB's there are many places we would love to ride that we cannot.


----------



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

Klurejr said:


> But you probably have more open trails for MTB.
> 
> Trail access in this country is a very difficult thing. Between Private land ownership and Wilderness area's that ban all mechanized travel, other user groups (hikers and horseback riders) fighting against MTB's there are many places we would love to ride that we cannot.


I disagree. I realize my experience is relatively limited anywhere I've been west of the Mississippi I've found endless mtb opportunities, I could hardly explore them all if I dedicated a lifetime to the cause.

As far as outdoor recreation there are venues here for every persuasion and there is room for incoming electric bikes, just not on every trail.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

voon said:


> But that is the crux: Motorless bikers are not happy to be thrown in the same pot (which is fine). But have no issues at all with lowpower bikes to be thrown into the same pot as highpowered bikes (which is not fine).
> 
> A low power pedal assist MTB (which to me is the 250W pedal assisted bike limited to 25 kmh) is *much* closer to a nonpowered one, than it is to a motorcycle. Which is why assisted lowpower bikers are raging up the walls if you throw them in the same pot as some motocrosspower empowered throttle-motorbiker.


I personally don't care whether e-bikes get their own classification with more access to more trails than high powered motos; that would be fine w/ me. No issues at all with low powered e-bikes on many trails that have been typically human-powered only. Who cares? As long as someone isn't trying to say that e-bikes are the same as mountain bikes and if a trail allows mountain bikes, it also has to allow e-bikes (an agenda which a lot of people actually ARE trying push, including much of the incredibly shortsighted bike industry).

Mountain bikers have spent years making sure we are absolutely not to be confused with motorized users of any sort. That's how we've had so much success as far as access and acceptance. Now all of a sudden, pedaling is too much for some people and they want to completely redefine mountain biking to include motors? Sorry, that's BS. E-bikers need to stand or fall on their own and leave mountain bikers out of it. We've got our own issues and battles to fight; e-bikers appear to want to just climb on our backs and somehow are surprised that we don't feel like carrying all your extra weight and baggage? Some serious entitlement going on there man.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

voon said:


> Please don't ... the US has far far far more space than we do .... Switzerland is cramped enough AND we manage to get along  Well. Mostly.
> 
> But the alp resorts are in fact expanding on fatbike/snow or summer trails, marked etc. With global warming and snow issues, they're going to new markets. Hikers will have to adapt. But the more dangerous areas have been changed, som trails are hiker only, while the bikers are routed a separate trail ... fine enough on the small parts, where this happens. The source of that is MTB, not eBike tho, happened longer ago.


 Well please don't tell us how we should do things here, umkay? You want them? Take them all. You don't have any grasp of the complexities and balancing acts of the various trail users groups, land managers, land owners and stake holders. But we will take chocolate expertise.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> I disagree. I realize my experience is relatively limited anywhere I've been west of the Mississippi I've found endless mtb opportunities, I could hardly explore them all if I dedicated a lifetime to the cause.
> 
> As far as outdoor recreation there are venues here for every persuasion and there is room for incoming electric bikes, just not on every trail.


I am guessing the area's you are speaking of exist outside large Urban Centers like San Diego County where large numbers of Mountain Bikers and other trails users live. There are less problems where less people live.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

Yes, the areas are different, not just between continents and countries, but in large areas like the US, obviously also among the states. So I do believe someone can find themselves in a tight position surrounded by private landscape and closed trails, while another enjoys miles of open perfection. Which is also why not everything and everybody should be thrown into the same pot, no matter what they drive.



slapheadmofo said:


> e-bikers appear to want to just climb on our backs and somehow are surprised that we don't feel like carrying all your extra weight and baggage? Some serious entitlement going on there man.


Wow, that's some quality stuff going on there.. How old are you? I drive mountainbikes since 35 years and have only recently started to enjoy eBikes. Entitlement? Look who's talking.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

voon said:


> I guess what pisses me of the most with some (note the word some, please) ebike haters is the fact they only hate out of egoism. They want the trail to themselves, not willing to share, flinging around aggressive opposition and FUD, quoting whatever reason against ebikes in pure hypocrisy.


If you'd bothered to read up on why people oppose ebikes you'd realise how foolish and ignorant your post is. You don't know the first thing about the genuine and logical concerns mountain bikers have about future development of ebikes, the increase in their use and the possible impact they could have on trail access and safety. You should go away and educate yourself rather than coming on here and insulting people. You're not helping your cause.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

Mr Pig said:


> If you'd bothered to read up on why people oppose ebikes you'd realise how foolish and ignorant your post is. You don't know the first thing about the genuine and logical concerns mountain bikers have about future development of ebikes, the increase in their use and the possible impact they could have on trail access and safety. You should go away and educate yourself rather than coming on here and insulting people. You're not helping your cause.


Like you had read any of my longer posts. Otherwise you'd know all my talk is based on P25 eMTBs and being thrown into the same pot. And complaining about insults, throwing your own into my face in basically the same sentence. Yeah. Good one.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

voon said:


> As for checking: Same issue as with any law. Does a falling tree make a sound if noone is there to witness it? Illegal car tuning leads to extremely high fines in Switzerland. High enough to discourage even the rich from doing it (percentage fines). That engine tuning isn't visible from the outside, either (although car tuenrs tend to add all kinds of visual bling to make themselves suspicious to law enforcement).


So who is going to patrol the "endless space" we have here in the U.S.? Fines are worthless if there is no way to enforce it.



voon said:


> But that is the crux: Motorless bikers are not happy to be thrown in the same pot (which is fine). But have no issues at all with lowpower bikes to be thrown into the same pot as highpowered bikes (which is not fine).


That's not our problem. I'm concerned about mountain bike trail access. I'm not fighting your battles for you.



J.B. Weld said:


> I disagree. I realize my experience is relatively limited anywhere I've been west of the Mississippi I've found endless mtb opportunities, I could hardly explore them all if I dedicated a lifetime to the cause.


Most of those trails are not easily accessible to most people, and the heavily used trails are going to be where the issues surface. East of the Mississippi is a whole different story. Don't just right the East Coast off because there are more public lands in the West. Also, federal land use is always hotly debated and subject to change. Who knows, maybe Trump will sell off all federally owned land.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

[


Wow, that's some quality stuff going on there.. How old are you? I drive mountainbikes since 35 years and have only recently started to enjoy eBikes. Entitlement? Look who's talking.[/QUOTE. Well interesting wording. One drives a vehicle with a motor, but rides a bike. That's the difference.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

mountainbiker24 said:


> So who is going to patrol the "endless space" we have here in the U.S.? Fines are worthless if there is no way to enforce it.


True. Not even tiny Switzerland has enough cops to control even the tiniest part of the alps. Also: if noone checks for the eBikes power, who's checking ebikes on the trails at all then? I mean if there's noone, then there's noone, Whatever he's suppsoed to check. I'm not for illegal activity, btw. I'm for keeping my P25 bike trail-legal.



mountainbiker24 said:


> That's not our problem. I'm concerned about mountain bike trail access. I'm not fighting your battles for you.




I'm not quite clear on what battle you are fighting for me, please elaborate. My battle is against anyone who tries to deny me P25 access on a trail. That's not even my choice, it's merely a result.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

voon said:


> Like you had read any of my longer posts. Otherwise you'd know all my talk is based on P25 eMTBs and being thrown into the same pot.


I'm going to neg-rep you, because you totally deserve it. I can't be bothered explaining the situation to you. life is too short and I'm not convinced you'd understand it anyway. Other people can try if they like.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

Mr Pig said:


> I'm going to neg-rep you, because you totally deserve it. I can't be bothered explaining the situation to you. life is too short and I'm not convinced you'd understand it anyway. Other people can try if they like.


Yeah nice. Different opinion in a heated, toxic thread .. must be neg repped I guess. Ah well. And please, do go on with the ad hominems.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

voon said:


> I'm not quite clear on what battle you are fighting for me, please elaborate. My battle is against anyone who tries to deny me P25 access on a trail. That's not even my choice, it's merely a result.


Try reading the quotation directly above my statement.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

voon said:


> Yeah nice. Different opinion in a heated, toxic thread ..


Yes, I suppose it is toxic... now! But just so you're clear on why, here is a list of the insults and negative terms you used in your very first post in it:

Pisses me of
ebike haters
Hate out of egoism.
Want the trail to themselves
Not willing to share
Flinging around aggressive opposition
FUD
Pure hypocrisy
Haters happily pretend
Just provocation
Anger issues
Ignorance
Cognitively challenged
Exaggerated fingerpointing
Anger management fails
Extremely tedious
Sad
Literally sad.
Trying to sow unhappiness
Trying to destroy community bonds
False "facts".
Shame on whoever fits into this shoe

That's quite an impressive list of nastiness for one post. Heck, I don't even know what 'FUD' means! If this is your idea of an opinion I don't want to hear it. I doubt anyone does.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

rider95 said:


> Just your opinion Harry your not spewing facts in my 3 plus yrs of riding and talking to forest rangers and other trail user I can say its been very positive for e bikes


If you read my post, you'll see I'm basing my opinions on where I live, where I also work directly with the local land managers, the people who set policy regarding bike and ebike access, as well as representatives of all the other user groups except runners, since they don't have one. So, I'm not just making this up or basing it on how a handful of people react to me as I ride past. This is based on what the people who make the decisions tell me.

