# Colorado land managers on e bikes



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

I always knew it would be just a matter of time before land managers found themselves on an eMTB. This should be interesting...https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/colorado-land-managers-are-using-electric-bikes/


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Taken for a spin, rescue and trail access. Just like the atvs at my local stuff.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Taken for a spin, rescue and trail access. Just like the atvs at my local stuff.


It doesn't really matter how or why they get in the hands of land managers, it's the fact that they have.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Since they use quads at my local CO state park on much of the "singletrack", I'd be glad to see them switch to ebikes. Quads make for weird lines...


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

So what happens when a land manager rides a PAS bike and likes it?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

What happens when they run across one of these?

http://forums.mtbr.com/classifieds/...n-bike-27-5-tires-38mph-1079456-new-post.html


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> So what happens when a land manager rides a PAS bike and likes it?


You don't think they like the quads? But yet they don't open the trails to them.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> You don't think they like the quads? But yet they don't open the trails to them.


They're nothing like a quad. C'mon man. That's crazy talk. Land managers have brought in ebikes to see how they would work in the park system. Now why would they do that if they were 100% opposed to them?


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

ALimon said:


> Now why would they do that if they were 100% opposed to them?


Nobody is 100% opposed to ebikes....okay somebody is, but I don't know them...I've ridden motorcycles since I was 17. I think people on motorized forms of recreaction should have a place to go. That said it's not on mountain bike/hiking trails.

Land managers are not stopping ebikes from trails because they hate them. The ones that are making that choice don't see them as being a good fit 100% human powered recreation. That's a reasonable viewpoint.

Locally ATVs and pickups are used to conduct SAR operations and maintain trails, but the trails are still limited to non-motorized use for the public.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> They're nothing like a quad. C'mon man. That's crazy talk. Land managers have brought in ebikes to see how they would work in the park system. Now why would they do that if they were 100% opposed to them?


Did you read the article?

I never said ebikes were "like a quad". They are using them to replace ice vehicles and hiking to areas they can't reach with their current ice vehicles. "They" as in the staff.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> So what happens when a land manager rides a PAS bike and likes it?


Most here have ridden them, there's been demos, and number like ebikes, and some plan on getting one, they just don't think a 750w ebike is appropriate on the trails they manage. All of them recognize the difference between them and a bicycle, even more so after riding them. I fully support a land managers decision to allow, or not allow them, they know their particular situations better than you or I.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

life behind bars said:


> What happens when they run across one of these?
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/classifieds/...n-bike-27-5-tires-38mph-1079456-new-post.html


As soon as I saw that posting I deleted it. We don't allow the discussion of 3000w electric motorcycles, we certainly are not going to allow them to be sold through here.



Harryman said:


> Most here have ridden them, there's been demos, and number like ebikes, and some plan on getting one, they just don't think a 750w ebike is appropriate on the trails they manage. All of them recognize the difference between them and a bicycle, even more so after riding them. *I fully support a land managers decision to allow, or not allow them, they know their particular situations better than you or I.*


Harryman - your posts once again are always top notch.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> Most here have ridden them, there's been demos, and number like ebikes, and some plan on getting one, they just don't think a 750w ebike is appropriate on the trails they manage. All of them recognize the difference between them and a bicycle, even more so after riding them. I fully support a land managers decision to allow, or not allow them, they know their particular situations better than you or I.


I also agree that 750w is overkill.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Did you read the article?
> 
> I never said ebikes were "like a quad". They are using them to replace ice vehicles and hiking to areas they can't reach with their current ice vehicles. "They" as in the staff.


?We wanted to give staff a better idea of the power and capabilities the bikes have,? said Dellaca. ?Both in their applications as a tool for the Parks and how they might affect different user groups on trails.?

I read it, and based on their comments they're looking at ebikes beyind just being tools for the park.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> ?We wanted to give staff a better idea of the power and capabilities the bikes have,? said Dellaca. ?Both in their applications as a tool for the Parks and how they might affect different user groups on trails.?
> 
> I read it, and based on their comments they're looking at ebikes beyind just being tools for the park.


Ok, but:



Harryman said:


> Most here have ridden them, there's been demos, and number like ebikes, and some plan on getting one, they just don't think a 750w ebike is appropriate on the trails they manage. All of them recognize the difference between them and a bicycle, even more so after riding them. I fully support a land managers decision to allow, or not allow them, they know their particular situations better than you or I.


And as I've said before, I think they are fine on some trails, just not all trails. Land managers who know their situations should decided to allow or not.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Ok, but:
> 
> And as I've said before, I think they are fine on some trails, just not all trails. Land managers who know their situations should decided to allow or not.


I totally agree with that. I think the right approach is to designate select trails for those who want to ride an eMTB. Total access, not necessary. No access, not realistic. I like the fact that the land managers do recognize a new segment and want to see what it's all about before it shows up on their door step and they don't have an answer for it.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I like the fact that the land managers do recognize a new segment and want to see what it's all about before it shows up on their door step and they don't have an answer for it.


They've had plenty of time to formulate an answer and many have. E-bikes are hardly a "new segment" as this thread from almost 6 years ago, http://forums.mtbr.com/trail-building-advocacy/electric-bikes-mtb-trails-809098.html so aptly demonstrates.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> They've had plenty of time to formulate an answer and many have. E-bikes are hardly a "new segment" as this thread from almost 6 years ago, http://forums.mtbr.com/trail-building-advocacy/electric-bikes-mtb-trails-809098.html so aptly demonstrates.


And 6 years ago you didn't have every manufacturer producing an eMTB.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I own an e-bike and I've ridden lots of them - and I *still* think they don't belong on many trails, especially given the 750w US Class 1 power limit and total lack of regulation of manufacturers in the US.

Now, if the EU standard had been adopted, I think you might change my mind a bit. For me, the bottom line is that I'm totally ok with a vehicle that makes mountain biking *easier*. For even the most handicapped/out of shape rider, that's probably only going to require 100-150W of power and an assist cutoff at 15mph or less to allow a mountain bike type experience, but I can live with 250W. What I can't live with is a vehicle that makes the rider significantly faster than even a fit/motivated person, because speed is already the #1 problem we face for trail access. 

I think e-bikes are a great tool. They are not ok for everyone everywhere for recreation. I would imagine a lot of land managers with similar experience feel the same way. 

-Walt


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

vikb said:


> Nobody is 100% opposed to ebikes....okay somebody is, but I don't know them...I've ridden motorcycles since I was 17. I think people on motorized forms of recreaction should have a place to go. That said it's not on mountain bike/hiking trails.
> 
> Land managers are not stopping ebikes from trails because they hate them. The ones that are making that choice don't see them as being a good fit 100% human powered recreation. That's a reasonable viewpoint.
> 
> Locally ATVs and pickups are used to conduct SAR operations and maintain trails, but the trails are still limited to non-motorized use for the public.


Where are all these motorized only trails? Some of my favorite bicycle trails allow motorcycles while seeing lots of hiking traffic. Multi use means all users including engines and motors. Partial use means bike/hike/horse, and exclusive use means hike only. The trails that allow trailscooters are still bike and hike trails.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> I own an e-bike and I've ridden lots of them - and I *still* think they don't belong on many trails, especially given the 750w US Class 1 power limit and total lack of regulation of manufacturers in the US.
> 
> Now, if the EU standard had been adopted, I think you might change my mind a bit. For me, the bottom line is that I'm totally ok with a vehicle that makes mountain biking *easier*. For even the most handicapped/out of shape rider, that's probably only going to require 100-150W of power and an assist cutoff at 15mph or less to allow a mountain bike type experience, but I can live with 250W. What I can't live with is a vehicle that makes the rider significantly faster than even a fit/motivated person, because speed is already the #1 problem we face for trail access.
> 
> ...


That's the thing, opening up every trail to e-bikes and bikes would still mean that there are places they can't or won't go. There are trails that nobody uses. Strava is a great app that allows you to see where particular user groups tend to congregate and then you can pick a trail where you are unlikely to see particular users. If there are trails were bicycles, pedal assist, horses, motorcycles, or dogs are found, then possible solutions can be determined.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Walt said:


> I own an e-bike and I've ridden lots of them - and I *still* think they don't belong on many trails, especially given the 750w US Class 1 power limit and total lack of regulation of manufacturers in the US.
> 
> Now, if the EU standard had been adopted, I think you might change my mind a bit. For me, the bottom line is that I'm totally ok with a vehicle that makes mountain biking *easier*. For even the most handicapped/out of shape rider, that's probably only going to require 100-150W of power and an assist cutoff at 15mph or less to allow a mountain bike type experience, but I can live with 250W. What I can't live with is a vehicle that makes the rider significantly faster than even a fit/motivated person, because speed is already the #1 problem we face for trail access.
> 
> ...


The Specialized Levo is 530 watts. Absolutely an amazing eMTB. It's performance is no faster than a fast pro would ride. Specialized designed this bike to fit in on multi use trails without a doubt. Nothing obnoxious about the bike. I rode it, I liked it on punchy climbs, hated it on flowing pump sections where it would shut off. So maybe this watts thing is a bit over rated. I'm not sure if you've ridden a Levo Walt, but If so, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the bike.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Linktung said:


> Where are all these motorized only trails? Some of my favorite bicycle trails allow motorcycles while seeing lots of hiking traffic. Multi use means all users including engines and motors. Partial use means bike/hike/horse, and exclusive use means hike only. The trails that allow trailscooters are still bike and hike trails.


Umm, no. Current english that applies to trail verbage in the US, multi use means hikers, bikers, dog walkers and sometimes horses.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> The Specialized Levo is 530 watts. Absolutely an amazing eMTB. It's performance is no faster than a fast pro would ride. Specialized designed this bike to fit in on multi use trails without a doubt. Nothing obnoxious about the bike. I rode it, I liked it on punchy climbs, hated it on flowing pump sections where it would shut off. So maybe this watts thing is a bit over rated. I'm not sure if you've ridden a Levo Walt, but If so, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the bike.


I have ridden a Levo (from a couple of years ago when it was first introduced, I think it has changed a bit since then). My thoughts:
-Range sucks if you go turbo a lot, but batteries will improve. 
-For flat to slight uphill stuff (up to about 5% grade), it will (if desired) make you *very* fast, to the point that on many trails it would be a problem (ie 2-way trails with bad sight lines). I could easily hit the limiter on ~5% grade stuff - 18-20mph rather than 10-12. Jumping stuff and wishing for berms/braking into the corners. That's where the difference in speed is most obvious.
-For steeper climbs, speed can be much faster than an unassisted rider, of course, but probably not enough to be a problem (ie 8-10mph rather than 3-5). 
-The limiter is a MAJOR bummer on the road/fire road when trying to get *to* the trail (feels like you dropped an anchor when the motor cuts) and I was wondering what it would take to dongle/delimit right away.

If the limiter cut out at 15 it would solve the flat/slight climb problem, but it would also be quite horrible in any non-trail situation. So it's a tough situation in that any bike that's going to be 100% sure to be no problem on singletrack is also going to be dead awful getting there in the first place.

For directional trails that are mostly used by bikes, I think they are fine. For MUT with 2-way traffic, the trail would need to be appropriate (ie, avoid long straights into blind corners). Tight/twisty NE trails would be mostly fine, you'd probably not go meaningfully faster than an unassisted rider. A lot of legacy MUT in the Western US probably isn't so great, though.

Around here there's also a legal issue - most of our trails depend on recreation and conservation easements that specify no motors. There is probably no way around that short of renegotiating the easements, which would be... quite a task.

-Walt


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

leeboh said:


> Umm, no. Current english that applies to trail verbage in the US, multi use means hikers, bikers, dog walkers and sometimes horses.


There are entire organizations here in the US that are named around multi use including motors.

Regardless, what do you call trails that allow bikes, horses, hikers, motorized? The people who use multiuse in this scenario are the ones who understand the word multiple.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Linktung said:


> There are entire organizations here in the US that are named around multi use including motors.
> 
> Regardless, what do you call trails that allow bikes, horses, hikers, motorized? The people who use multiuse in this scenario are the ones who understand the word multiple.


That is absolutely true, but in the majority of the US the ship has sailed on motorized vehicles on singletrack - and hence "MUT" is a term that *most* people use to describe trails open to all nonmotorized users.

It does work fine in places with low user density, but those trails have become rarer and rarer (as a former enduro/hare scramble guy, I should know) and they are now practically nonexistent in lots of places.

-Walt


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

ALimon said:


> The Specialized Levo is 530 watts. Absolutely an amazing eMTB. It's performance is no faster than a fast pro would ride. Specialized designed this bike to fit in on multi use trails without a doubt. Nothing obnoxious about the bike. I rode it, I liked it on punchy climbs, hated it on flowing pump sections where it would shut off. So maybe this watts thing is a bit over rated. I'm not sure if you've ridden a Levo Walt, but If so, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the bike.