You get a personal benefit from riding your ebike, that's great, I do too riding my bike. Recreational sports like riding are selfish, we use public spaces for our health and enjoyment, no one benefits from it but us. Well, ok maybe also the people we live with. 

As I see it, indvidual riders can benefit the community by giving back, caring for the land we ride on, or other people who ride bikes, kids programs, high school racing, what have you. Moving forward, we'll either have existing riders riding ebikes, which won't increase in giving back. They either are now already, or they're not. Or, we'll have new riders on ebikes, which IME they won't even realize that they could or should give back for years, just like new mtb riders.

So, even if you ignore any potential for increased user conflicts with new riders and increased speeds, you'll have riders/more riders riding farther than before, increasing the load on the trail systems and the people that maintain them. I'm not saying it's a gigantic problem and the end of the world, but it should be acknowledged and adressed IMO, instead of just being ignored. More work and aggravation and what does the bike community get out of it again?

If you can explain how ebikes are going to be a big benefit for the bike community I'd love to hear it. Any ebike clubs out there making the world a better place? Think it will help in getting new access, wilderness access perhaps?



voon said:


> And most of these people have absolutly no issues with motorless MTBs on their space in general?


Since there is a lot of crossover between groups here, on the trails, there's not many significant conflicts or animosity on the surface. Behind the scenes and in meetings there are portions of all user groups who would love it if aliens came and abducted all the bikers. I wouldn't mind less people overall myself, it's crowded here, not horribly, but there's trails I won't touch on the weekends because endlessly stopping for people or having them stop for me gets old for everyone.

Lucklily, except in some of the smaller towns, the land managers here are heavily probike, so I'm not afraid we'll get the boot. They are also not interested in adding ebikes to the mix due to the inability to enforce any sort of legislation, the increased speeds and wear. They rely on volunteers for almost all trail maintenance since they don't have the budgets to do it themselves.

I've ridden in the alps and dolomites and lived in Switzerland a long time ago. It's different there, both the geographic and socio/poiltical climate. We have less rules and regulations and more people who love to ignore them. I'm not disputing that ebikes get along well in Europe, I've seen it for myself. Colorado alone is over six times bigger than Switzerland, to say the biking climate varies across the US is a massive understatement.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

Mr Pig said:


> Yes, I suppose it is toxic... now! But just so you're clear on why, here is a list of the insults and negative terms you used in your very first post in it:
> ...
> That's quite an impressive list of nastiness for one post. Heck, I don't even know what 'FUD' means! If this is your idea of an opinion I don't want to hear it. I doubt anyone does.


Indeed, it is a heated post, isn't it. I was angry. You guys fear losing access to trails. So do I.

But you forgot to quote the most important bit I wrote: ".. *with some (note the word some, please) ebike haters*...". I still stand by what I wrote. Including that it only applies to some. Wether the shoe fits you I dunno ... I didn't adress you nor do I know you, so not sure what upsets you there.

FUD means "Fear Uncertainty Despair". A term for a mixture of spread news/info/propaganda/half-truths/lies and so on, often also used in conenction to politics.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

voon said:


> Wow, that's some quality stuff going on there.. How old are you? I drive mountainbikes since 35 years and have only recently started to enjoy eBikes. Entitlement? Look who's talking.


I have no idea what you are trying to say. I don't think you do either.

Do you really not understand that many/most mountain bikers (at least in the US) do not want motors of any sort forced into our 'pot' due to access issues? Can you explain why you think mountain bikers owe e-bikes support? Why shoudn't e-bikes just create their own 'pot'? Mountain bikers did, with great success for the most part.

I don't really care about learning about the various distinctions between power levels and application methods; I have no interest in the subject. I would suggest that e-bikers go try to figure that all out between yourselves and land managers. I'm happy to accept whatever you all work out as long as I don't ever have to worry about mountain bike trails being shut down or access denied due to e-bikes, for whatever reason, even if it's just the fact that you run up against LMs that have unreasonable views on motorized use. I've been riding a long time myself, and building trails almost as long. I know exactly how LMs and other user groups feel about motors around here and I'm quite happy with our 'human powered/passive recreation' designation, thank you very much.

If e-bikers want to gain permission to ride the trails here, they've got a long, tedious, and frustrating process in front of them. The same one we mountain bikers have been dealing with for decades. We've already fought for and won our acceptance on the trails for the most part, not interested in re-fighting or losing any just because someone bought a new toy and now feels the entire sport should be redefined to accommodate it.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

slapheadmofo said:


> Do you really not understand that many/most mountain bikers (at least in the US) do not want motors of any sort forced into our 'pot' due to access issues? Can you explain why you think mountain bikers owe e-bikes support? Why shoudn't e-bikes just create their own 'pot'? Mountain bikers did, with great success for the most part.


Sure I can. I realize the issue is very different in the US now, even among states. We do not have things like ranches (or similarly huge) privatly owned landstretches around here. And even if you accidentally set foot on one, you're not being shot at or sued immeditaly .. suually, this can be settled in a friendly way (although a farmer once warned me not to cross his field, as there is sometimes a lose bull ... back then I wanted to visit a particularly beautiful tree). You can basically always find a gravel track or trail somewhere, that is public to get you anywhere mostly. Also, we're tightly regulated here ... takes aways some freedom, but tends to also make things a bit more orderly. Therefore we only have two allowed eBikeclasses, the Pedelec 25 and the S-Pedelec 45 (25 and 45 kmh, resp.). Noone here rides 1000W home made eBikes anywhere and you'll only meet eMTBs on trails, that do not behave much different, besides being slightly faster uphill and allowing constant uphill without me dieing.

I'm a mountainbiker since decades. I've seen the fights, hikers calling for laws to expel bikers. That was usually the result of a handful of ruthless bikers, bypassing people and animals too closely, scaring them or risking collisions etc - so they naturally built up a dislike for all MTBers. I guess soemthing similar happens in the US now, if people can drive massive machines across trails (also it still confuses me, how you can make use of that power on a technical trail). So it's history renewed over there .... fear to be excluded from tails, because a few eBikers with massive power ratings cause too much of a riot. I get it. Your situation is different. Here, the Pedelecs have been given their clear classification ... or rather, they don't have on of their own, but have been assigned to existing ones: the 25 is ruled by bicycle law here, the P45 by moped law (not motorbike law ... I mean the use of that term by what had been called motorbikes since ages .. a Kawasaki or something .. not a bike with a motor. maybe that's wrong, I'm a nonnative speaker).

I only fear such riots may reheat things over here, too ... atm I'm quite happy with how it is here in Switzerland. if you'd see me on my Pedelec on a trail, you'd never ever feel threatened .. I'm no threat. I don't drive exceptionally fast, I'm one of the guys making a point to slow down to walking speeds when bypassing hroses and people, I greet everybody, trying to maintain a good relationship. I exploded a bit before, cause I have the fear of being excluded as well, and it runs deep .. hence we're all so upset.

Sorry if this has gone the wrong way .. I may have said a few slightly onesided things that cause more action than intended - I'm a bit emotional on that topic, too.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

No worries, and it's not as bad as you might think here in the US for the most part. 

I personally have no qualms about sharing most mtb trails with low-powered e-bikes. I also would love to see more opportunities in my part of the country for 'real' motos (combustion toys are all sorts of fun). I just don't want to see a old can of worms re-opened by those who are trying to insist that mountain bikes be re-classified to include motors. I'm old and tired and just want to ride my bike and build trails rather than revisit all the BS we had to go through when legitimizing MTB as a user group.


----------



## voon (Nov 10, 2016)

Thanks ... yes, I'm not getting younger. Not 50 yet, but if you see me, then it's a slow lumbering mammoth flowing across snow. I have the speed threat of a steam roller (and being 6'3" on an eBike, the weight).


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I could care less about e-bikes as long as they do not affect (regardless of the reason) mountain bike trail access. Full stop. 

Since I have nothing much to gain and lots to lose, in general I will advocate against allowing them unless I see a widespread industry adoption of 1) 250W/15mph EU standard, and 2) at least minimal efforts to prevent user modifications of the motor/controller/battery to circumvent those limits. E-bikes should not need e-bike specific forks or brakes or chains or whatever - if you're adding that much power, you're starting to move too close to motorcycle territory, IMO. 

The industry has already screwed up royally on this, presumably because they want to sell faster/radder/more gnar stuff, not just make riding a bike easier for slow folks. Bad move.

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

The industry also has screwed up (at least locally and IMHO) by sticking these things in shops next to regular bikes without and wanting the shops to sell them as if they were just another mountain bike without even bothering to inform the consumer that there are almost no legal places to ride them within hundreds and hundreds of miles. They just want to get a bunch of them out there under the radar, pocket their $$, and trail access for the rest of us be damned.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

I'm an eMTB advocate and desire more cooperation between the divergent groups since some of us are members of both. However, and I thought this was decided a long time ago, there's no way eMTB's aren't separate and must be accepted or rejected on their own merits (this precludes physically challenged individuals who IMO should be granted access). Where eMTB's are allowed to ride, fine; where they're not, keep trying to get them accepted.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

BTW, initially this thread was about stealth ebikes. Things might get interesting if manufacturers start using the Vivax system. One entity is building them (run was only 15 bikes built by hand and expensive).


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yeah, that's the nightmare - bikes where nobody can tell. Battery tech would need to come a long way to really do it, but man... that might just kill trail access for wheeled vehicles, period, in a lot of places. 

Long term worst case scenario there, obviously. Still, we need "stealth" motorized bikes on trails why?

-Walt


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Walt said:


> Still, we need "stealth" motorized bikes on trails why?
> 
> -Walt


For the same reason the human race needs to build/dispose of more batteries and use motors so we get less exercise.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Battery tech is there already (for better or worse). Look at the Faraday; batteries "hidden" in frame tubes. The next "nightmare" might be the bike where the rotor is the rear rim and the stator is contained in the seat tubes.


----------



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

Klurejr said:


> I am guessing the area's you are speaking of exist outside large Urban Centers like San Diego County where large numbers of Mountain Bikers and other trails users live. There are less problems where less people live.


Yeah I confess that San Dieago/LA inspires me to point east and floor it. Beautiful beaches though.

I have lived in and visited other urban areas though (Tucson, Pheonix etc.) that have a lot more opportunities and arguably superior riding conditions than where I am now, which is about as sparsely populated as it gets.


----------



## babull (Nov 23, 2016)

aging is not a problem, you can always find something to make fun life.
I guess you can consider the Addmotor Electric Bikes , I am 40-year-old, and bought one bike from this company, price is good to cost.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> I suppose I'm lucky because we're all on equal terms where I'm at, I always have pleasant or at worst neutral encounters with horses and hikers.


Still, they join the Sierra Club and vote to ban MTB from wilderness.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

mountainbiker24 said:


> As long as you're riding it on legal trqils, then good for you! Personally, I mountain bike for the exercise, but to each his own.


Pedlecs give you plenty of exercise - they just allow you to go farther with the same amount of effort and keep up with faster friends. People in Europe know.

I would not mind them limited to 250 instead of 750 as it would allow for much more battery life and lighter motors.


----------



## snowsurfer11 (May 26, 2007)

I have a Specialized Turbo Levo, I have to say it is a blast to catch and pass ripped "pro" riders half my age and see the half confused , half angry look on thier faces as they get dropped.. The bike is pretty stealth, most cant tell it is an ebike.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yeah, it's a blast. What could possibly go wrong with making everyone faster than a pro without working too hard?

...and then we all got banned from the trails. 

-Walt


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Strava causes people to go fast.

I would like to try a really good e-bike (Scott E-Genius 700 Tuned or Levo) on trails to see what it is like. I think they may be harder to ride fast on anything with any kind of rocks or roots. Going uphill on a fire road though would be what they excel at.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

People keep putting forth the notion that electric bikes will be the end of trail access. I have a different view. Old people make the laws in this country. IMHO the clientele that will be the main staple of bikes like the Levo will be the people that run this country. More and more communities are being designed around the bicycle. Perceptions are a changing. When I stop and talk to hikers (while on my ebike) they are extremely interested in using the ebike to commute. They tell me they want to ride to work but they can't get all sweaty on the way in. The only people that I have ran into so far that are violently opposed to ebikes are the super fit bikers. In the end it really boils down to trail etiquette. Any user group can can cause problems. One of the worst user groups that I have seen are the people walking their dogs.


----------



## snowsurfer11 (May 26, 2007)

rsilvers said:


> Strava causes people to go fast.
> 
> I would like to try a really good e-bike (Scott E-Genius 700 Tuned or Levo) on trails to see what it is like. I think they may be harder to ride fast on anything with any kind of rocks or roots. Going uphill on a fire road though would be what they excel at.


My Levo has surprised me, I thought it being a heavy bike would limit it on some trails, but it feels exactly like a regular high performance mtn bike.
It rips any trail in Moab even super technical trails like Captain Ahab and EKG, I havent found any limit trail wise so far, and handling is exact same as a regular bike. Specialized did a spectacular job designing this bike.
Only negative I see is fast wideopen downhill fire roads , it will not exceed 20 mph.


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

The Levo is extremely limited on technical trails where you need ground clearance. The pedal strikes are much worse compared to my 26" Santa Cruz Nomad. You really have to watch out on trails that are v-shaped from erosion.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

I think we need a law that a 250 watt e-bike that requires pedaling to operate is legally a regular bike. CA did something like that. They are like hybrid cars, except you are the engine. The ban on engines was from a time when noise and exhaust were the issue. If horses can be allowed, then so can certain e-bikes. Come to think of it, horses are 1-HP. I was biking along and a guy on a horse was charging down the trail at full speed. It was an issue. So maybe even allow 750 watts/1-HP.


----------



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

rsilvers said:


> Still, they join the Sierra Club and vote to ban MTB from wilderness.


They? I'm one of "them" and though I don't belong to the Sierra Club I appreciate everything they've done to protect our natural resources from industrial intrusion, for example motorized traffic in sensitive areas.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

rsilvers said:


> I think we need a law that a 250 watt e-bike that requires pedaling to operate is legally a regular bike. CA did something like that. They are like hybrid cars, except you are the engine. The ban on engines was from a time when noise and exhaust were the issue. If horses can be allowed, then so can certain e-bikes. Come to think of it, horses are 1-HP. I was biking along and a guy on a horse was charging down the trail at full speed. It was an issue. So maybe even allow 750 watts/1-HP.


Beating a dead horse speaking of horses.

Assuming you mean CA as in California and not CA as in Canada; the regs here are for a 750 watt limit and 3 different e-bike classes---Class 1 is pedalec 20 mph max, Class 2 is throttle 20 mph max and Class 3 is pedalec 28 mph max.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Giant Warp said:


> People keep putting forth the notion that electric bikes will be the end of trail access. I have a different view. Old people make the laws in this country. IMHO the clientele that will be the main staple of bikes like the Levo will be the people that run this country. More and more communities are being designed around the bicycle. Perceptions are a changing. When I stop and talk to hikers (while on my ebike) they are extremely interested in using the ebike to commute. They tell me they want to ride to work but they can't get all sweaty on the way in. The only people that I have ran into so far that are violently opposed to ebikes are the super fit bikers. In the end it really boils down to trail etiquette. Any user group can can cause problems. One of the worst user groups that I have seen are the people walking their dogs.


👍+1. The dog walkers can be flat out crazy. The safest ones aren't on a leash. Enough about them, what about the animal?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

+1000 on dog owners; was hiking at Joshua Tree National Park (a fantastic, must see place) yesterday and a guy had a big dog on one of the most popular trails even though it's prohibited expressly. Also had to help rescue a horse that had been bitten severely by an off leash pit bull once while MTBing. Obviously not all dog owners are this bad; some are very conscientious.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> They? I'm one of "them" and though I don't belong to the Sierra Club I appreciate everything they've done to protect our natural resources from industrial intrusion, for example motorized traffic in sensitive areas.


I am talking regular MTB now. You want us MTB riders banned from 106 million acres of public land just because Sierra-Club members (the people who walk with hiking staffs as religious symbols so they can identify each other) can't stand the sight of a bike that may ruin their ambiance? Where horses are allowed to poop all over, but a bike is forbidden?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Yup, I've been in the hardwood lumber industry my entire life. My family used to manage 60k+ acres of forest land in NYS. We practiced sustainable forestry and I'll tell you the Sierra club and special interest groups were a pain in the ass. Constantly kicking off trespassers and poachers. Try logging in the Adirondack State park. Fun, fun. A spotted owl is not going to do crap for you "literally!" when you're on the throne!


----------



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

rsilvers said:


> I am talking regular MTB now.


Same here. I don't go for the current accepted norm (painting with broad brushes). I've ridden with good people who were Sierra Clubbers and/or equestrians.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Endangered species have intrinsic value to some people, you just have to accept that point of view (which I tend to agree with for both philosophical and practical reasons). 