I have been riding 2 levo for a year now, both in town and in the mountains, and they are great for green or blue trails. Their weight is not an asset for black trails or rock gardens. That's where the great shocks and fat tires are useful. I still take them, but will have a hard time keeping up with regular MTBs. It took me a couple of rides to tune my style and being efficient going uphill. It's essential when you ride an Ebike, to know when to drop the assistance to a lesser level to avoid to gain too much speed going uphill.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

Walt said:


> I have ridden a Levo (from a couple of years ago when it was first introduced, I think it has changed a bit since then). My thoughts:
> -Range sucks if you go turbo a lot, but batteries will improve.
> -For flat to slight uphill stuff (up to about 5% grade), it will (if desired) make you *very* fast, to the point that on many trails it would be a problem (ie 2-way trails with bad sight lines). I could easily hit the limiter on ~5% grade stuff - 18-20mph rather than 10-12. Jumping stuff and wishing for berms/braking into the corners. That's where the difference in speed is most obvious.
> -For steeper climbs, speed can be much faster than an unassisted rider, of course, but probably not enough to be a problem (ie 8-10mph rather than 3-5).
> ...


While I agree that there are many issues needed to iron out about e-bike access and limits, I never get the "I can go up hill faster now so that is a danger to others" argument. That same trail would have the exact same issues if you were headed downhill on any bike, a 5% grade would probably allow any bike to exceed 20 mph if desired. At some point rider responsibility must be factored into the equation and riders should not be bombing down (or up) trails that don't allow proper safety margins for meeting hikers/bikers/riders.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Zinfan said:


> While I agree that there are many issues needed to iron out about e-bike access and limits, I never get the "I can go up hill faster now so that is a danger to others" argument. That same trail would have the exact same issues if you were headed downhill on any bike, a 5% grade would probably allow any bike to exceed 20 mph if desired. At some point rider responsibility must be factored into the equation and riders should not be bombing down (or up) trails that don't allow proper safety margins for meeting hikers/bikers/riders.


2-way bike traffic (closing speeds) is a problem, as are hiker expectations about traffic coming uphill.

I have actually already experienced this - descending (at a ~15mph) on low visibility singletrack and encountering e-bikes coming up at ~15mph when normal bikes would do maybe 8. No collision but it was exciting. If I'd been pushing to go fast, it could have been ugly. When you add climbing speed (or speed on the flats) on 2-way trails, you dramatically increase closing speeds. I'm sure you understand why that's bad.

Agreed that overall top speed (ie, descending) is no higher. Gravity produces a lot of watts!

-Walt


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> 2-way bike traffic (closing speeds) is a problem, as are hiker expectations about traffic coming uphill.
> 
> I have actually already experienced this - descending (at a ~15mph) on low visibility singletrack and encountering e-bikes coming up at ~15mph when normal bikes would do maybe 8. No collision but it was exciting. If I'd been pushing to go fast, it could have been ugly. When you add climbing speed (or speed on the flats) on 2-way trails, you dramatically increase closing speeds. I'm sure you understand why that's bad.
> 
> ...


Now you have to go slower on the downhills, that sounds like a win for all trail users.....hooray for ebikes!!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Linktung said:


> Now you have to go slower on the downhills, that sounds like a win for all trail users.....hooray for ebikes!!


Not at all - I was in great control and had plenty of time to react to/stop for normal uphill traffic (whether hikers or horses or bikes). Even at a careful, controlled speed - it was dangerous *for everyone involved*.

That's not good (or fun) for anyone. On a flatter trail, you could have e-bike vs. e-bike at 40mph closing speed. Erm... not a lot of land managers are going to be happy about that idea.

Closing speed is the #1 problem on MUTs. Period. Ask any land manager you want about this and you'll get the same answer. Bikes going slow on the climbs is quite literally the only reason they are tolerated in many places - hikers and other users can plan ahead for where and from what direction they will encounter mountain bikes descending, and expect that everywhere else, they'll be not much faster than a trail runner.

As I said, not all trails have sight line problems or 2-way traffic (or non-bike traffic). But many do. You can't add speed and expect no consequences.

-Walt


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Zinfan said:


> While I agree that there are many issues needed to iron out about e-bike access and limits, I never get the "I can go up hill faster now so that is a danger to others" argument. That same trail would have the exact same issues if you were headed downhill on any bike, a 5% grade would probably allow any bike to exceed 20 mph if desired. At some point rider responsibility must be factored into the equation and riders should not be bombing down (or up) trails that don't allow proper safety margins for meeting hikers/bikers/riders.


Great point. I've noticed rider responsibility is often overlooked when discussing ebike climbing/closing speeds. I get the whole closing speed thing, but we've had closing speed issues long before ebikes showed up. I've had plenty of close calls, all by knuckleheads bombing blind corners and riding way too fast for the trail conditions, zero responsibility. It's hard to point a finger at an ebike for climbing too fast when you have a pedal bike descending too fast also. We all like to bomb the downhills, but you have to be smart about when and where you do it.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> Not at all - I was in great control and had plenty of time to react to/stop for normal uphill traffic (whether hikers or horses or bikes). Even at a careful, controlled speed - it was dangerous *for everyone involved*.
> 
> That's not good (or fun) for anyone. On a flatter trail, you could have e-bike vs. e-bike at 40mph closing speed. Erm... not a lot of land managers are going to be happy about that idea.
> 
> ...


15 mph on a downhill with bad sight lines isn't a carefull, controlled speed and you almost took out some riders because of it. Downhill 15 mph carries much more force then an an uphill rider. You now need to be going much slower or you run the risk of hitting an ebiker. As a hiker, I would rather have an ebiker going uphill at 25mph then have an ebiker decending at 15mph. Downhill acceleration is far more unpredictable and dangerous then uphill acceleration. Other user groups could care less about bike on bike crashes, and since they aren't decending at 15 mph they don't have your vulnerabilities in this scenario. Dogs are allowed on Park City trails and on my best day on a pedelec, I am much slower uphill then the average canine. If you need slow uphill speeds, you are going too fast. Good thing we have people on ebikes now to give you some motivation for safe behavior.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I would like to go riding with guys that can go 20 mph uphill on a Levo. If there is any grade or features, I call BS. I have spent alot of time on Emtb and Eroad bikes all thru the mountains and unless you’re Froome or Saigon, it ain’t happening.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Great point. I've noticed rider responsibility is often overlooked when discussing ebike climbing/closing speeds. I get the whole closing speed thing, but we've had closing speed issues long before ebikes showed up. I've had plenty of close calls, all by knuckleheads bombing blind corners and riding way too fast for the trail conditions, zero responsibility. It's hard to point a finger at an ebike for climbing too fast when you have a pedal bike descending too fast also. We all like to bomb the downhills, but you have to be smart about when and where you do it.


Land managers have long ago learned that they have to manage for the lowest common demoninator. So, sure, there are idiots on mtbs that ride too fast in every possible scenario, which on a mtb is mostly on descents, since you're limited by how fit you are everywhere else. Providing more power via a motor simply increases the number of riders who are now able to ride faster in more situations, allowing more idiots to ride faster in the wrong places. Ofc, not everyone is an idiot, but that's not who creates problems for the LM's.

If you don't think adding a few miles per hour to closing speeds is an issue, would you rather walk around a corner and into another walker, or run around a corner into another runner? There's only about a 5mph difference between walking and running speeds.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> Land managers have long ago learned that they have to manage for the lowest common demoninator. So, sure, there are idiots on mtbs that ride too fast in every possible scenario, which on a mtb is mostly on descents, since you're limited by how fit you are everywhere else. Providing more power via a motor simply increases the number of riders who are now able to ride faster in more situations, allowing more idiots to ride faster in the wrong places. Ofc, not everyone is an idiot, but that's not who creates problems for the LM's.
> 
> If you don't think adding a few miles per hour to closing speeds is an issue, would you rather walk around a corner and into another walker, or run around a corner into another runner? There's only about a 5mph difference between walking and running speeds.


I think this article has shown that land managers, like many, are curious as to how the ebike can be utilized both as a work tool and a recreational bike. I've always said, once a land manager gets a taste of an ebike like the Levo, it will open up access to some extent. It's inevitable IMO. TIme will tell.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Linktung said:


> 15 mph on a downhill with bad sight lines isn't a carefull, controlled speed and you almost took out some riders because of it. Downhill 15 mph carries much more force then an an uphill rider. You now need to be going much slower or you run the risk of hitting an ebiker. As a hiker, I would rather have an ebiker going uphill at 25mph then have an ebiker decending at 15mph. Downhill acceleration is far more unpredictable and dangerous then uphill acceleration. Other user groups could care less about bike on bike crashes, and since they aren't decending at 15 mph they don't have your vulnerabilities in this scenario. Dogs are allowed on Park City trails and on my best day on a pedelec, I am much slower uphill then the average canine. If you need slow uphill speeds, you are going too fast. Good thing we have people on ebikes now to give you some motivation for safe behavior.


I think this is a fascinating idea, because indeed, it's easier to stop going uphill than downhill (cut the power and your speed drops a LOT faster). In an ideal world on MUT, we'd ride uphill fast and downhill slow.

The thing is, though, it would mean the end of normal mountain biking as we know it:
-E bikes would go uphill at 15-20mph (super fun).
-Normal mountain bikes would go uphill at the usual 3-10mph.
-All downhill bikes (powered or not) would have to go downhill at <10mph.

Unpowered bikes would go essentially the same (trail runner) speed the entire ride.

That doesn't sound very fun for anyone but the e-bike rider - if the goal is to *share* the experience with normal bikes, this scenario won't really work, as it's a complete reconfiguration of the user experience for all folks on wheels.

-Walt


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Gutch said:


> I would like to go riding with guys that can go 20 mph uphill on a Levo. If there is any grade or features, I call BS. I have spent alot of time on Emtb and Eroad bikes all thru the mountains and unless you're Froome or Saigon, it ain't happening.


I totally agree. I found climbing on the Levo to be easier more so than faster. I'll take Froome on a climb against anyone here on a Levo.

I guesss that kind of puts things in prospective. An average joe on a Levo would get destroyed by a pro on a pedal bike.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Gutch said:


> I would like to go riding with guys that can go 20 mph uphill on a Levo. If there is any grade or features, I call BS. I have spent alot of time on Emtb and Eroad bikes all thru the mountains and unless you're Froome or Saigon, it ain't happening.


I can very easily do it on a <5% grade, without even going Turbo. Of course if there are technical features or steeper grades or sharp turns, that will slow you down. But it did turn mild uphills into (as many manufacturers advertise) uphill flow trails - as in, braking into corners and getting a little air on small bumps.

Now, for most folks, that will require some considerable effort. But it's doable if you're sort of fit and motivated to do it. You'll annihilate the battery but those have already improved and will continue to - and some people just want to go for a 45 minute lunchtime shred session, there's plenty enough juice to turbo that.

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I think this article has shown that land managers, like many, are curious as to how the ebike can be utilized both as a work tool and a recreational bike. I've always said, once a land manager gets a taste of an ebike like the Levo, it will open up access to some extent. It's inevitable IMO. TIme will tell.


The land managers here did ride Levos, which led to still not allowing access. Their call, some will, some won't.

Unless you're talking about Europe, the "ebike like a Levo" is a class of ebike that doesn't exist in the US, land managers have to manage based on what the law allows, and what they think the impact of that law will be in 5 - 10 years. They don't rewrite code very often. So, they're looking at 750w emtbs, not the current 250w emtbs. Maintaining that a "ebike like a Levo" is an example of what the future holds is no more realistic than using 100w emtbs as your example.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Walt said:


> I think this is a fascinating idea, because indeed, it's easier to stop going uphill than downhill (cut the power and your speed drops a LOT faster). In an ideal world on MUT, we'd ride uphill fast and downhill slow.
> 
> The thing is, though, it would mean the end of normal mountain biking as we know it:
> -E bikes would go uphill at 15-20mph (super fun).
> ...


Nonsense


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> The land managers here did ride Levos, which led to still not allowing access. Their call, some will, some won't.
> 
> Unless you're talking about Europe, the "ebike like a Levo" is a class of ebike that doesn't exist in the US, land managers have to manage based on what the law allows, and what they think the impact of that law will be in 5 - 10 years. They don't rewrite code very often. So, they're looking at 750w emtbs, not the current 250w emtbs. Maintaining that a "ebike like a Levo" is an example of what the future holds is no more realistic than using 100w emtbs as your example.


I'm not sure the laws need to be rewritten. I think when the laws were written PAS bikes didn't exist. The non motorized vehicles they were referring to were autos, dirt bikes,quads etc... That's what they were targeting. Now comes along a bike with a PAS motor, no throttle, cuts off at 18-20mph. And at best rides like a top level pro. It's not a bicycle, it's not a motorcycle, and for that reason, it deserves a whole new classification.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Falls under the " motorized vehicle" classification. Do it have a motor? Yes it does. Already rules and regs in place for those. Gas, electric whatev. Motorized. Wishful thinking only gets you so far.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

leeboh said:


> Falls under the " motorized vehicle" classification. Do it have a motor? Yes it does. Already rules and regs in place for those. Gas, electric whatev. Motorized. Wishful thinking only gets you so far.


I don't really think, assuming you can keep people on class 1 bikes, that it's comparable to a motorcycle. Realistically the power output is a couple orders of magnitude less, the impact is way lower, etc.

The key is to keep people at class 1, and that will be really hard and is the main potential problem. If someone could assure me that EU class 1 bikes are all that would ever see dirt, I'd be 100% behind it, because I have a ton of elderly neighbors I'd like to ride with. The potential for enhancing human happiness and well being is certainly there - but so is the potential for abuse and big problems.

-Walt


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Falls under the " motorized vehicle" classification. Do it have a motor? Yes it does. Already rules and regs in place for those. Gas, electric whatev. Motorized. Wishful thinking only gets you so far.


Stop being so stubborn. You're narrow minded approach makes no sense. It's apparent your hate for e bikes. And that's ok. But to not recognize that PAS bikes aka Levo and the PAS Walt mentioned that are in Europe are not motorcycles is just pure hard headedness, or wishful thinking, and that only gets you so far.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Stop being so stubborn. You're narrow minded approach makes no sense. It's apparent your hate for e bikes. And that's ok. But to not recognize that PAS bikes aka Levo and the PAS Walt mentioned that are in Europe are not motorcycles is just pure hard headedness, or wishful thinking, and that only gets you so far.


Where did he say an PAS ebike is a motorcycle?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Walt said:


> I can very easily do it on a <5% grade, without even going Turbo. Of course if there are technical features or steeper grades or sharp turns, that will slow you down. But it did turn mild uphills into (as many manufacturers advertise) uphill flow trails - as in, braking into corners and getting a little air on small bumps.
> 
> Now, for most folks, that will require some considerable effort. But it's doable if you're sort of fit and motivated to do it. You'll annihilate the battery but those have already improved and will continue to - and some people just want to go for a 45 minute lunchtime shred session, there's plenty enough juice to turbo that.
> 
> -Walt


You must have some uphill freeways! Anyrate, slow down you're giving us a bad rap! I'm building a new Jam2 29er Pro. There philosophy is go light with less battery, unless your really going epic all day add another 379 w for a total range of 780w. German engineering, it will be interesting. I've had really good luck with Levo's and hope this is da bomb!


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Gutch said:


> You must have some uphill freeways! Anyrate, slow down you're giving us a bad rap! I'm building a new Jam2 29er Pro. There philosophy is go light with less battery, unless your really going epic all day add another 379 w for a total range of 780w. German engineering, it will be interesting. I've had really good luck with Levo's and hope this is da bomb!


Oh, it wasn't on any of my local trails here. We have legal issues that basically mean that e-bikes are banned forever, unless someone wants to hire a few million bucks worth of lawyers and renegotiate all our recreation easements.

But yes, PC has a lot of non-technical trails. You can go crazy fast uphill here on an e-bike if you want to.

-Walt


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Walt said:


> Oh, it wasn't on any of my local trails here. We have legal issues that basically mean that e-bikes are banned forever, unless someone wants to hire a few million bucks worth of lawyers and renegotiate all our recreation easements.
> 
> But yes, PC has a lot of non-technical trails. You can go crazy fast uphill here on an e-bike if you want to.
> 
> -Walt


Yeah, I know. Was just messing with you.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

15mph downhill is not fast, that's an easy cruiser speed. I routinely go 30mph plus on fast downhills. There are one way trails for that reason. E bikes have no advantage in the down.



Linktung said:


> 15 mph on a downhill with bad sight lines isn't a carefull, controlled speed and you almost took out some riders because of it. Downhill 15 mph carries much more force then an an uphill rider. You now need to be going much slower or you run the risk of hitting an ebiker. As a hiker, I would rather have an ebiker going uphill at 25mph then have an ebiker decending at 15mph. Downhill acceleration is far more unpredictable and dangerous then uphill acceleration. Other user groups could care less about bike on bike crashes, and since they aren't decending at 15 mph they don't have your vulnerabilities in this scenario. Dogs are allowed on Park City trails and on my best day on a pedelec, I am much slower uphill then the average canine. If you need slow uphill speeds, you are going too fast. Good thing we have people on ebikes now to give you some motivation for safe behavior.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I'm not sure the laws need to be rewritten. I think when the laws were written PAS bikes didn't exist. The non motorized vehicles they were referring to were autos, dirt bikes,quads etc... That's what they were targeting. Now comes along a bike with a PAS motor, no throttle, cuts off at 18-20mph. And at best rides like a top level pro. It's not a bicycle, it's not a motorcycle, and for that reason, it deserves a whole new classification.


You're way behind the curve and should do some research. The laws we're discussing are being written with PAS ebikes (along with throttles) specifically in mind, and to classify them as no longer motor vehicles. If effect, a new classification. Which forces land managers to evaluate what the laws allow, which is not just a 250w PAS ebike, but a 750w ebike. No one with any decision making powers that I know of confuses ebikes with motorcycles, but neither do they equate a 250w ebike with a 750w one. Or a bicycle for that matter.

If you think 750 emtbs are OK on mtb trails, have at it, because that's what you are advocating for.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

Harryman said:


> You're way behind the curve and should do some research. The laws we're discussing are being written with PAS ebikes (along with throttles) specifically in mind, and to classify them as no longer motor vehicles. If effect, a new classification. Which forces land managers to evaluate what the laws allow, which is not just a 250w PAS ebike, but a 750w ebike. No one with any decision making powers that I know of confuses ebikes with motorcycles, but neither do they equate a 250w ebike with a 750w one. Or a bicycle for that matter.
> 
> If you think 750 emtbs are OK on mtb trails, have at it, because that's what you are advocating for.


I know most of the talk is of Colorado but California already has defined e-bike classes as of Jan. 2016.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1096

And while they do say these bikes are 750w or less, the Class 1 bike is pedal assist only and cuts off at 20 mph which makes a 750w motor wasteful as 250w will do that just fine.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Zinfan said:


> I know most of the talk is of Colorado but California already has defined e-bike classes as of Jan. 2016.
> https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1096
> 
> And while they do say these bikes are 750w or less, the Class 1 bike is pedal assist only and cuts off at 20 mph which makes a 750w motor wasteful as 250w will do that just fine.


Colorado has similar laws written by the same org. If you don't think Joe erider won't choose a 500w emtb over a 250w emtb since it has 30% more torque at the same price point, I've got a bridge to sell you... Each year 250w motors offer more torque and manufacturers are cramming in more watt hours per battery, bigger is always better except to the few.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

Harryman said:


> Colorado has similar laws written by the same org. If you don't think Joe erider won't choose a 500w emtb over a 250w emtb since it has 30% more torque at the same price point, I've got a bridge to sell you... Each year 250w motors offer more torque and manufacturers are cramming in more watt hours per battery, bigger is always better except to the few.


And what benefit will more torque have? It's hard enough to keep a 250w ebike from looping out on steep uphills, adding much more torque just adds to the issue. More torque isn't going to equal more speed as they are limited to 20 mph. And yes I know ebikes can be modified but even in ebike friendly Europe I see you posted that there is a 8000 euro fine for doing such modifications. More watt hours per battery = more range not more speed.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> You're way behind the curve and should do some research. The laws we're discussing are being written with PAS ebikes (along with throttles) specifically in mind, and to classify them as no longer motor vehicles. If effect, a new classification. Which forces land managers to evaluate what the laws allow, which is not just a 250w PAS ebike, but a 750w ebike. No one with any decision making powers that I know of confuses ebikes with motorcycles, but neither do they equate a 250w ebike with a 750w one. Or a bicycle for that matter.
> 
> If you think 750 emtbs are OK on mtb trails, have at it, because that's what you are advocating for.


I'm advocating for 530 watts I guess. That's what the Levo is. That's the only eMTB ive ridden. Nothing obnoxious about the power output on that bike. Unless you're a sloth, or ride like a sloth, or think mountain bikes should only be ridden like a sloth, then that might be the only way one could think the Levo is "too fast" for a mtb


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Stop being so stubborn. You're narrow minded approach makes no sense. It's apparent your hate for e bikes. And that's ok. But to not recognize that PAS bikes aka Levo and the PAS Walt mentioned that are in Europe are not motorcycles is just pure hard headedness, or wishful thinking, and that only gets you so far.


 No hate here. I may even get one, for the commute. Great for cargo bikes as well. Great for that alternative to the car for transportation. Do they belong on multi use trails that's for non motorized use only? No, imho. Not allowed in MA where I ride. Ride legal, no issues. When you say stuff like e bikes are inevitable? That's something else. And recognize that the US is not the EU, not in norms ,customs or laws. They are not motorcycles, nor are they bikes either. And as to watts and power? There are no limits or rules, really once they are on the trails. Sure they might come from a factory and have a sticker that say X, but how do you tell them apart? Really.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

ALimon said:


> I'm advocating for 530 watts I guess. That's what the Levo is. That's the only eMTB ive ridden...


You should probably spend some more time on ebikes because you seem to be very confused about how power output and motor watt ratings work and have shown you don't understand what your talking about on several occasions. For example, the Levo has a 250w rated motor, not 530w.

So, are you advocating for a 530watt rated motor or a 250 watts rated motor?


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

leeboh said:


> No hate here. I may even get one, for the commute. Great for cargo bikes as well. Great for that alternative to the car for transportation. Do they belong on multi use trails that's for non motorized use only? No, imho. Not allowed in MA where I ride. Ride legal, no issues. When you say stuff like e bikes are inevitable? That's something else. And recognize that the US is not the EU, not in norms ,customs or laws. They are not motorcycles, nor are they bikes either. And as to watts and power? There are no limits or rules, really once they are on the trails. Sure they might come from a factory and have a sticker that say X, but how do you tell them apart? Really.


The US isn't like the EU in that we have the Right To Travel which they do not. That means the restrictions imposed by the land managers are unconstitutional. You can easily win any court case where a land manager is discriminating against personal choice of vehicle that has been deemed a right by the Supreme Court. The CPSC has on record that any assisted bike at 750 watts or less is a bicycle, and it would take an (unconstitutional) act of Congress to reverse that decision.

There is very little visual distinction between an assisted bike and an unassisted bike and very few law enforcement agents willing to stick their nose that far up people's butts over something so trivial. You would also have to find a judge willing to support the decision. The downside is that on the surface assisted bikes appear to be illegal and authoritarian jerks ignorant of the Constitution feel like it is okay to harass pedelecs in the wild or on the internet.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Aw, jeez.*

Do we always have to end up back at the UN black-helicopters e-bike bans are unconstitutional thing?

You don't have any constitutional right to operate anything you want anywhere you want, and you'd be laughed out of the courtroom if you claimed that. LMs can ban bikes, they can ban e-bikes, they can ban horses, they can even just ban everyone if circumstances warrant (ie, USFS blanket forest closures in NM right now for fire danger reasons).

This sort of stuff really hurts you when it comes to actually persuading skeptical folks. Be reasonable and friendly and you might end up getting more legal access. Crazy conspiracy theories seldom work in the court of public opinion.

-Walt


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Linktung said:


> The US isn't like the EU in that we have the Right To Travel which they do not. That means the restrictions imposed by the land managers are unconstitutional. You can easily win any court case where a land manager is discriminating against personal choice of vehicle that has been deemed a right by the Supreme Court. The CPSC has on record that any assisted bike at 750 watts or less is a bicycle, and it would take an (unconstitutional) act of Congress to reverse that decision.
> 
> There is very little visual distinction between an assisted bike and an unassisted bike and very few law enforcement agents willing to stick their nose that far up people's butts over something so trivial. You would also have to find a judge willing to support the decision. The downside is that on the surface assisted bikes appear to be illegal and authoritarian jerks ignorant of the Constitution feel like it is okay to harass pedelecs in the wild or on the internet.