I don't think bringing the Sierra Club into the discussion makes any sense unless you mean that adding motors will give anti-bike folks another weapon to use against us. To be honest, I'd rather have trails closed to bikes entirely than overrun by motorized (whether electric or not) vehicles so that the majority of the population (who just want to hike) can't enjoy them. 

-Walt


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Why should hiking get priority over MTB? There is one reason and one reason only - the Sierra Club has decades-long experience with lobbying lawmakers, and the Sierra Club is anti-MTB. The MTB lobby is much newer and not as large or as well established.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

It's very easy to have judgements about ideas for land usage when technically you have no ownership. When parties do have ownership and rely on the resources for there business, these "groups" get tricky. 
I do agree though about the Sierra Club not relevant to our ebike discussion. I also hike and have great respect for wild life, particularly when I was younger! JK, it's all part of the outdoor experience for me. Working in the woods all day alone you tend to grow fond of the animals.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Gutch said:


> I do agree though about the Sierra Club not relevant to our ebike discussion.


As Walt pointed out, the Sierra Club is relevant to our e-Bike discussion because the number one cited reason why MTB riders are so hostile to e-bike is fear over losing trail access from hikers being bothered by fast bike riders. No one is trying to deny MTB riders trail access more than the Sierra Club. It is often said that they could use e-bikes are a reason to continue to ban all bikes. Personally I don't think so though.

E-bikes have a higher average speed but not a higher top speed, and can't really go faster on technical trails. And really, on my fat-bike ride today I took some risks and tried my best to maintain a high speed and not lose momentum that is hard to replace. Had I been on an e-bike, I could have slowed down to be safer at every intersection and much more often knowing I could just re-accelerate later.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I agree, but the bottom line is you add assist to an already fast rider and well, they are hauling the mail. However, the already fast guy is fast because he knows how to ride. And, he's fast on a bike because he's spent years riding. That same rider understands trail etiquette. These are the guys that I "hope" are purchasing ebikes. There will be more damage to trails, however the numbers will be fewer than traditional mtb's. I know when I rode mine, I didn't keep riding the same loop, I was gone exploring!


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

snowsurfer11 said:


> My Levo has surprised me, I thought it being a heavy bike would limit it on some trails, but it feels exactly like a regular high performance mtn bike.
> It rips any trail in Moab even super technical trails like Captain Ahab and EKG, I havent found any limit trail wise so far, and handling is exact same as a regular bike. Specialized did a spectacular job designing this bike.
> Only negative I see is fast wideopen downhill fire roads , it will not exceed 20 mph.


1) Another e-"biker" poaching trails that don't allow e-bikes.

2) Any bike should be able to coast at 20mph+ on even a gentle downhill.

3) Captain Ahab is technical?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Damn ebikers, posting in ebike forum!


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Gutch said:


> Damn ebikers, posting in ebike forum!


About poaching trails that expressly forbid e-bikes, no less! Gasp! Shock! Horror!

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> I know when I rode mine, I didn't keep riding the same loop, I was gone exploring!


As an aside, I kind of wonder how the expanded range will affect how you view your local trail system. Like now, if I go out for around a couple hour ride, say 15-20 miles, I am lucky enough to ride from my house and can chose from a number of options in my trail network. If I ride A, maybe I'll ride B, C or D next time and so on. If my range doubled and I could ride both A & B in roughly the same amount of time and effort, would I start to get tired of my local stuff faster? Does adding that capablility, shrink your network and for those people who don't have a ton of trails to ride, take away that newness?

I know here for moto guys, there's only @ 25 miles of legal trail you can ride directly from the edge of town and half of that is currently closed to them. It's open to everyone, so they are trails that we ride too and most of it is remote enough that on a bike, you might ride it a handful of times each summer, but for these guys, that's it and on a normal ride, they'll ride the entirety of it, and likely do laps on most of it. It must be a drag to ride the same thing over and over.

I could see that unless you had a big enough network, it could be sort of a double edged sword. What say you emtbers?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Yes, no doubt. Coming from emtb and mtb, every trail shrinks. IMO, if you're riding a beast with assist, why stay at the zoo? If you live in an area where you have 20 miles of Singletrack that you can legally ride on - not worth it. It's an interesting thing to see how far you can ride around on a charge and where you can preserve. Knowing the outcome is tank city if you blow it. They are interesting and shed different thoughts. I doubt on an emtb, (I know I haven't gone deep in the pain cave) many riders will. That is where the traditional bike shines.
They are still fun as **** and that is why I ride, to have fun. Nobody is paying my mortgages based on my riding, however a beer sponsor...maybe.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Le Duke said:


> About poaching trails that expressly forbid e-bikes, no less! Gasp! Shock! Horror!
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


Agreed..


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> 1) Another e-"biker" poaching trails that don't allow e-bikes.


The trails also say "dogs must be leashed" and you know how that goes. 80% of dogs are not leashed.


----------



## cmg (Mar 13, 2012)

rsilvers said:


> The trails also say "dogs must be leashed" and you know how that goes. 80% of dogs are not leashed.


In that case motorbikes can ride there 

2 wrongs dont make a right


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Good question, Harry. Doubt this will resonate with many, but sometimes - despite the plethora of trails to ride here - I ride the same trail with a different bike for variety.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Yeah, I mix it up too. I can see that if an ebike was just one of several bikes in the garage, it would one more option for a different experience. If it was my main ride though, I'd be wary of the shrinkage effect.

Even though I have @ a hundred miles of trail I can ride from my house, I try to manage it to keep it from becoming routine. There's some parks I only ride in the winter for example when the higher trails are snowed in. We have a few here that are have highly technical riding but are relatively small, just a nest of trails, that take @ an hour and a half to ride a loop on everything. I'm not sure I'd want to do it in half the time, or end up riding it all twice? Seems like it would take away some of desire to get back there.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Pshaw, Palmer laps never get old!

-W


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

A couple of points to clear up about the Levo. Top speed 17 mph. On a steep downhill, yes, you can exceed that by means of gravity like all bikes. On trails that are not so steep, no you can not exceed that because the motor stays engaged and acts like an engine brake with a governor and slows you down no matter how hard you pedal. In other words, any physically fit mtn biker wearing spandex will thrash you. Also, the 3.0 tires don't corner very well on loose over hard pack so that slows you down. Then, since the bike is so heavy and rides so low, the speed on technical single track must be altered. Think of the Levo as a Cadillac.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I agree and disagree. The 3.0 tires and the weight of the bike make it planted on loose over hard. I ran wider rims and Grid casing sidewalls. Check your tire pressure and go tubeless. Also experienced zero issues on technical besides the added physical effort with the upper body due to the weight of the Levo. And if I'm in spandex riding the Levo, maybe Sagan would catch me. I do agree on the top speed thing maxing out.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Walt said:


> Pshaw, Palmer laps never get old!
> 
> -W


I was thinking more of Ute, which is @ twice as big with twice as many trails as when you were here. SRAM testing ground since it's right out their back door.

I've seen that riders are delimiting their Levos in Europe using an app on their phones, so I don't expect that pesky speed limit to be there for some people.


----------



## snowsurfer11 (May 26, 2007)

Le Duke said:


> 1) Another e-"biker" poaching trails that don't allow e-bikes.


These trails allow ebikes, so quit spreading lies. The only trails I have found in Moab that don't allow them are the Brand trails and are clearly marked so. The owner of Specialized did introduce the Turbo Levo on the Amasa Back trail system after all.....


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

snowsurfer11 said:


> These trails allow ebikes, so quit spreading lies. The only trails I have found in Moab that don't allow them are the Brand trails and are clearly marked so. The owner of Specialized did introduce the Turbo Levo on the Amasa Back trail system after all.....


Oh? They do, eh?

https://www.blm.gov/ut/st/en/fo/moab/recreation/mountain_bike_trails.html

Amasa Back is legal.

Captain Ahab and Hymasa and EKG ARE NOT LEGAL FOR E-BIKES.

https://www.blm.gov/style/medialib/...n_bike_trail.Par.33053.File.dat/AmasaBack.pdf

https://www.blm.gov/style/medialib/...in_bike_trail.Par.42569.File.dat/Klondike.pdf

These are pretty simple concepts.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

snowsurfer11 said:


> These trails allow ebikes, so quit spreading lies. The only trails I have found in Moab that don't allow them are the Brand trails and are clearly marked so. The owner of Specialized did introduce the Turbo Levo on the Amasa Back trail system after all.....


Dude, this has been a big deal and in the newspapers and everything - no, they are not legal. They are legal on moto stuff only in the Moab area in general (USFS and BLM consider them motorized).

Might be time for an apology to everyone, posting about poaching is a BIG no-no around here.