 Yikes. CPSC? That might be for road rules concerning DOT public road rules, not off road rules concerning foot paths. Go win your court case, please report back. Which supreme court case law are you referring to? Every single land manger, agency, land owner and rule maker has rules for hikers, bikers and motorized use, allowed or not allowed. Visual distinction? You mean motorized or not, clear line in the sand. Environmental police do stings and confiscate the poachers' rides ( motos) impound them and then fine the riders where I pedal ( MA) Something like $ 500 to get your ride back and a $250 fine. Do you feel harassed? There is always the road forum. What Walt said, be a positive force to effect change, proactive and friendly go a long way.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

Walt said:


> Do we always have to end up back at the UN black-helicopters e-bike bans are unconstitutional thing?
> 
> You don't have any constitutional right to operate anything you want anywhere you want, and you'd be laughed out of the courtroom if you claimed that. LMs can ban bikes, they can ban e-bikes, they can ban horses, they can even just ban everyone if circumstances warrant (ie, USFS blanket forest closures in NM right now for fire danger reasons).
> 
> ...


Agreed. And lets not forget that you don't need police/rangers to get all up in your business, anyone who may object to your access can cause headaches for you. Those of us old enough can remember when mountain bikes first hit the scene and the reaction from the equestrian community was "not on my trails, never ever" and there were many fights for access. My unfounded hope is that e-mtb's (Class 1) will be like snowboards, gradual acceptance based on popularity and increased market share of recreational dollars spent. Again I'm old enough to remember when many ski resorts banned snow boards as being far too dangerous to be on the same hill as normal skiers.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Zinfan said:


> Again I'm old enough to remember when many ski resorts banned snow boards as being far too dangerous to be on the same hill as normal skiers.


Back in the early days of the internet with newsgroups instead of web forums, the snowboard vs. skier debates looked *exactly* like the MTB vs. eMTB debates we are seeing right now. You could probably take some of those debates and change "Ski" to "MTB" and "Snowboard" to "eMTB".


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

honkinunit said:


> Back in the early days of the internet with newsgroups instead of web forums, the snowboard vs. skier debates looked *exactly* like the MTB vs. eMTB debates we are seeing right now. You could probably take some of those debates and change "Ski" to "MTB" and "Snowboard" to "eMTB".


More like Ski vs Snowmobile. Cuz motor, obviously.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> More like Ski vs Snowmobile. Cuz motor, obviously.


LMAO. You have no clue.


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

honkinunit said:


> Back in the early days of the internet with newsgroups instead of web forums, the snowboard vs. skier debates looked *exactly* like the MTB vs. eMTB debates we are seeing right now. You could probably take some of those debates and change "Ski" to "MTB" and "Snowboard" to "eMTB".


Yep. it's so similar it's scary. "snowboard are going so fast downhill they are going to increase the accident rate!" "Snowboard are going to scrap the snow off the mountains!" " It's a SKI hill not a SNOWBOARD hill!" " National forest lease will not be renewed because of the damages the snowboard are going to inflict to the mountains!"

Same stuff.

And if we go further back, this is the same thing I heard about windsurfing vs surfing....


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Last time I checked, snowboards didn't have a motor.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Not really, nobody is going uphill! Fear of the unknown and fear of change is what’s on the table.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

tahoebeau said:


> You should probably spend some more time on ebikes because you seem to be very confused about how power output and motor watt ratings work and have shown you don't understand what your talking about on several occasions. For example, the Levo has a 250w rated motor, not 530w.
> 
> So, are you advocating for a 530watt rated motor or a 250 watts rated motor?


Apparently I read the info wrong on the Levo. My bad. So I stand corrected. I'm advocating for 250watt eMTB's.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> No hate here. I may even get one, for the commute. Great for cargo bikes as well. Great for that alternative to the car for transportation. Do they belong on multi use trails that's for non motorized use only? No, imho. Not allowed in MA where I ride. Ride legal, no issues. When you say stuff like e bikes are inevitable? That's something else. And recognize that the US is not the EU, not in norms ,customs or laws. They are not motorcycles, nor are they bikes either. And as to watts and power? There are no limits or rules, really once they are on the trails. Sure they might come from a factory and have a sticker that say X, but how do you tell them apart? Really.


Honest question. Have you ever ridden a Levo or something similar?


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

Linktung said:


> The US isn't like the EU in that we have the Right To Travel which they do not. That means the restrictions imposed by the land managers are unconstitutional. You can easily win any court case where a land manager is discriminating against personal choice of vehicle that has been deemed a right by the Supreme Court. The CPSC has on record that any assisted bike at 750 watts or less is a bicycle, and it would take an (unconstitutional) act of Congress to reverse that decision.
> 
> There is very little visual distinction between an assisted bike and an unassisted bike and very few law enforcement agents willing to stick their nose that far up people's butts over something so trivial. You would also have to find a judge willing to support the decision. The downside is that on the surface assisted bikes appear to be illegal and authoritarian jerks ignorant of the Constitution feel like it is okay to harass pedelecs in the wild or on the internet.


Please tell me you aren't serious. You need to really read up on all of that and how much it DOESNT apply here.

Just like the 750w rule is 1 of many stipulations. I believe if it exceeds 25mph (which I know in Illinois the 25mph rule does apply on road) under power from the motor only it doesnt apply.

Secondly as walt and such pointed out that applies to public access paved roads. DOT does not regulate bike paths. That's down to state, county, and city to determine what they allow. Also DOT has absolutely nothing to do with trails, access roads and so on. All of that access is purely determined by the land managers whether that's an individual person or the USFS and anything in between.

What so many hardcore pro-ebike people cant seem to understand is one very basic undeniable FACT: ebikes have a motor. Period. And many trails have signs that say "No motorized vehicles allowed". End of story.

Now that said I am NOT against ebikes. Not the pedal assist ones like the Levo. They are of zero issue to trails. The rest above those have no place on trails due to power and that they are no longer human powered.

But fact of the matter is this debate is beating a dead horse and the extremes of both sides are doing nothing but making matters worse not better. Pedal assist. OEM type ebikes are of 0 threat and cause no issues for anyone except some feel their manhood is challenged.

Just like plenty of ebike owners think they should be allowed to have an electric dirt bike with pedals that do nothing truly useful and capable of 50mph should be ok on bicycle/multiuse trails. And as Waly has shared in the past from watching it happen, are the big problem with access for those with lower power and true pedal assist.

But carrying the attitude like this of an un-educated "its unconsitutional" point of view will only cause problems for gaining even the most basic ebike access.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> More like Ski vs Snowmobile. Cuz motor, obviously.


No. This really is exactly like the old ski vs snowboard crap. And if we can learn anything from history then the eMTB will eventually find access just about everywhere. I remember the resorts pushing back against the snowboard at their resorts. That only lasted so long, with the popularity of the snowboard, the resorts could only say no for so long. Eventually the resorts had to give in.

I could be wrong but I think Aspen was the last US resort to not allow snowboards. That stuffy Aspen mentality really reminds me of the anti ebike crowd. I remember hearing the arguments from the old farts that snowboarders are only going to cause problems, collisions will occur because the young crowd will be riding too fast and their wreckless behavior will lead to injuries. Today, Aspen holds the X Games. Funny how things change over time.

Here's an interesting article.

https://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/02/us/snowboards-end-an-era-on-aspen-s-main-slope.html


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Honest question. Have you ever ridden a Levo or something similar?


 Not that it matters, no place legal to ride within 75 miles of me. Rode a haibike 500 watt? Hub motor. Way heavy, put it up to max power, hit 25 mph scary fast on a dirt road. Lots of MA has rocks, roots and logs, way too heavy to bunny hop or loft the front wheel over a log or up a ledge. And rode one of those trek commuters that go 28 mph.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Not that it matters, no place legal to ride within 75 miles of me. Rode a haibike 500 watt? Hub motor. Way heavy, put it up to max power, hit 25 mph scary fast on a dirt road. Lots of MA has rocks, roots and logs, way too heavy to bunny hop or loft the front wheel over a log or up a ledge. And rode one of those trek commuters that go 28 mph.


Ride a Levo if you get a chance. Oh and It does matter, if you haven't ridden one, then you have no contrast in your argument. So cal has some rocky terrain, I had no problem navigating some gnarly sections. Hard to argue about something you've never ridden


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

ALimon said:


> No. This really is exactly like the old ski vs snowboard crap. And if we can learn anything from history then the eMTB will eventually find access just about everywhere. I remember the resorts pushing back against the snowboard at their resorts. That only lasted so long, with the popularity of the snowboard, the resorts could only say no for so long. Eventually the resorts had to give in.
> 
> I could be wrong but I think Aspen was the last US resort to not allow snowboards. That stuffy Aspen mentality really reminds me of the anti ebike crowd. I remember hearing the arguments from the old farts that snowboarders are only going to cause problems, collisions will occur because the young crowd will be riding too fast and their wreckless behavior will lead to injuries. Today, Aspen holds the X Games. Funny how things change over time.
> 
> ...


Just FYI, both Alta and Deer Valley here in UT don't allow snowboards.

I think there are similarities with the snowboard debate (lots of unfounded fears) but there are also some crucial differences, in that the snowboarders were going the same direction (downhill) at about the same speed/potential speed.

E-bikes have the potential to change how riders ride - especially in terms of uphill speed. They also have the *potential* to be modified (or simply built with illegal specs) without much way for LMs to keep those bikes off. I know *personally* of some quad racer guys who feel that e-bikes basically mean it's open season on the trails for anyone with an electric motor.

Those are, of course, *potential* problems, not actual ones, yet. Snowboarders showed that they could safely and responsibly share the mountain with skiers, and I think it's quite possible that e-bikers will show the same. It's also possible that due to the total lack of enforcement of manufacturing standards/general need for speed, that a few bad apples will wreck it for everyone.

I don't think we'll really know for another decade, though.

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> No. This really is exactly like the old ski vs snowboard crap.


Nah...that's more like all the stuffy XC guys harping about DHers and 'endurobros', which you see going on around here constantly.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Ride a Levo if you get a chance. Oh and It does matter, if you haven't ridden one, then you have no contrast in your argument. So cal has some rocky terrain, I had no problem navigating some gnarly sections. Hard to argue about something you've never ridden


 Umm, did you not get the part about no legal riding within 75 miles of my house? I literally can ride all day in 3 directions from my driveway with some short pave connections North of Boston. Not buying one. Doesn't matter what I test ride, dude. It's not an argument. Bikes don't have motor. Fact. Rocky terrain? You have not a clue as what " trails" are like here. Lynn Woods, Harold Parker, humbling. You have to loft your front wheel 1 foot 20-30 times on a 2 or 3 hr ride?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Umm, did you not get the part about no legal riding within 75 miles of my house? I literally can ride all day in 3 directions from my driveway with some short pave connections North of Boston. Not buying one. Doesn't matter what I test ride, dude. It's not an argument. Bikes don't have motor. Fact. Rocky terrain? You have not a clue as what " trails" are like here. Lynn Woods, Harold Parker, humbling. You have to loft your front wheel 1 foot 20-30 times on a 2 or 3 hr ride?


Ummmi I didn't realize you never travel more than 75 miles from your house. That could explain your narrow mindedness. There is more riding in the world other than Lynn woods and Harold Parker, much better riding!


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

leeboh said:


> Bikes don't have motor. Fact.


Hardly a fact Considering that ebikes are the ONLY growing segment of the bike industry worldwide.

https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/market-research/electric-bicycle-motors-market.asp

It's your choice to ride one or not.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

ruthabagah said:


> Hardly a fact Considering that ebikes are the ONLY growing segment of the bike industry worldwide.
> 
> https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/market-research/electric-bicycle-motors-market.asp
> 
> It's your choice to ride one or not.


This link sums up the market research quoted above.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Ummmi I didn't realize you never travel more than 75 miles from your house. That could explain your narrow mindedness. There is more riding in the world other than Lynn woods and Harold Parker, much better riding!


 You've been to those areas? One would have to pedal them, no motors allowed. I have trails 200 yds from my driveway. I ride there all the time, wouldn't you?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ruthabagah said:


> Hardly a fact Considering that ebikes are the ONLY growing segment of the bike industry worldwide.
> 
> https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/market-research/electric-bicycle-motors-market.asp
> 
> It's your choice to ride one or not.


 Sure, just not legal on the trails I ride. Mt biking, commuting and road riding are really big in the Boston area, guess all the bike shops are just selling what?


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

leeboh said:


> Sure, just not legal on the trails I ride. Mt biking, commuting and road riding are really big in the Boston area, guess all the bike shops are just selling what?


It's only a matter of times before the law change and is adapted to the need of the people. I'll give it 2 years at most.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> LMAO. You have no clue.


Talk about not having a clue. Most ski resorts were losing money at that time, skiing was dying out in a lot of the US. Snowboarders came along with money to save the resorts. Not going to happen with ebikes. Nice try though

https://www.nytimes.com/1997/12/22/...winter-sport-s-image-has-changed-bad-boy.html


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I could be wrong, but I think the bike industry is a little solvent at the moment. Next cash cow?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> You've been to those areas? One would have to pedal them, no motors allowed. I have trails 200 yds from my driveway. I ride there all the time, wouldn't you?


Of course I would. All I'm saying is open up your mind a bit. Just because a Levo doesn't fit your application or trail conditions doesn't mean it's not a worthy bike or doesn't deserve some trail access. But seriously, it's really hard to argue against something if you've never experienced it.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ruthabagah said:


> It's only a matter of times before the law change and is adapted to the need of the people. I'll give it 2 years at most.


 All the laws in all the state and federal agencies, they move so fast on stuff. Wager is what? Brews, some of my home made bacon? MA has so many conservation areas, all prohibit motorized vehicles. State parks too. Start there. Adapted to the old and lazy? Not. There is no need. Just wants, thats different.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Talk about not having a clue. Most ski resorts were losing money at that time, skiing was dying out in a lot of the US. Snowboarders came along with money to save the resorts. Not going to happen with ebikes. Nice try though
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/1997/12/22/...winter-sport-s-image-has-changed-bad-boy.html


You must not know anyone in the bicycle business. Sales are lackluster and have been for several years. eBikes are keeping the doors open. Go watch the interview with the head of Pivot. 70% of their high end MTB sales in Europe are now coming from one model - the Shuttle.


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

Lack of education and proliferation of myths seems to spoil progression in many industries, not only the bicycle industry.

Despite all the engineering and testing suppliers do during development, suppliers don't really do much to address the problem. Maybe someone can take a page out of Santa Cruz's book with that viral carbon fiber testing video thing, and apply it to this. Not sure how they'd address how people seem to be stuck on their own seemingly "rational" principles and not being open (e.g. anti-motor mostly based on principle).

Beware the scarcity mindset...

Personally, I'd love to ditch the habit of upgraditis and having bikes end up being over $5k, just to make the bike climb and accelerate a bit snappier, and still not have strength/durability as high as I like. If I ran these solutions to flat tires (tougher casing, tire inserts), my bike would be so slow. Pedal-assist sound appealing to me at that point, and if they can make it indistinguishable from a typical mtb, I'd be sold. Would love to replace shuttling with self-shuttle, not only to the top of the trail, but also to the trailhead itself, as long as it's within the battery's range; 15 mi each way + 15 mi of trail riding sounds doable with pedal assist. That and I'll have less excuses for going out, such as being too tired (to keep up with others).

Whatever the land managers decide, I'll go with it. Trail access is the main thing holding back my purchase decision. I already got a mtb in case they deem it no good, but I see a lot of positives with pedal assist. Looking forward to a Canyon Spectral:ON in the US.


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

leeboh said:


> Adapted to the old and lazy?


Typical over characterization of a feeble mind.... In the meantime, I'll be riding my ebike tonight for another 20 miles outside of Denver. Just like all the old and lazy people.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> All the laws in all the state and federal agencies, they move so fast on stuff. Wager is what? Brews, some of my home made bacon? MA has so many conservation areas, all prohibit motorized vehicles. State parks too. Start there. Adapted to the old and lazy? Not. There is no need. Just wants, thats different.


Nothing really changes in MA. Last time I was there it felt like I took a time travel back in time. CA will lead the change. We always do.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

ruthabagah said:


> It's only a matter of times before the law change and is adapted to the need of the people. I'll give it 2 years at most.


I totally agree. As the demographics change so will the laws.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Nothing really changes in MA. Last time I was there it felt like I took a time travel back in time. CA will lead the change. We always do.


 Well yes, it was the start of this country, the revolution and stuff. So it is a bit of history, CA thats just left over Mexico stuff. CA is the test case, we'll see how that shakes out.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ruthabagah said:


> It's only a matter of times before the law change and is adapted to the need of the people. I'll give it 2 years at most.


 Need? Hmmm. Everyone is now a couch potato? Or a chain smoker. Everyone needs a motor? Interesting. Just keep clicking your heels.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

leeboh said:


> Need? Hmmm. Everyone is now a couch potato? Or a chain smoker. Everyone needs a motor? Interesting. Just keep clicking your heels.


But you need to look at Euro market trends as well. Not only is Pivot seeing 70% of high end buyers deciding on the Shuttle the owner also states that sales of all mtb's of >$4000 are increasingly going towards emtb's. Are you saying all those Euro's are couch potato's or smokers? Not everyone needs a motor but some people find enjoyment and enhanced riding from having one.


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

leeboh said:


> Need? Hmmm. Everyone is now a couch potato? Or a chain smoker. Everyone needs a motor? Interesting. Just keep clicking your heels.


Typical over characterization .... I am repeating this to you, since you posted the same baseless comment on the same page 4 post ago.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ALimon said:


> No. This really is exactly like the old ski vs snowboard crap. And if we can learn anything from history then the eMTB will eventually find access just about everywhere. I remember the resorts pushing back against the snowboard at their resorts. That only lasted so long, with the popularity of the snowboard, the resorts could only say no for so long. Eventually the resorts had to give in.
> 
> I could be wrong but I think Aspen was the last US resort to not allow snowboards. That stuffy Aspen mentality really reminds me of the anti ebike crowd. I remember hearing the arguments from the old farts that snowboarders are only going to cause problems, collisions will occur because the young crowd will be riding too fast and their wreckless behavior will lead to injuries. Today, Aspen holds the X Games. Funny how things change over time.
> 
> ...


You're talking about "pay to play" places with the resorts. They realized that snowboards were another revenue stream, the challenge was not to piss off the skiers. Most mountain biking is not pay to play, there is no incentive for the land managers to allow ebikes, only potential headaches. Except for pay to play downhill lifts/shuttles trails; emtbs are more likely to be accepted there where they can be charged a pass but won't clog the lifts.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

chazpat said:


> You're talking about "pay to play" places with the resorts. They realized that snowboards were another revenue stream, the challenge was not to piss off the skiers. Most mountain biking is not pay to play, there is no incentive for the land managers to allow ebikes, only potential headaches. Except for pay to play downhill lifts/shuttles trails; emtbs are more likely to be accepted there where they can be charged a pass but won't clog the lifts.


But the bike companies and bike shops would love to have another revenue stream and thus could provide resources for admitting emtb's on the trail. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind (it's the internet so even if I wanted to try it would be futile I feel) but as a emtb user I'd like market forces to move towards allowing more access (again Class 1 only). Time of course will tell. btw Mammoth Mountain has started to allow emtb's on their trails and I will watch to see if they develop some uphill trails that are designed for emtb use for the most part.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I say let’s turn it up a speed or 2. Why not? Let’s adapt to more speed. I know, blah blah blah. Same ole may be getting old? Let’s climb twice the speed. Huey Lewis “ I want a new drug” “Some” mtbrs that have been riding for awhile might feel the same. Although may not set well with other Trail users. What Speshy and the others should do is fund major emtb trails. They’d be the first to start and gain respect and sales. JMO.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I say let's turn it up a speed or 2. Why not? Let's adapt to more speed. I know, blah blah blah. Same ole may be getting old? Let's climb twice the speed. Huey Lewis " I want a new drug" "Some" mtbrs that have been riding for awhile might feel the same. Although may not set well with other Trail users. What Speshy and the others should do is fund major emtb trails. They'd be the first to start and gain respect and sales. JMO.


Tough thing about that is, it's not just the money, or the physical act of building the trail, it's the time spent doing the advocacy work and jumping through all the hoops that need to be jumped through. You need people that are willing to put in that time, preferably ones with a good bit of similar experience. You're best bet is of course going to be mountain bikers. But most people with a lot of experience creating MTB trails are very familiar with how important the "human powered" and "passive recreation" angle is when it comes to access and probably aren't typically going to go out of their way to spend a ton of time fighting for emtb access. 
If emtbs are ever going to go anywhere around here (I'm also in MA, but unlike Lee, I get to ride any vehicle I want right from my yard), there would have to be a serious grass-roots advocacy movement. That's what worked for MTBers; there's no reason it couldn't work for eMTBers too if they put in the time and effort to make it.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

slapheadmofo said:


> Tough thing about that is, it's not just the money, or the physical act of building the trail, it's the time spent doing the advocacy work and jumping through all the hoops that need to be jumped through. You need people that are willing to put in that time, preferably ones with a good bit of similar experience. You're best bet is of course going to be mountain bikers. But most people with a lot of experience creating MTB trails are very familiar with how important the "human powered" and "passive recreation" angle is when it comes to access and probably aren't typically going to go out of their way to spend a ton of time fighting for emtb access.
> If emtbs are ever going to go anywhere around here (I'm also in MA, but unlike Lee, I get to ride any vehicle I want right from my yard), there would have to be a serious grass-roots advocacy movement. That's what worked for MTBers; there's no reason it couldn't work for eMTBers too if they put in the time and effort to make it.


Why would they go to all that trouble when they can just wait two years and they will be granted access with no effort?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

chazpat said:


> Why would they go to all that trouble when they can just wait two years and they will be granted access with no effort?


Yeah, I don't think the plan of waiting on either a)"The Industry" of b)"Other People" (ie MTBers) to take care of everything is going to pan out very well. I know it won't work here. Maybe in CA.


----------



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

I think the industry will do most of the work because they have the most to gain.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think the industry will do most of the work because they have the most to gain.


 Based on past experience? In New England, support has been slim, to say the least. Most of the bike makers are West coast? Some race support, events and such sure. Actual trail building/funding/support?


----------



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

leeboh said:


> Actual trail building/funding/support?


Legislation. Time will tell.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

We get a lot of support from breweries, REI, and local bike industries.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think the industry will do most of the work because they have the most to gain.


A few companies might throw a little money around here and there, bit as far as actually doing enough work to make something happen? Never have, never will. Their singular motive (their own profit) isn't going to hold much sway when it comes to LMs IME.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Mtbing brings in major revenue here. Emtb trails would do the same.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> We get a lot of support from breweries, REI, and local bike industries.


Can you quantify "a lot"?
We get some support from the same, but a few cases of beer, some trail tools and a discount on parts isn't the same as putting in hundreds and hundreds of hours "in the trenches" trying to get rules changed. You will need many very dedicated volunteers to make anything substantive happen. So far, that grassroots advocacy (actual advocacy, not just internet ramblings) just isn't something that appear to be happening. Nobody is stepping up, at least that I can tell.


----------



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

slapheadmofo said:


> A few companies might throw a little money around here and there, bit as far as actually doing enough work to make something happen? Never have, never will. Their singular motive (their own profit) isn't going to hold much sway when it comes to LMs IME.


We're all only guessing, I just threw out mine. If the industry wins in Washington they won't have to talk to any land managers. Like I said, time will tell.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> We're all only guessing, I just threw out mine. If the industry wins in Washington they won't have to talk to any land managers. Like I said, time will tell.


I guess that could affect parts of the country with lots trails on federal land.
Doesn't seem it would change anything in areas that don't such as the northeast.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Gutch said:


> We get a lot of support from breweries, REI, and local bike industries.


 We too get some support from REI, but thats just trail grant money. Great yes, but not actual the planning, design, meeting with 3 conservation commissions, scouting, flagging, meeting with a pro trail builder, or actual construction.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Walt said:


> Not at all - I was in great control and had plenty of time to react to/stop for normal uphill traffic (whether hikers or horses or bikes). Even at a careful, controlled speed - it was dangerous *for everyone involved*.
> 
> That's not good (or fun) for anyone. On a flatter trail, you could have e-bike vs. e-bike at 40mph closing speed. Erm... not a lot of land managers are going to be happy about that idea.
> 
> ...


Walt,

You are a good poster and I'm sure a very nice guy. But I disagree with your point. If closing speed was really a concern, you can't restrict one term of that equation while ignoring the other. You claim a difference of 7mph between MTB and eBikes for climbing (seems arbitrary, but OK). However, you fail to recognize that there can be a much greater disparity is speeds for downhill riders. As mentioned before, rider responsibility has to come into play here.

By virtue of your arguments, we should not allow cars with more than 300hp on the road because they go too fast. But we see that just isn't true. You simply can't regulate behavior by regulating equipment.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Harryman said:


> Land managers have long ago learned that they have to manage for the lowest common demoninator. So, sure, there are idiots on mtbs that ride too fast in every possible scenario, which on a mtb is mostly on descents, since you're limited by how fit you are everywhere else. Providing more power via a motor simply increases the number of riders who are now able to ride faster in more situations, allowing more idiots to ride faster in the wrong places. Ofc, not everyone is an idiot, but that's not who creates problems for the LM's.
> 
> If you don't think adding a few miles per hour to closing speeds is an issue, would you rather walk around a corner and into another walker, or run around a corner into another runner? There's only about a 5mph difference between walking and running speeds.