-Walt


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Not cool


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Threw together a Cyclone (from Luna) build today; it's on a new Motobecane Fantom 27.5 Plus---I'm quite pleased with it. It's currently running at around 1900 watts; I'll be dialing it back to a "legal" 750 eventually. Can't see why anybody would want to run the max 3kW given the anticipated wear and tear on the bike.

It's almost as quiet as the legitimately CA legal Bafang BBS02 I recently had going; which is nearly Levo quiet.










If one is handy with tools; they can build twice the e-bike for half the money compared to factory built.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Nice conversion; did you use the stock mounting system? I've got a mini cyclone that I'm taking my time with since I want to use brackets to attach it to the bike. Currently working on designing them. Not in a rush since I've got a couple of projects ahead of it.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

fos'l said:


> Nice conversion; did you use the stock mounting system? I've got a mini cyclone that I'm taking my time with since I want to use brackets to attach it to the bike. Currently working on designing them. Not in a rush since I've got a couple of projects ahead of it.


Thanks, yes I used the stock system; I had purchased the 73mm BB model thinking I'd use it on a different frame so I needed to change the mounting spacers for the Motobecane's 100mm but that was simple. Yes there is some lateral flex under full power @ 1900w (the skimpy coupling "nuts" are part of this IMHO) but not enough to make me want to "fix" it. At max 3k power probably yes.

Only glitch was one of the terminals in the on/off switch cable wasn't seated so it popped out when I plugged it in the second time around. I should also mention that the PAS cadence sensor supplied by Luna as an accessory takes a lot of modification to work with the Cyclone/ISIS BB combo. (The PAS option with the stock Cyclone controller is a bit of a joke regardless)

So the kit is "plug and play" but would be daunting for a first-timer given zero paperwork (meaning instructions---and Luna discloses all of this). And unlike the Bafang kits there are controller connections that could be done wrong.

BTW I was considering the Mini Cyclone (would suit my purposes better) but with some reviews saying that it was a noisier motor (and less reliable) than the 3k Cyclone (and $70 more expensive) I went with the latter.

Here's the very "stealthy" BBS02 I had been playing with:









(Windsor Cliff 29er; another Bikes Direct purchase)


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

Another Bikes Direct e vil bike conversion


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

MP, thanks for the information. I'll let you know about the mini's noise when it's in operation. Probably I've been spoiled by my BBS02 since it's so quiet.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Is SnowSurfer11 going to apologize for calling me a liar?

Or has that 6-post troll gone back to haunt his favorite bridge?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

I think Trump has said he's doing away with the BLM


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

Bigwheel said:


> Another Bikes Direct e vil bike conversion
> 
> View attachment 1110350


E-cross!


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

crankout said:


> e-cross!


v 2.0









Battery not shown but was on bike when weighed.


----------



## RayFeiler (Jan 16, 2017)

Did anyone see this on 60 Minutes?

60 Minutes investigates hidden motors and pro cycling - CBS News


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Yup, motors in the tour de farce for years now.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

They didn't prove anything.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

^^^^ Alternative facts?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

leeboh said:


> ^^^^ Alternative facts?


What did they prove? Nothing but innuendo and unsupported here say. C'mon you guy's are supposed to be smarter than that. Guess not.


----------



## RayFeiler (Jan 16, 2017)

Maybe they are referring to this?

Cheating cyclist busted with hidden motor in bike - Business Insider


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

RayFeiler said:


> Maybe they are referring to this?
> 
> Cheating cyclist busted with hidden motor in bike - Business Insider


No, they were referring to the Tour, the Tour De France specifically. The cyclocross incident is old news.


----------



## eBikesmith (Jan 31, 2017)

*Facts > Opinions*

Personal opinions aside, some of the concerns brought up by those opposing eMTB use on non-motorized trails are valid. There is a lot of hard work that goes into maintaining these trails, and having trail access denied to all bikers because of wreckless behavior is understandably unacceptable. With that said, there are no definitive studies done that I've been able to find that studies these effects (There was that report scandal with IMBA that never came out, but it appears that their initial findings were inconclusive at best).

Now in terms of losing trail access, I believe it narrows down to speed and soil erosion. I'd like to address my thoughts on both.

*Speed:*
Any rider with a class 1/2 (and possible level 3) eMTB will tell you, you go up the mountain significantly faster with ease. Now this doesn't mean you're hauling like a dirt bike. It just means your going at 5-15 miles per hour up the hill, and able to do that multiple times per ride, instead of just one or two. (On a side note, I have a 750w eMTB and I average 6mph on uphill section in a climbing gear on level 1 assist.) I don't see this as creating any kind of hazard for anybody or anything.
Now, the contested downhill aspect. Another thing most people who have experienced eMTB riding even once will note, they actually go down slower than if they were on a regular pedal only bike. The extra weight actually makes it more difficult to maneuver, decreasing the overall downhill speed. I truly believe there needs to be more cooperation and understanding to debunk this idea that eMTB are closer to mopeds than mountain bikes. Either way, I think we can all agree on this, there is absolutely no substitute for common sense, respect, and experience.

*Soil Erosion:*
Now, for the even larger threat to trail access. Soil erosion. Aside from all sorts of soil eroding riding styles, techniques, and maneuvers, there needs to be some legitimate studies done. As in a legal class of eMTB vs a comparable mountain bike on an identical section of trial with identical conditions. It just seems silly to me that people automatically jump to the fact that eMTB are heavier than their pedal only counterparts, therefore they cause greater soil erosion. Logically speaking, any basic understanding of physics will tell you, if you counterbalance the weight of the bicycle and eMTB with the weight of the rider to equal identical total weights (i.e. 180lb rider plus 30lb bike / 160lb rider plus 50lb bike), there should be almost no difference. Matter of fact, this might work in favor of an eMTB because of inertia and the center of gravity due to how the mass is distributed. If anything, this just seems like a slippery slope for weight based discrimination. Are we going to have weight limits on trails soon (No riders over 210lbs allowed)? Thus, I really hope some highly regarded education institutions pick up on this topic, and publish some studies in well regarded journals. I firmly believe this will also debunk a lot of opinion based myths. Again, either way, I think we can all agree on this, there is absolutely no substitute for common sense, respect, and experience.

Now, for an opinion piece, I came across an article that suggests that Strava poses a greater threat than any eMTB. Definitely a worthwhile read for anybody that cares about trail access.

The Angry Singlespeeder: Strava versus eBikes - Mtbr.com


----------



## Cougar2465 (Apr 19, 2014)

My mates on manual bikes are faster than me on my ebike! 

I had to sell my manual bike and get an ebike to be able to keep riding. I injured my knees and can't push too hard any longer.

I would feel it's unfair if I was not allowed to go riding on my ebike with my mates on manual bikes as they would ruin the trail much more than I would!

Btw, I got the Turbo Levo cause they look like a non e bike. Not that so I can poach but it's more like just for the look!


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

eBikesmith said:


> Personal opinions aside, some of the concerns brought up by those opposing eMTB use on non-motorized trails are valid. There is a lot of hard work that goes into maintaining these trails, and having trail access denied to all bikers because of wreckless behavior is understandably unacceptable. With that said, there are no definitive studies done that I've been able to find that studies these effects (There was that report scandal with IMBA that never came out, but it appears that their initial findings were inconclusive at best).
> 
> Now in terms of losing trail access, I believe it narrows down to speed and soil erosion. I'd like to address my thoughts on both.
> 
> ...


Nope. Totally missed it. It does not boil down to speed and erosion. It boils down to where to draw the line.

Ebikes are motorized. It's a fact and can't be argued.

So now let's hypothetically put a wattage limit on what we will allow on any given trail. It doesn't matter what that limit is.

Who monitors it? Who will pay someone to monitor it?

So now we've allowed ebikes on to non-motorized trails (hypothetically).

Now we want to build a new trail system and anti motorized vehicle groups come out of the woodwork to oppose us because now, if they allow mtb's, they are also allowing ebikes.

Back to the monitoring point...no one will do it and so it will get out of hand. Who's to say what a 250 watt versus 1500 watt ebike looks like?


----------



## eBikesmith (Jan 31, 2017)

Allow me to dissect your train of thought.



> It does not boil down to speed and erosion. It boils down to where to draw the line.
> 
> Ebikes are motorized. It's a fact and can't be argued.


That's actually an interesting point you make; drawing the line. Totally respectable, and there should be no arguments from people who ride eBikes or vice-versa.



> So now let's hypothetically put a wattage limit on what we will allow on any given trail. It doesn't matter what that limit is.
> 
> Who monitors it? Who will pay someone to monitor it?
> 
> ...no one will do it and so it will get out of hand. Who's to say what a 250 watt versus 1500 watt ebike looks like?


Now this is where I understand your concern, but don't quite follow. I can't help but ask, why? What scenario do you see unfolding that would warrant the need for this? Are you worried that all of sudden eMTBs will be like electric motopeds, and all of a sudden the line is completely blurred, with no enforceable method to keep everyone and everything safe? I would say that's a valid point, but lets step back from this dystopian reality, and analyze.