Wow... I really disagree with this. Land managers are government bureaucrats. Most of them have no idea what an eBike is. They aren't the all knowing, wise arbiters you make them out to be. They are simply whipping boys that get beaten over the head constantly by opposing forces. Greenie/bunny huggers would have trails closed for all types of vehicles. OHVers would have the land unrestricted. And MTBers lie in the middle. So, the truth is, land managers respond to the group that is the loudest and will cause them the most grief. Given the exploding popularity of eBikes, guess which group's voice is going to get louder.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Harryman said:


> You're way behind the curve and should do some research. The laws we're discussing are being written with PAS ebikes (along with throttles) specifically in mind, and to classify them as no longer motor vehicles. If effect, a new classification. Which forces land managers to evaluate what the laws allow, which is not just a 250w PAS ebike, but a 750w ebike. No one with any decision making powers that I know of confuses ebikes with motorcycles, but neither do they equate a 250w ebike with a 750w one. Or a bicycle for that matter.
> 
> If you think 750 emtbs are OK on mtb trails, have at it, because that's what you are advocating for.


The problem with your 250W vs 750W argument is that it is arbitrary and it throw out the baby with the bath water. "I rode a 750W eBike one time that belonged to my cousin and that's way too much power!" This is not a way to advocate regulation.

I'd be thrilled if BLM/NFS did an real and honest evaluation of eBikes and created regulations based on facts vice arbitrary speculation or previous regulations that was created to govern OHVs.

Interestingly, I see that BLM and NFS claim to ban eBikes (based on OHV regulations), but they don't give any justification for the bans (i.e. safety, environmental impact, etc). They are just as arbitrary as you are being.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> The problem with your 250W vs 750W argument is that it is arbitrary and it throw out the baby with the bath water. "I rode a 750W eBike one time that belonged to my cousin and that's way too much power!" This is not a way to advocate regulation.
> 
> I'd be thrilled if BLM/NFS did an real and honest evaluation of eBikes and created regulations based on facts vice arbitrary speculation or previous regulations that was created to govern OHVs.
> 
> Interestingly, I see that BLM and NFS claim to ban eBikes (based on OHV regulations), but they don't give any justification for the bans (i.e. safety, environmental impact, etc). They are just as arbitrary as you are being.


 Don't you think the land managers and rangers have sooo many other thing to do besides care about 1 more motorized vehicle? There are already rules and regs for motorized vehicles. Seems the e bikers need to do some of their own work ? Loud e bike voices? Like on some random interweb page? How about the mt bikers background of 25 + years of meetings, lobbying, gathering support and organizing the group to show up and do trail work? At least that's how it works here in New England. Good luck getting your voice heard. Really. Sit down at a meeting with some Sierra club, AMC or hiker group and explain to them its not really an ORV. Or some horsey folk.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Jim_bo said:


> Walt,
> 
> You are a good poster and I'm sure a very nice guy. But I disagree with your point. If closing speed was really a concern, you can't restrict one term of that equation while ignoring the other. You claim a difference of 7mph between MTB and eBikes for climbing (seems arbitrary, but OK). However, you fail to recognize that there can be a much greater disparity is speeds for downhill riders. As mentioned before, rider responsibility has to come into play here.
> 
> By virtue of your arguments, we should not allow cars with more than 300hp on the road because they go too fast. But we see that just isn't true. You simply can't regulate behavior by regulating equipment.


By virtue of your argument we should allow 1k watt ebikes on trails and just trust people to ride slow?

Closing speed is my biggest problem with them. I now have to expect some yahoo to come around a corner at 10-15 when usual speed in 3-5. Just because you are too tired, need a day off your regular bike or want to do 3 laps instead of one, I now have to slow my downhill speed to 5-7 instead of 15ish.

On a one way trail or bike park, fire road, ride your moped all you want as far as I am concerned, just don't ruin two way single track trails by increasing closing speed.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> Don't you think the land managers and rangers have sooo many other thing to do besides care about 1 more motorized vehicle? There are already rules and regs for motorized vehicles. Seems the e bikers need to do some of their own work ? Loud e bike voices? Like on some random interweb page? How about the mt bikers background of 25 + years of meetings, lobbying, gathering support and organizing the group to show up and do trail work? At least that's how it works here in New England. Good luck getting your voice heard. Really. Sit down at a meeting with some Sierra club, AMC or hiker group and explain to them its not really an ORV. Or some horsey folk.


Absolutely.

ATV/Moto in the northeast is almost nonexistent, and those groups complain loudly and constantly about it.
Mountain bikers actually DID something besides complaining. That's why we have tons and tons of trails and access. Working, not whining, is what gets results around here. Glad I live in a place where that's how things work.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

leeboh said:


> Don't you think the land managers and rangers have sooo many other thing to do besides care about 1 more motorized vehicle? There are already rules and regs for motorized vehicles. Seems the e bikers need to do some of their own work ? Loud e bike voices? Like on some random interweb page? How about the mt bikers background of 25 + years of meetings, lobbying, gathering support and organizing the group to show up and do trail work? At least that's how it works here in New England. Good luck getting your voice heard. Really. Sit down at a meeting with some Sierra club, AMC or hiker group and explain to them its not really an ORV. Or some horsey folk.


I think you've done more to make my point than you realize. Thanks.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

sfgiantsfan said:


> By virtue of your argument we should allow 1k watt ebikes on trails and just trust people to ride slow?
> 
> Closing speed is my biggest problem with them. I now have to expect some yahoo to come around a corner at 10-15 when usual speed in 3-5. Just because you are too tired, need a day off your regular bike or want to do 3 laps instead of one, I now have to slow my downhill speed to 5-7 instead of 15ish.
> 
> On a one way trail or bike park, fire road, ride your moped all you want as far as I am concerned, just don't ruin two way single track trails by increasing closing speed.


You too have made my points very nicely. Thanks for your predictable zealotry based on little more than vitriol and conjecture.


----------



## pumpsmynads (May 12, 2017)

Calling them mopeds or motorbikes is a narrow-minded viewpoint. A 125cc motorbike Has about 11Kw power, and they’re crap and slow. An emtb has 20x less power than these wheezy things and can’t operate with a throttle but they’re still too fast? If the trail is too narrow so that closing speed is an issue it wouldn’t be 2 way would it?

Additionally, what’s to say someone can’t just turn off (or say they’ve turned off the pedal assist) if someone complains about being on the trail?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think the industry will do most of the work because they have the most to gain.


In the short term, the industry will have to do some heavy lifting. In the long term, I think the changing of demographics alone will be the single biggest influence for eMTB's
Today's youth, millennials are all growing up with e powered devices and most will own an ebike wether as a commuter or for trail riding. 5 years from now almost everyone will have an ebike in their garage, they will become the new norm It's today's generation that will be the next batch of land managers and law makers. So from that perspective, all the eMTB needs to gain access is time.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

ALimon said:


> In the short term, the industry will have to do some heavy lifting. In the long term, I think the changing of demographics alone will be the single biggest influence for eMTB's
> Today's youth, millennials are all growing up with e powered devices and most will own an ebike wether as a commuter or for trail riding. 5 years from now almost everyone will have an ebike in their garage, they will become the new norm It's today's generation that will be the next batch of land managers and law makers. So from that perspective, all the eMTB needs to gain access is time.


I could not agree more. eBikes are coming. It's like arguing against a tidal wave. They will be here whether you want them or not.

Those that argue so pointlessly against eBikes make me think of those who made similar arguments against snowboards, smartphones, and even horseless carriages.


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> You too have made my points very nicely. Thanks for your predictable zealotry based on little more than vitriol and conjecture.


So are you saying that 1000w (or presumably any amount of watts) should be welcome too?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> I think you've done more to make my point than you realize. Thanks.


 Cool. So when you form your own e bike advocay group and have a FB page, I promise to play nice. Cheers.


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> Those that argue so pointlessly against eBikes make me think of those who made similar arguments against snowboards, smartphones, and even horseless carriages.


The snowboard, smartphone or horseless carriage deals have nothing to do with the core argument against electric bikes on non-motorized trails, which of course is that some areas should be kept motor-free.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> You too have made my points very nicely. Thanks for your predictable zealotry based on little more than vitriol and conjecture.


 There are rules regarding motorized vehicles on almost all public lands. Don't like the rules or how they are interpreted? Get active. But right now agree or disagree, thats how it goes.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> In the short term, the industry will have to do some heavy lifting. In the long term, I think the changing of demographics alone will be the single biggest influence for eMTB's
> Today's youth, millennials are all growing up with e powered devices and most will own an ebike wether as a commuter or for trail riding. 5 years from now almost everyone will have an ebike in their garage, they will become the new norm It's today's generation that will be the next batch of land managers and law makers. So from that perspective, all the eMTB needs to gain access is time.


 Just time is needed? Cool. Now to get you and them to look away from any screen for more than 30 seconds. My e bike video app, making some bucks. Sure, todays youth will be the next leaders, in 30 years. So the land grants, private land holdings, and state parks that currently prohibit motorized vehicles will just disappear? And no other trail users will voice concerns? I'll just wait. New England does stuff differently than lots of other places I guess. The same kids that aren't getting married, have huge college loans and can't afford to move out of moms house will just have 5-10K ? Cool.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> So are you saying that 1000w (or presumably any amount of watts) should be welcome too?


I didn't say that, but it seems to be what you heard.

I have said that eBikes should NOT be regulated as if they are an OHV. They are a completely different animal. I have said that eBikes, particularly class 1 eBikes are far closer to MTBs, so if they are to simply be thrown into a category for regulation purposes, it should be there.

I have also said that eBikes should be treated as a separate niche as it really isn't a MTB nor is it an OHV. Instead, eBikes should have regulations that are based on actual data instead of arbitrary conjecture.

I wonder if those who advocate for the eBike regulations based on arbitrary conjecture would also advocate for random regulations based on no data for things like guns, healthcare, traffic laws, zoning laws, etc.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

pumpsmynads said:


> Calling them mopeds or motorbikes is a narrow-minded viewpoint. A 125cc motorbike Has about 11Kw power, and they're crap and slow. An emtb has 20x less power than these wheezy things and can't operate with a throttle but they're still too fast? If the trail is too narrow so that closing speed is an issue it wouldn't be 2 way would it?
> 
> Additionally, what's to say someone can't just turn off (or say they've turned off the pedal assist) if someone complains about being on the trail?


 It's still a motorized vehicle on the trail.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> The snowboard, smartphone or horseless carriage deals have nothing to do with the core argument against electric bikes on non-motorized trails, which of course is that some areas should be kept motor-free.


You miss the point that your "core argument" is little more than a "just becuz" argument. Your core argument is based on nothing substantial. It is as arbitrary and absurd as saying that some neighborhoods should just be kept white.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

leeboh said:


> It's still a motorized vehicle on the trail.


By the legal definition, a class 1 eBike is not a motorized vehicle. This is despite the attempts of BLM and USFS to treat them as if they are all OHVs.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> By the legal definition, a class 1 eBike is not a motorized vehicle. This is despite the attempts of BLM and USFS to treat them as if they are all OHVs.


 What law, in what state and what court? Prove those fed agencies wrong. Wow, hmm, it has a motor. Start there. Seems like ya'll got some work to do. Please report back with your findings and rulings in your favor, really. Would like to know.


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> I didn't say that, but it seems to be what you heard.





Jim_bo said:


> You simply can't regulate behavior by regulating equipment.


Then what is the point of class 1? Just like the on the road shouldn't power be unlimited? Responsible citizens will of course adhere to the rules and regulations 

Human power requires no regulations, some people will be faster than others but they are inherently limited.


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> You miss the point that your "core argument" is little more than a "just becuz" argument. Your core argument is based on nothing substantial. It is as arbitrary and absurd as saying that some neighborhoods should just be kept white.


Wow. OK then.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> I didn't say that, but it seems to be what you heard.
> 
> I have said that eBikes should NOT be regulated as if they are an OHV. They are a completely different animal. I have said that eBikes, particularly class 1 eBikes are far closer to MTBs, so if they are to simply be thrown into a category for regulation purposes, it should be there.
> 
> ...


 I actual get what you are saying. E bikes are a different animal. Maybe the platypus of the wheeled world? They have a motor, but kind of bike like, but not the same. This land manager, rule maker, supervisor has a giant stack of papers on his/her desk, underfunded, understaffed in forest fire season and high camping season. Give them a reason not to classify it as an ORV, do some studies. Don't chew out the rest of us because that's how the rules are currently interpreted. Do your own work, don't expect ( most) mt bikers or someone else to do it for you. Really not that hard, it's motorized. Regardless how anyone feels about it.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

ALimon said:


> In the short term, the industry will have to do some heavy lifting. In the long term, I think the changing of demographics alone will be the single biggest influence for eMTB's
> Today's youth, millennials are all growing up with e powered devices and most will own an ebike wether as a commuter or for trail riding. 5 years from now almost everyone will have an ebike in their garage, they will become the new norm It's today's generation that will be the next batch of land managers and law makers. So from that perspective, all the eMTB needs to gain access is time.


This is the definition of talking out of your ass.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> Wow... I really disagree with this. Land managers are government bureaucrats. Most of them have no idea what an eBike is. They aren't the all knowing, wise arbiters you make them out to be. They are simply whipping boys that get beaten over the head constantly by opposing forces. Greenie/bunny huggers would have trails closed for all types of vehicles. OHVers would have the land unrestricted. And MTBers lie in the middle. So, the truth is, land managers respond to the group that is the loudest and will cause them the most grief. Given the exploding popularity of eBikes, guess which group's voice is going to get louder.


I base my opinions on my experience working with land managers, which is extensive, over a decade working with a multitude of agencies, local, state and Federal. Yesterday, I spend 6 hours hiking with various "bureaucrats" associated with Colorado State Parks evaluating a new trail to see about allowing mtbs on a section of it that is currently closed. Out of the 8 people there, 6 of them ride mtbs and all know what an ebike is. The notion that they sit in a cube somewhere, and make arbitrary decisions is laughable, you really don't have any idea of how land mangers operate. While the public has input, and especially stakeholders, I've never seen a land manager bow to public pressure for anything, they make decisions based on what they feel is in the best interest of the land they manage. That usually makes some people happy and some people unhappy.

Looking at actual ebike sales, which are still miniscule in the US, it's going to be quite a while before they are organized enough to push for anything.

The bike industry has far less clout with the people that actually make decisions about allowing ebike access than a lot of people give them credit for.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> I didn't say that, but it seems to be what you heard.
> 
> I have said that eBikes should NOT be regulated as if they are an OHV. They are a completely different animal. I have said that eBikes, particularly class 1 eBikes are far closer to MTBs, so if they are to simply be thrown into a category for regulation purposes, it should be there.
> 
> I have also said that eBikes should be treated as a separate niche as it really isn't a MTB nor is it an OHV. Instead, eBikes should have regulations that are based on actual data instead of arbitrary conjecture.


Agree completely.

I'm not against ebikes, just against declaring them mountain bikes.
That would be good for ebikers, but bad for mountain biking access.


----------



## elder_mtber (Jan 13, 2004)

Jim_bo said:


> You miss the point that your "core argument" is little more than a "just becuz" argument. Your core argument is based on nothing substantial. It is as arbitrary and absurd as saying that some neighborhoods should just be kept white.


Surprise!!! The race card worms its way into this issue.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> The problem with your 250W vs 750W argument is that it is arbitrary and it throw out the baby with the bath water. "I rode a 750W eBike one time that belonged to my cousin and that's way too much power!" This is not a way to advocate regulation.
> 
> I'd be thrilled if BLM/NFS did an real and honest evaluation of eBikes and created regulations based on facts vice arbitrary speculation or previous regulations that was created to govern OHVs.
> 
> Interestingly, I see that BLM and NFS claim to ban eBikes (based on OHV regulations), but they don't give any justification for the bans (i.e. safety, environmental impact, etc). They are just as arbitrary as you are being.


I don't know how the numbers of 250w and 750w were arrived at, they well could have been arbitrary. 750w is one HP, but it's not like that means anything. But, I'm not being arbitrary, those regulations are already in place, courtesy of Peopleforbikes, and land managers are forced to base their decisions on allowing access by how those laws allow defined an ebike. Like it or not, that's what happens in the real world. You can continue to dismiss it all, I really don't care, it's certainly amusing to watch you argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

If you guys want to push for a new class that is 250w only, and have a few million bucks handy to pay for the associated legislation, or the ear of a friendly land manger, or want to take the feds to court, have at it. I'll keep working within the parameters that currently exist.

You also obviously think I don't like ebikes, which is untrue, I really dislike that the industry is deliberately misleading land managers (and consumers/bike riders) that a 250w emtb is typical of what the laws would allow on their land, and that a 750w ebike is just a bike. If they were upfront about ebikes, funded studies to prove their point, worked to resolve issues LM's had with ebikes, I'd be fine with whatever a LM decided in the end.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> This is the definition of talking out of your ass.


The quality of your posts are astoundingly juvenile


----------



## howardv (Nov 11, 2016)

Harryman said:


> Out of the 8 people there, 6 of them ride mtbs and all know what an ebike is. The notion that they sit in a cube somewhere, and make arbitrary decisions is laughable, you really don't have any idea of how land mangers operate.


Most mountain bikers I see on the trails don't know anything about e-mtbs. I didn't. Until I bought an inexpensive trekking bike so I could meet friends for dinner and not be sweaty! Got a whole new perspective once I started riding it. And you won't get it by just test riding it around the block or up one hill. If one gets the chance, they need to have it for at least a whole day.

I then went and bought a FS e-mtb. I now ride both my bikes. Look at this way, some days you want to go to the gym and work with 100+ lbs weights for an hour, while other days you wanna work with 20 lbs weights for 4 hours. Both are an excellent workout, but different.



Harryman said:


> Looking at actual ebike sales, which are still miniscule in the US, it's going to be quite a while before they are organized enough to push for anything.
> 
> The bike industry has far less clout with the people that actually make decisions about allowing ebike access than a lot of people give them credit for.


100% agree. Cycling lobbying is almost non-existent due to lack of funds.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

ALimon said:


> Today's youth, millennials are all growing up with e powered devices and most will own an ebike wether as a commuter or for trail riding.


"All" huh? Do you actually know or ride with any kids? I do, all the time.
Mainly, they ride BMX bikes, with a smaller but still considerable number riding mountain bikes, and less riding road bikes.
Out of hundreds and hundres of kids I've seen on bikes, I've yet to see one on a e-bike.

Where exactly is it that you ride where every kid you run into is on an ebike?


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Gutch said:


> We get a lot of support from breweries, REI, and local bike industries.


When you say "we", who do you mean? Mountain bikes or ebikes?


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

This is where the 250w reg originates from:









It clearly states that 0.25KW, or 250w is the *maximum* amount of assist allowed. I would wager to say that while all the current manufacturers are sliding by using 250w as their shield, and while they are certainly capable of producing that number they also even in EU format exceed that figure by 2x at least.

So all you Levo lovers that are hoping for a 250w limit may want to be careful what you are wishing for as it has been proven several times that under full power a Brose motor is closer to 700w.

If the reason you want to lobby for the 250w limit is to put a damper on overall speed gain by using an e bike you would certainly achieve that goal by doing so.

Here in the US the Federal 750w/20mph law has been on the books for many years and in reality better fits the current situation in regards to the mid drive motors on the market. So not really a big deal but the marketing subterfuge that surrounds the wattage figures and how it is helping to form legislation and getting lots of you here all riled up is a joke. On you.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> The quality of your posts are astoundingly juvenile


 Lets go with" all the e mt bike needs to gain access is time" 2 and 5 years were some. 10 might get you some slow change. Ever work with state or federal agencies with anything?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Lets go with" all the e mt bike needs to gain access is time" 2 and 5 years were some. 10 might get you some slow change. Ever work with state or federal agencies with anything?


I have. It's a nightmare. But you can't deny demographics change over time. I've spoken to land managers here in CA, and they have told me they're starting to look into pilot trails to see how they will co mingle with other trail users. They know what's coming, and they know they need to have a plan in place sooner than later. CA also appears to be pushing ebikes harder than other states.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

^^^^Yup. Good luck with that.


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

Bigwheel said:


> This is where the 250w reg originates from:
> 
> View attachment 1202652
> 
> ...


"Maximum *continuous* rated power of 0.25 kW" is different from full/peak power. Heat is a major limit on how much a motor can sustain continuously, hence why motors like the one found on Levos are rated 250 W nominal. The "maximum continuous rating (MCR)" is a general guideline regarding safe operating levels without damaging the motor under a range of various conditions, not just ideal conditions. Not going to go far with only a 500 Wh battery, if the motor's running 700 W continuous; are you imagining that it'd be going 20 MPH for 40 minutes worth of pedaling?

Your other claims need citations.

I'll add that the power assist levels are comparable to World Cup athletes, on a bike that's 2x as heavy as theirs. Might as well consider the motor to be "world-cup legs". Can't most healthy people do over 500W in a short 10 second burst? "_Maximum power levels during one hour range from about 200 W ("healthy men") to 500 W (exceptionally athletic men)._" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_performance

I simply see it as raising the minimum speed of riding, on demand. You choose how much assist for your specific needs, whether it be just enough to casually hang out with fast friends, to help get you started on a ride in which you feel somewhat sluggish, or to help you recover in case you blew yourself up going too fast in the first 20 minutes of the ride.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> ^^^^Yup. Good luck with that.


Good luck with what?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

mbmb65 said:


> When you say "we", who do you mean? Mountain bikes or ebikes?


Mtbs.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Am I correct to understand that speed limits are 15mph? I’ve personally never seen a sign.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> I'm I correct to understand that speed limits are 15mph? I've personally never seen a sign.


Where?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> Where?


Singletrack nationwide?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Singletrack nationwide?


There are a few places (usually city/state parks) that have an official speed limit, but 99% of the mountain bike trail mileage in the US doesn't have an official rule about speed. It's a safe/sane sort of situation. And obviously, there is basically zero enforcement (though there's that notorious case of a trail getting closed in CA based on Strava data) so even in places with a speed limit, it's essentially a free for all.

Trails tend to just get closed to bikes if speeds become an issue - there aren't the resources to patrol for speeders most places.

-Walt


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Speed limit in the NPS Park I ride is 10mph. Most of the other trails I ride are mtb trails with no speed limit.


----------



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

chazpat said:


> Speed limit in the NPS Park I ride is 10mph.


Does anyone adhere to that?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Does anyone adhere to that?


Of course not. And there goes the closing speed argument.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> Does anyone adhere to that?


I don't know, I don't have a computer on my bikes and I use Runkeeper, which doesn't show max speed. The trails are directional for bikes. Several of us have suggested signs encouraging foot traffic to travel in the opposite direction like the mtb trails in the area but at this time, foot traffic can go either way. I would bet the percentage of people in the area who would want these trails to be open to ebikes is very, very low.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

When they start dropping the motors in the downtubes, nobody’s going to know unless your radar gunning them, savvy consumer, or they cut open your frame. The point is that emtbs sooner or later will be out there and we won’t even know it. The ONLY way to stop the issue with wattage etc is an enforceable speed limit which nobody can afford or wants, because we all go too fast sometimes, idc what you’re riding. From what I was told emtb’s are welcome at Bentonville AR the new destination hot spot. It amazes me we can have adults legally smoking weed in front of junior, but **** a brick when it comes to an electric motor! Wow, just wow.


----------



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

Gutch said:


> When they start dropping the motors in the downtubes, nobody's going to know unless your radar gunning them, savvy consumer, or they cut open your frame.


I haven't seen many yet but the ones I have I've recognized from 100 yards away due to their unnatural speed. Humans power will always be inherently limited, so is electric power but the limits are much higher.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

Gutch said:


> It amazes me we can have adults legally smoking weed in front of junior, but **** a brick when it comes to an electric motor! Wow, just wow.


If I catch junior smoking weed, he's toast, but its going to happen someday. If I catch him on an ebike, I'm disowning him. I can't even fathom the shame that would bring to my family. I envision having to perform harikari.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

watermonkey said:


> If I catch junior smoking weed, he's toast, but its going to happen someday. If I catch him on an ebike, I'm disowning him. I can't even fathom the shame that would bring to my family. I envision having to perform harikari.


Harikari? So glad I'm not a part of your family


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Gutch said:


> When they start dropping the motors in the downtubes, nobody's going to know unless your radar gunning them, savvy consumer, or they cut open your frame. The point is that emtbs sooner or later will be out there and we won't even know it. The ONLY way to stop the issue with wattage etc is an enforceable speed limit which nobody can afford or wants, because we all go too fast sometimes, idc what you're riding. From what I was told emtb's are welcome at Bentonville AR the new destination hot spot. It amazes me we can have adults legally smoking weed in front of junior, but **** a brick when it comes to an electric motor! Wow, just wow.


 They already have down tube motors in the tour de farce. Check out some vids of those wheels spinning madly after a crash.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Maybe the next trend in mtb will be clear frames so all can see you're not hiding a motor.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> When they start dropping the motors in the downtubes, nobody's going to know unless your radar gunning them, savvy consumer, or they cut open your frame. The point is that emtbs sooner or later will be out there and we won't even know it. The ONLY way to stop the issue with wattage etc is an enforceable speed limit which nobody can afford or wants, because we all go too fast sometimes, idc what you're riding.


So, ebikes will lead to speed limits everywhere? Awesome, sign me up!


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Harryman said:


> So, ebikes will lead to speed limits everywhere? Awesome, sign me up!