What rules are already in place for ALL bikers? We have speed limits, uphill/downhill passage rules, different trail use rules, etc. Now which of these rules are not broken all of the time, pretty much everywhere? None. PEOPLE are constantly going crazy fast downhill, getting their KoM on Strava or just having a blast. They inherently break the following passage rules because there is little chance of them slowing down in time. Meanwhile, riders go on trails all of the time marked for equestrian or hiker use only.

Now we come back to ebikes, specifically, eMTBs. What rules do we have in place for them? At least in California, we have designated them to different classes based on their wattage, speed capabilities, and throttle abilities. Even if you have no idea what the motor wattage is, any rider can still break all of the rules previously mentioned, BEFORE beginning to break further rules specifically designed for ebikes.

Therefore, the rules (at least in California), are fine just the way they are. You don't need to know the wattage of the ebike to see if somebody is riding recklessly. We don't limit horsepower on cars around speed limits on our roads, and yet we already do with ebikes. Think about the ratio of law enforcement on the roads, as opposed to the number of drivers they monitor. Now compare that to the number of rangers to mountain bikers. How about the number of people disregarding the laws, vs law abiding motorists. Now compare that to responsible riders vs irresponsible ones. Just food for thought.

I understand it's easy to draw the line between pedal and electric, rather than responsible rider, versus irresponsible rider, but that's just discriminatory. eMTB's should not be seen as some kind of threat. We're cut from the same fabric as other riders, and just want to go out, and have a good time that everyone can enjoy. It's actually ironic that the logic you're suggesting is the same one that those against allowing trail access for bikers in general are using. Let's not let a few bad apples, spoil the whole bag!

P.s I don't agree that this is not about speed and soil erosion. I just wanted to stick to the point you're trying to make.


----------



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

eBikesmith said:


> Allow me to dissect your train of thought.......


You're over-complicating a simple concept, lots of people enjoy the sanctuary of motor-free environments. E-bikes have motors and are faster than bicycles so their inclusion deserves to be evaluated on an individual basis.

Your username suggests you may have a financially influenced bias on the subject?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Saying it's ok to ride low wattage ebikes on non-motorized trails is like being a little pregnant. Once that door is cracked open, it will continuously be pushed to be opened further. 

I'm not against ebikes in general, I think the US could really benefit from people using them as transportation rather than automobiles. But this push to allow them on non-motorized trails is really turning me against them. As JB said, I think your interest isn't in what is best for the sport but rather what is best for your wallet.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

The same thing could be said about allowing humans to use the trails walking. If you allowing walking it could lead to people wanting to drive tanks there. 

The default right for Americans is that they are allowed to travel with their choice of vehicle and then banned by due process. If a pedal assist bike interferes with ones ability to travel an area, then they should take on some restrictions. Until that due process is taken on, it is a violation of the 5th amendment and any governing body caught enforcing a ban is exposing that organization to a lawsuit.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Linktung said:


> The same thing could be said about allowing humans to use the trails walking. If you allowing walking it could lead to people wanting to drive tanks there.
> 
> The default right for Americans is that they are allowed to travel with their choice of vehicle and then banned by due process. If a pedal assist bike interferes with ones ability to travel an area, then they should take on some restrictions. Until that due process is taken on, it is a violation of the 5th amendment and any governing body caught enforcing a ban is exposing that organization to a lawsuit.


Please share your knowledge of the specific case law that shows 'due process' was followed when coming up with laws that prevent me from driving a jetliner down the highway, or a jeep across my local ball fields. Otherwise, I'm suing somebody!!!

:skep:


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Linktung said:


> The same thing could be said about allowing humans to use the trails walking. If you allowing walking it could lead to people wanting to drive tanks there.
> 
> The default right for Americans is that they are allowed to travel with their choice of vehicle and then banned by due process. If a pedal assist bike interferes with ones ability to travel an area, then they should take on some restrictions. Until that due process is taken on, it is a violation of the 5th amendment and any governing body caught enforcing a ban is exposing that organization to a lawsuit.


As a member of the public, you have a right to be on public lands, you do not have a right to do as you'd wish there, or a right to use any vehicle you'd like. There are listed allowable uses, it's up to the land agency to decide if they or any new ones are appropriate. We don't have a constitutional right to ride mtbs or emtbs anywhere we'd like, we have permission to do so in specific areas.


----------



## eBikesmith (Jan 31, 2017)

For the record, I do not yet profit off of ebikes. Do I repair bikes in general for family and friends? Yes. Do I specialize in repairing ebikes specifically? Yes. Do I plan on possibly starting an ebike shop? I actually really want to, and probably plan on doing so. With that aside, I don't think it's fair to discount my points or intentions, because first and foremost, I love bicycles. I daily commute, and mountain bike on a weekly basis and want nothin less than to share this experience with others.

Simply put, I haven't heard one logical explanation as to why ebikes shouldn't be allowed on non-motorized trails. When they originially said non-motorized, they were referring to dirt bikes that can ruin trails, scare horses, injure hikers, and pollute with the enivroment with emissions and noise. Lets not get it twisted. This doesn't apply to eMTBs. 'Just because they are' shouldn't be considered a valid point. And saying that there is potential for abuse; how is that a reason for a blanket ban? (I feel this is the argument used to ban firearms.)

Somebody just pointed out that eMTBs are bad for the sport. I politely disagree. There are SO many people that can be introduced to the sport thanks to eMTBs. Older folks. People with disabilities. People who may currently be out of shape that are intimidated to come ride. And pretty much every average Joe who would like to shift the work/reward ratio in their favor (myself included). This could be a game changer for the whole industry. Creating unnecessary restrictions for all these people is not cool.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

eBikesmith said:


> Simply put, I haven't heard one logical explanation as to why ebikes shouldn't be allowed on non-motorized trails.


Because motors. That's pretty logical. You can use whatever twisted logic that you'd like to use to advance your agenda but it comes down to the motor. And if you can't understand that then there is no such thing as reason for you.


----------



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

eBikesmith said:


> Simply put, I haven't heard one logical explanation as to why ebikes shouldn't be allowed on non-motorized trails.


Because they are motorized, and also faster than bicycles. How is that not logical?

And what is the logic against considering trails for e-bike use on an individual basis just the same as bicycles are?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

eBikesmith said:


> Somebody just pointed out that eMTBs are bad for the sport. I politely disagree. There are SO many people that can be introduced to the sport thanks to eMTBs. Older folks. People with disabilities. People who may currently be out of shape that are intimidated to come ride. And pretty much every average Joe who would like to shift the work/reward ratio in their favor (myself included). This could be a game changer for the whole industry. Creating unnecessary restrictions for all these people is not cool.


If you are referring to me, that is not what I said. eMTBs are not the sport, the sport is non-motorized bicycles, that is the point.

We could remove all the rocks and roots and pave the trails, then older folks, people with disabilities, people who may be out of shape that are intimidated to come ride, etc could participate, but it would no longer be mountain biking.

"Game changer for the whole industry" - in other words, a whole new market to sell to. Trying to change the sport into something it's not so you have more people to sell to is not cool.


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

You must spread some reputation around before giving it to chazpat again.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

eBikesmith said:


> And pretty much every average Joe who would like to shift the work/reward ratio in their favor (myself included).


I'll cry you a river. Just pedal the darn bike. Not everything in life is supposed to 100% fun all the time. If you pedal your bike you'll get stronger and you can shift the work/reward ratio in your favour without a motor. In fact I think that is the basis of mountain biking as a sport.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Ebikesmith...you've been given reasons and evidence as to why ebikes are bad for the sport of mountain biking. You are trying very hard to find your own point of view being supported and are being obtuse.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Once upon a time, 

there was an island off the coast of America called Fizinog. The people who lived there were very like us in many ways, except shorter and not as good looking perhaps, but they were a proud and industrious people. Happy, for the most part.

Fizinog did have it's problems, like all places do, and one of them was guns. You see, some of the younger folks from Fizinog had sailed across the water to Am-e-re-ca, as they called it, and had been introduced to these exiting things called guns. They thought guns were brilliant! Fun to play with and just the job for protecting themselves from the wild Gruntsnarlers that lived in the woods of Fizinog. Soon these young Fizinogans had shipped guns over to the island in there hundreds and they sold well. It was soon cool to have one but it wasn't too long before problems arose.

There were accidents with the guns, some not-so-accidents, people got hurt. People died. The Grand Fizinog Council met and decided action had to be taken. They banned the guns and ordered that they all be thrown into the sea. And they were. Fizinog felt safe again. 

Some people missed the guns though. They had been fun, if you were careful, and throwing stones at the Gruntsnarlers didn't work. The young Fizinogans would try to make other things that filed the gap left by the guns, but it was hard. Then one day, one of them had a breakthrough. The Fizinogans had a lovely musical instrument called a Floter, kind of like a flute thing but bigger, and he found that if you filled one with sap from the Kistrom tree and squeezed the end you could get it to shoot marbles out of the end. You'd have to see it but anyway, soon he had made and sold hundreds of them to keen young fellow Fizinogans. 

When the Grand council heard about this they were furious and called the young inventor in to see them. He explained that they had nothing to worry about. His device was not the same as a gun. It was much weaker and was just for fun, and scaring the Gruntsnarlers of course. He demonstrated it, he let them try it, and they agreed it was safe. 

And it was, but the young Fizinogan hadn't been totally honest with the Council. You see, he'd been getting a bit bored with his invention. The novelty of its limited power had worn thin, and it didn't really scare the Gruntsnarlers very well. Just annoyed them really, so he'd been trying to make it more powerful. And he succeeded. By refining the sap and putting a few extra parts inside he'd made it much more powerful, while making sure it looked just the same on the outside. 

Well, he though this was super! He and his friends could walk around with their powerful contraptions and no one knew. In fact, at a glance they looked just like plane old Floters. And they sure sorted out the Gruntsnarlers! 

But you can guess what happened. Some of the young Fizinogans just couldn't resist misusing their contraptions and soon the death toll was almost as bad as it had been with the guns. The Council was in a pickle. The island was awash with contraptions. no one could tell which ones were dangerous, which ones were safe and to make matters worse they looked exactly like the totally innocent Floters as well.

It was a sad day, the day all of the contraptions, and the Floters, were thrown into the sea. The island was safe once again, but it had lost it's music. Some people said it was a price worth paying, but others just missed the music very, very much. 

The end.


----------



## JRT_in_WMass (Jul 22, 2013)

eBikesmith said:


> Somebody just pointed out that eMTBs are bad for the sport. I politely disagree. There are SO many people that can be introduced to the sport thanks to eMTBs. Older folks. People with disabilities. People who may currently be out of shape that are intimidated to come ride. And pretty much every average Joe who would like to shift the work/reward ratio in their favor (myself included). This could be a game changer for the whole industry. Creating unnecessary restrictions for all these people is not cool.


I largely agree with you, but there are some who try to resist change. For example, there are the Luddite bicycle purists who while only a small segment of the total population, think that their use is the only valid use. Luddite bicycle purists ride penny farthings, and prefer to do so both naked and drunk. Luddite bicycle purists firmly believe that the modern chain driven contraptions which some refer to as being "safety bicycles" are not real bicycles at all, and they also firmly believe that the riders of those contraptions are spoiling their sport called bicycling. Luddites want to live in an earlier century and are only deluding themselves into thinking they can slow the advance of time.








The broader population of Americans are far less ambitious about exercising, which is why many are overweight or obese. They will spend money on contraptions to exercise, but do not tend to actually use those contraptions, because doing so requires some effort with little near term reward. If ebikes gain popularity, those might be interesting enough to get the fatties off of the couch and out of the house where they might socially engage, perhaps rebuilding some interaction within the community while also getting a little exercise, of which they get none while sitting on the couch in front of the television screen watching faux news broadcasts.


----------



## eBikesmith (Jan 31, 2017)

This has been an interesting discussion. I guess we've come to an impasse. As with everything, evolution and progress will take its course. Just as we're seeing with autonomous transportation, there will be those that will resist, and those that enjoy the marvels that technology brings.

See you guys on the mountain! Have fun, and stay safe!


----------



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

What the hell y'all smoking?


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

eBikesmith said:


> See you guys on the mountain!


Or not..


----------



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

eBikesmith said:


> This has been an interesting discussion. I guess we've come to an impasse.


I suppose simple logic could be considered an impasse.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

eBikesmith said:


> This has been an interesting discussion. I guess we've come to an impasse. As with everything, evolution and progress will take its course. Just as we're seeing with autonomous transportation, there will be those that will resist, and those that enjoy the marvels that technology brings.
> 
> See you guys on the mountain! Have fun, and stay safe!


Which brings us to this:





Bicycles don't have motors; plain and simple.


----------



## JRT_in_WMass (Jul 22, 2013)

Moe Ped said:


> *Some* bicycles don't have motors; plain and simple.


I fixed that error of omission for you.


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

Hey, combine the self driving bicycle with one of those drone controller headsets and anyone can mtb from their couch!


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

JRT_in_WMass said:


> I fixed that error of omission for you.


Not really; if a bicycle has a motor it's called a motorcycle. This has been covered before. Many times.

Motorcycles shouldn't be on non-motorized trails. Should there be more motorized trails? Yes.

I'm OK with e-biking being considered a sport. It's just not the sport of bicycling.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

Its still the jocks verses the motorheads just like in school 40 years ago...


----------



## Whiptastic (Mar 14, 2016)

Moe Ped said:


> Which brings us to this:
> ...
> Bicycles don't have motors; plain and simple.


 I had a self-driving bicycle, but it got mad at me and rode off into the sunset; then boarded a fairy to Fizinog. Once there the Gruntsnarlers beat it to death with their bare hands and threw it off a cliff. That prompted my "smart" refrigerator to lock its' doors in protest. As a result I lost 20lbs. and feel the best I have in years! 


Seriously though, the reality is that we are a nation of laws. I for one am thankful for the thought out California laws regarding this topic. I enjoy riding both MTB's and eMTB's. As I age, I can see the eMTB getting more use.  I currently enjoy riding with my group of others on MTB's without any conflicts.

When it comes to "racing" or "competition" it is clear as a sunny SoCal day that any artificial energy assistance of any type should be excluded to keep the playing field even and the ego rights of winning fair.

I want to know what Mr. Pig is lacing his after ride microbrew with? If it can add as much extra power as it does creativity I won't need my eMTB anymore.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Whiptastic said:


> I want to know what Mr. Pig is lacing his after ride microbrew with?


eBiker blood! ;0)


----------



## cmg (Mar 13, 2012)

Moe Ped said:


> Which brings us to this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


oh man l cant wait till April 1, the rest of April (and my life) lll be carving trails to work all while lm working, what a great time to be alive.......

wait......what?


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Making my list of places to ride my e bike this summer Santos fl Alifa river I am adding NC for the first time and Ohio, GA too lots of fun times ahead for the e biker , I called the president of my local Mt bike club was told don't worry get out in ride our trails and welcomed me to come to meetings with my ebike . The tide is changing more and more ppl are seeing the ebike as a benefit to the MT bike community I just did my first winter riding in over 20yrs loved it the GF thought I was crazy E bikes open so many doors .


----------



## portnuefpeddler (Jun 14, 2016)

1niceride said:


> Its still the jocks verses the motorheads just like in school 40 years ago...


 I'm not sure where I fit in there, but I find that pretty much right on. I love the snide comments of " I don't know about you, but I ride for the exercise," as a way of dissing e bikes. Wow...that sounds like fun, riding for exercise! I ride for FUN. For one thing, I don't care what reason someone else rides for, it matters not a whit to me. And it obviously infers you get NO exercise riding an e mtb bike, and that right there tells me they don't know what they're talking about. Just because (better state the obvious, it seems needed here) you get less exercise on an e bike on a given route, doesn't mean you get NO exercise, duhhh.

Like just because some e bikes can go faster uphill doesn't mean that they are going to be actually ridden faster uphill. Going "too fast" is going too fast, when I ride with regular mtbr's I ride their speeds or slower and it is an absolute non issue. The only speed issues I've encountered have been from guys blasting downhill. I really don't care if your e bike goes 100 mph, as long as you ride it at regular bike speeds when on a trail with others. Just like how I don't drive my 100 mph capable car through a 25 mph school zone at 100, it's the same frigging concept.

IN CONCLUSION: I chime in here very rarely, every few months, and once again have yet to see or hear of any major problems that e bikes are causing. No hordes of hikers getting mowed down, no established single tracks closing down because of abusive e bikers, STILL much ado about nothing. I snowboard every day, and man does this whole ebike thing remind me of the doom and gloom that was coming, according to skiers at the time, from allowing boarders on the ski hill! We go the same speed the skiers do, and practice the same traffic rules, and there is zero problems, we all get along just fine. An out of control and reckless boarder is no more a hazard then a jerk skier. I'm done, the lift opens in a half hour, carry on you guys. Maybe I'll check back in, in a couple months and see if the end of the regular mtbr world due to e bike proliferation has occurred, or not.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

portnuefpeddler said:


> IN CONCLUSION: I chime in here very rarely, every few months, and once again have yet to see or hear of any major problems that e bikes are causing.


E-mountain mopeds are not causing any problems here because:

1. they are illegal to ride on trails
2. they are new so not many are in the area

These factors and the current situation doesn't mean they won't cause issues when there are enough of them out there and people start trying to poach trails they are not allowed to ride.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

JRT_in_WMass said:


> The broader population of Americans are far less ambitious about exercising, which is why many are overweight or obese. They will spend money on contraptions to exercise, but do not tend to actually use those contraptions, because doing so requires some effort with little near term reward. If ebikes gain popularity, those might be interesting enough to get the fatties off of the couch and out of the house where they might socially engage, perhaps rebuilding some interaction within the community while also getting a little exercise, of which they get none while sitting on the couch in front of the television screen watching faux news broadcasts.


I'll agree with this, which is my hope that people start to use ebikes as transportation, on bike paths and as a way to get out and about. Which if reading ebike forums is any indication of use, is what 99% of new ebikers use their ebikes for. Emtb riders are almost without exception current or ex mtb riders, or with maybe a few ex moto guys. I don't have any sympathy with the argument that emtbs are necessary to enable people to excercise, any more than mtb access is. It's just people wanting to use new toys, it's not going to get couch sitters up and out.


----------



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

portnuefpeddler said:


> IN CONCLUSION: I chime in here very rarely, every few months, and once again have yet to see or hear of any major problems that e bikes are causing. No hordes of hikers getting mowed down, no established single tracks closing down because of abusive e bikers, STILL much ado about nothing.


E-bikes are still in their infancy and basically not allowed on 99% of hiking trails so it's not surprising that there aren't any problems yet, that doesn't mean that careful consideration shouldn't be used when implementing policies though.

Electric bikes are fundamentally different (not bad/evil) than bicycles and skis vs. snowboards just isn't an accurate analogy.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Originally Posted by portnuefpeddler 

IN CONCLUSION: I chime in here very rarely, every few months, and once again have yet to see or hear of any major problems that e bikes are causing. No hordes of hikers getting mowed down, no established single tracks closing down because of abusive e bikers, STILL much ado about nothing. Yep in my 4yrs of riding e bikes not one problem has been caused by e bikes on trails and E bikes have no need for 7ft wooden jumps and high banks walls on public trails also we slow down for hikes and dog walkers plus ther is no need to bomb down hills to carry speed nope just pick your way down and say a few kind words to the hiker as you slowly pass him .


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

JRT_in_WMass said:


> I largely agree with you, but there are some who try to resist change. For example, there are the Luddite bicycle purists who while only a small segment of the total population, think that their use is the only valid use. Luddite bicycle purists ride penny farthings, and prefer to do so both naked and drunk. Luddite bicycle purists firmly believe that the modern chain driven contraptions which some refer to as being "safety bicycles" are not real bicycles at all, and they also firmly believe that the riders of those contraptions are spoiling their sport called bicycling. Luddites want to live in an earlier century and are only deluding themselves into thinking they can slow the advance of time.
> View attachment 1119598
> 
> 
> The broader population of Americans are far less ambitious about exercising, which is why many are overweight or obese. They will spend money on contraptions to exercise, but do not tend to actually use those contraptions, because doing so requires some effort with little near term reward. If ebikes gain popularity, those might be interesting enough to get the fatties off of the couch and out of the house where they might socially engage, perhaps rebuilding some interaction within the community while also getting a little exercise, of which they get none while sitting on the couch in front of the television screen watching faux news broadcasts.


 Luddite? Or some realize that bikes don't have motors. And where I pedal for the most part here in MA, no motorized vehicles allowed on multi use trails. People needing exercise? Just pedal, walk, jog, run, no motor needed.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

portnuefpeddler said:


> I'm not sure where I fit in there, but I find that pretty much right on. I love the snide comments of " I don't know about you, but I ride for the exercise," as a way of dissing e bikes. Wow...that sounds like fun, riding for exercise! I ride for FUN. For one thing, I don't care what reason someone else rides for, it matters not a whit to me. And it obviously infers you get NO exercise riding an e mtb bike, and that right there tells me they don't know what they're talking about. Just because (better state the obvious, it seems needed here) you get less exercise on an e bike on a given route, doesn't mean you get NO exercise, duhhh.
> 
> Like just because some e bikes can go faster uphill doesn't mean that they are going to be actually ridden faster uphill. Going "too fast" is going too fast, when I ride with regular mtbr's I ride their speeds or slower and it is an absolute non issue. The only speed issues I've encountered have been from guys blasting downhill. I really don't care if your e bike goes 100 mph, as long as you ride it at regular bike speeds when on a trail with others. Just like how I don't drive my 100 mph capable car through a 25 mph school zone at 100, it's the same frigging concept.
> 
> IN CONCLUSION: I chime in here very rarely, every few months, and once again have yet to see or hear of any major problems that e bikes are causing. No hordes of hikers getting mowed down, no established single tracks closing down because of abusive e bikers, STILL much ado about nothing. I snowboard every day, and man does this whole ebike thing remind me of the doom and gloom that was coming, according to skiers at the time, from allowing boarders on the ski hill! We go the same speed the skiers do, and practice the same traffic rules, and there is zero problems, we all get along just fine. An out of control and reckless boarder is no more a hazard then a jerk skier. I'm done, the lift opens in a half hour, carry on you guys. Maybe I'll check back in, in a couple months and see if the end of the regular mtbr world due to e bike proliferation has occurred, or not.


 So your snowboard has a motor?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

eBikesmith said:


> For the record, I do not yet profit off of ebikes. Do I repair bikes in general for family and friends? Yes. Do I specialize in repairing ebikes specifically? Yes. Do I plan on possibly starting an ebike shop? I actually really want to, and probably plan on doing so. With that aside, I don't think it's fair to discount my points or intentions, because first and foremost, I love bicycles. I daily commute, and mountain bike on a weekly basis and want nothin less than to share this experience with others.
> 
> Simply put, I haven't heard one logical explanation as to why ebikes shouldn't be allowed on non-motorized trails. When they originially said non-motorized, they were referring to dirt bikes that can ruin trails, scare horses, injure hikers, and pollute with the enivroment with emissions and noise. Lets not get it twisted. This doesn't apply to eMTBs. 'Just because they are' shouldn't be considered a valid point. And saying that there is potential for abuse; how is that a reason for a blanket ban? (I feel this is the argument used to ban firearms.)
> 
> Somebody just pointed out that eMTBs are bad for the sport. I politely disagree. There are SO many people that can be introduced to the sport thanks to eMTBs. Older folks. People with disabilities. People who may currently be out of shape that are intimidated to come ride. And pretty much every average Joe who would like to shift the work/reward ratio in their favor (myself included). This could be a game changer for the whole industry. Creating unnecessary restrictions for all these people is not cool.


 No cool is thinking that adding a motor to a bike is not making it a whole 'nother thing. Here in MA where I ride, not legal for the most part( maybe 6 legal areas or so) So there's that. Some older out of shape guy or gal with no skills and no cardio base is your new hope? Hmmm. A bike without a motor would work too. And at 20-30 lbs lighter might be easier to learn on. E mt bikes? Where would you draw the line, 250 watts, 2,000 watts and up. How to tell by looking, you can't . After market mods, fake stickers. Already there.


----------



## SeaBass_ (Apr 7, 2006)

leeboh said:


> So your snowboard has a motor?


Beat me to it!


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

leeboh said:


> So your snowboard has a motor?


What he means is that the chair lift has a motor.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

leeboh said:


> No cool is thinking that adding a motor to a bike is not making it a whole 'nother thing. Here in MA where I ride, not legal for the most part( maybe 6 legal areas or so) So there's that. Some older out of shape guy or gal with no skills and no cardio base is your new hope? Hmmm. A bike without a motor would work too. And at 20-30 lbs lighter might be easier to learn on. E mt bikes? Where would you draw the line, 250 watts, 2,000 watts and up. How to tell by looking, you can't . After market mods, fake stickers. Already there.


You are arguing with this:

http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/custom-specialized-demo-8-emtb-build-1033487.html

Note that he is going beyond your perameters: 3kW Cyclone Drive and a Cycle Analyst

What happens when things like this end up on our trails.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

tiretracks said:


> What did they prove? Nothing but innuendo and unsupported here say. C'mon you guy's are supposed to be smarter than that. Guess not.


 Why did the whole British TT bikes all weigh more than 800 grams than the competition? I'm no weight weeny roadie, I do know that pro roadies are ocd about weight. And TT bikes? really?


----------



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

leeboh said:


> Why did the whole British TT bikes all weigh more than 800 grams than the competition? I'm no weight weeny roadie, I do know that pro roadies are ocd about weight. And TT bikes? really?


They were constantly scanning the peloton with thermal imaging cameras during the Tour. I've no doubt that motors may have been used in the past but because they are easy to detect it seems unlikely anyone could get away with using them in any big time race these days. I'm guessing there's more of a market for them among affluent retirees and mid-league racers.


----------