Speed limits already exist everywhere. It's called common sense. It's not really an ebike issue as much as it is a personal behavior issue.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> Speed limits already exist everywhere. It's called common sense. It's not really an ebike issue as much as it is a personal behavior issue.


 No speed limits on MA trails. Not so much in the way of big downhills either.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

leeboh said:


> No speed limits on MA trails. Not so much in the way of big downhills either.


You don't need to have big downhills in order to slow down around blind corners on a two way trail, which is essentially a speed limit.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

ALimon said:


> You don't need to have big downhills in order to slow down around blind corners on a two way trail, which is essentially a speed limit.


Sketchy logic is sketchy.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

life behind bars said:


> Sketchy logic is sketchy.


 Nothing sketchy about my logic... on point as usual


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

J.B. Weld said:


> I haven't seen many yet but the ones I have I've recognized from 100 yards away due to their unnatural speed. Humans power will always be inherently limited, so is electric power but the limits are much higher.


People I ride with play that game all the time while chilling at the top of climbs, guessing if the other riders have pedal-assist or not. My group has poor judgment--anyone going remotely fast, and doesn't look to be dressed like a XC racer, gets called out for pedal-assist. Brazen enough to tell the incoming rider that they look like they had a motor too, and most of them don't know how to respond to such a statement. You might expect them to be proud of their power, taking it as a complement, but instead more than half are defensive, as if they don't want to be witch-hunted by mistake.

Hard to tell by bike bulkiness too. I was watching video coverage of World Cup DH top 3 qualifying at Leogang, and had to do research to figure out what Tracey Hannah was riding:









Video for context: https://www.redbull.com/int-en/videos/leogang-2018-dh-women-qualifying-runs

Heck, in a few rare cases, hikers wonder if the Yeti Switch Infinity was a motor or not.









The average mountain biker who wasn't exposed to this knowledge before will initially think that the Switch Infinity link is a set of extra shocks.

Point is, hard to trust peoples' judgment if they're not properly educated on the subject matter that they're discussing. Would you correct these hikers and average mtbrs if you owned this Yeti? Is that not what ebike owners are doing? Think the difference is that people are getting too political about this, trying to protect their values from a changing world.

I come here to learn. I instead learn how people just are terrible at sharing public space. I also learned how people are inclined to be discriminatory, drawing lines to segregate others based on common traits, and shaming all that fall under such categorization.


----------



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

karmaphi said:


> Point is, hard to trust peoples' judgment if they're not properly educated on the subject matter that they're discussing. Would you correct these hikers and average mtbrs if you owned this Yeti? Is that not what ebike owners are doing? Think the difference is that people are getting too political about this, trying to protect their values from a changing world.


I'm really not sure what you're saying. I was only pointing out the fact that I could tell when someone was on an e-bike even though they were too far away to see any details on the bike. Actually I didn't know they were electrified at first, I just noticed that there was something unnatural going on and then saw why when they passed by.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> I'm really not sure what you're saying. I was only pointing out the fact that I could tell when someone was on an e-bike even though they were too far away to see any details on the bike. Actually I didn't know they were electrified at first, I just noticed that there was something unnatural going on and then saw why when they passed by.


But unknowingly, you make a good point for those willing to share trails with eBikers.

The argument here has consistently been that mtb trails should be for "human power only" bikes. So, if a person leaves the battery pack out of his class 1 pedal assist bike, clearly it is human powered only and should be readily accepted by everyone here. Would the anti-ebikes crowd propose battery checkpoints where LEOs conduct illegal internal searches of our bike frames? And would you advocate conducting those illegal searches because a rider is faster than you?

One of the more popular arguments has been "land managers can't distinguish class 1 from class 3 bikes, so all electric bikes should be banned". But likewise, land managers may not be able to distinguish an eBike from a conventional mtb, so do we now advocate banning all mtbs?

As I've said before, it is dangerous to ask that government regulate/ban only the things you don't like. Because government always over regulates and invariably ends up banning the things you do like.


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> But unknowingly, you make a good point for those willing to share trails with eBikers.
> 
> The argument here has consistently been that mtb trails should be for "human power only" bikes. So, if a person leaves the battery pack out of his class 1 pedal assist bike, clearly it is human powered only and should be readily accepted by everyone here. Would the anti-ebikes crowd propose battery checkpoints where LEOs conduct illegal internal searches of our bike frames? And would you advocate conducting those illegal searches because a rider is faster than you?
> 
> ...


I have no idea what that means either. I not asking the government to regulate or ban anything, just keep the rules as they are. I could care less if anyone pedals their electric bike without a battery but of course no one would actually do that.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> One of the more popular arguments has been "land managers can't distinguish class 1 from class 3 bikes, so all electric bikes should be banned". But likewise, land managers may not be able to distinguish an eBike from a conventional mtb, so do we now advocate banning all mtbs?


Hey, now you're catching on; that's why a lot of us are concerned about ebikes on the trails.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

chazpat said:


> Hey, now you're catching on; that's why a lot of us are concerned about ebikes on the trails.


Pure selfishness?

JB Weld also likes the ban on bikes in Wilderness.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

karmaphi said:


> People I ride with play that game all the time while chilling at the top of climbs, guessing if the other riders have pedal-assist or not. My group has poor judgment--anyone going remotely fast, and doesn't look to be dressed like a XC racer, gets called out for pedal-assist. Brazen enough to tell the incoming rider that they look like they had a motor too, and most of them don't know how to respond to such a statement. You might expect them to be proud of their power, taking it as a complement, but instead more than half are defensive, as if they don't want to be witch-hunted by mistake.
> 
> Hard to tell by bike bulkiness too. I was watching video coverage of World Cup DH top 3 qualifying at Leogang, and had to do research to figure out what Tracey Hannah was riding:
> 
> ...


The people who spend a lot of time in chat rooms are a bad cross section of the public. The folks who are better socially adjusted spend their free time talking to actual humans.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> But unknowingly, you make a good point for those willing to share trails with eBikers.
> 
> The argument here has consistently been that mtb trails should be for "human power only" bikes. So, if a person leaves the battery pack out of his class 1 pedal assist bike, clearly it is human powered only and should be readily accepted by everyone here. Would the anti-ebikes crowd propose battery checkpoints where LEOs conduct illegal internal searches of our bike frames? And would you advocate conducting those illegal searches because a rider is faster than you?
> 
> ...


 Convoluted much? How about just following the rules for motorized access? Change them if you don't like them. And yes that is the concern "we" have been voicing, getting mt bikes banned, cuz they are lumped in with e bikes.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> But unknowingly, you make a good point for those willing to share trails with eBikers.
> 
> The argument here has consistently been that mtb trails should be for "human power only" bikes. So, if a person leaves the battery pack out of his class 1 pedal assist bike, clearly it is human powered only and should be readily accepted by everyone here. Would the anti-ebikes crowd propose battery checkpoints where LEOs conduct illegal internal searches of our bike frames? And would you advocate conducting those illegal searches because a rider is faster than you?
> 
> ...


But adding another layer of regulations that cover e-bikes is okay with the guy that fears overregulation. Mmmmkay.


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

leeboh said:


> They already have down tube motors in the tour de farce. Check out some vids of those wheels spinning madly after a crash.


except, that is purely untrue. it's a story from the 'Alex Jones' fringe

otoh Ryder Hesjedal is a local here .. and he now rides an E-MTB


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Jim_bo said:


> One of the more popular arguments has been "land managers can't distinguish class 1 from class 3 bikes, so all electric bikes should be banned". But likewise, land managers may not be able to distinguish an eBike from a conventional mtb, so do we now advocate banning all mtbs?


This is in fact exactly what a lot of us are worried about - that e-bikes will be indistinguishable to the point that all bikes just get managed as motorized vehicles.

-Walt


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

leeboh said:


> Convoluted much? How about just following the rules for motorized access? Change them if you don't like them. And yes that is the concern "we" have been voicing, getting mt bikes banned, cuz they are lumped in with e bikes.


Do you mean follow the rules as they are written, or follow the rules as you think they should have been written? Because as they are written, nothing prohibits class 1 ebikes from noon motorized trails in BLM and USFS trails.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Walt said:


> This is in fact exactly what a lot of us are worried about - that e-bikes will be indistinguishable to the point that all bikes just get managed as motorized vehicles.
> 
> -Walt


Then if you concede that ebikes may become indistinguishable from mtbs and that could pose a future threat to mtb access, doesn't it stand to reason that you should embrace the ebikes, in particular class 1, and advocate for their acceptance? You claim to have regular interactions with land managers, so you are in a position to directly influence the acceptance of class 1 bikes. But to just accept the "all electric bikes ban" without rebuttal seems like you accept mtb access restrictions are inevitable.

You either advocate for the acceptance of class 1 ebikes, or you are complicit in the future restrictions of mtb access. You are not going to stop the wave of ebikes. But at least you could help ensure that wave does no damage to mtbs.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> You either advocate for the acceptance of class 1 ebikes, or you are complicit in the future restrictions of mtb access. You are not going to stop the wave of ebikes. But at least you could help ensure that wave does no damage to mtbs.


That's some pretty special reasoning there.

You wannabe lawyers are good entertainment!


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

BCsaltchucker said:


> except, that is purely untrue. it's a story from the 'Alex Jones' fringe
> 
> otoh Ryder Hesjedal is a local here .. and he now rides an E-MTB


 Google is your friend. Try vivax, or down tube motors.


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

leeboh said:


> Google is your friend. Try vivax, or down tube motors.


more silliness from you again?

the simple truth is that illegal use of e-motors in pro races has never occurred. There was some amateur old-man idiot caught with one last year in an old man race in Italy. And there was an ebike found in the pits at a pro cyclocross race once, but never ridden in a race. There was some National-Engquirer level silly rumours that Ryder Hesjedal and Fabian Cancellara might have used a hidden motor in races, that was all purely unsubstantiated silliness. mountain out of a molehill to date


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

BCsaltchucker said:


> the simple truth is that illegal use of e-motors in pro races has never occurred.


And even if it did, who GAF?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Nothing to do with Ebikes, but this ones special for Leeboh. Never been opened!


----------



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

BCsaltchucker said:


> There was some National-Engquirer level silly rumours that Ryder Hesjedal and Fabian Cancellara might have used a hidden motor in races, that was all purely unsubstantiated silliness.


Just like the silly epo rumors in the 90's? I kind of doubt motors have ever been used much in pro races but the fact that they scan for them and that the uci is requiring bikes to be equipped with devices that detect them suggests that it has been an issue.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Just like the silly epo rumors in the 90's? I kind of doubt motors have ever been used much in pro races but the fact that they scan for them and that the uci is requiring bikes to be equipped with devices that detect them suggests that it has been an issue.


Cheating has always been a part of competing. It's been going on from the beginning of time. Now add millions of dollars and a touch of fame and you have the recipe for the ultimate reason to cheat.

i raced professionally in Europe in the 90's.... what a filthy era that was.


----------



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

ALimon said:


> Cheating has always been a part of competing. It's been going on from the beginning of time. Now add millions of dollars and a touch of fame and you have the recipe for the ultimate reason to cheat.


You are preaching to the choir.


----------



## matt4x4 (Dec 21, 2013)

Gutch said:


> I also agree that 750w is overkill.


For whom, the midget or the obese guy?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Both. I weigh 210 kitted and own a 250w and 750w. 250w could integrate a lot smoother into singletrack and other Trail users. JMO. A Levo will haul any weight around.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

Jim_bo said:


> Because as they are written, nothing prohibits class 1 ebikes from noon motorized trails in BLM and USFS trails.


Well, I'm not familiar with any noon motorized trails, but on the non motorized trails I frequent, the motor is what consistently prohibits class 1 ebikes.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Both. I weigh 210 kitted and own a 250w and 750w. 250w could integrate a lot smoother into singletrack and other Trail users. JMO. A Levo will haul any weight around.


Agreed. I own a 750w bike. I weigh only 150, but the bike is over 80, even without a load on it (cargo bike). You can absolutely haul ass on it (though it's governed at 20mph) if you even vaguely put effort into pedaling.

Now, maybe if you were truly morbidly obese or something, 250w wouldn't be enough. But for even pretty fat and lazy people it'll provide plenty of power to go have a fun day mountain biking.

-Walt


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Walt said:


> Agreed. I own a 750w bike. I weigh only 150, but the bike is over 80, even without a load on it (cargo bike). You can absolutely haul ass on it (though it's governed at 20mph) if you even vaguely put effort into pedaling.
> 
> Now, maybe if you were truly morbidly obese or something, 250w wouldn't be enough. But for even pretty fat and lazy people it'll provide plenty of power to go have a fun day motor biking.
> 
> -Walt


Sorry Walt, had to fix it for you.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Jim_bo said:


> Then* if you concede that ebikes may become indistinguishable from mtbs and that could pose a future threat to mtb access, doesn't it stand to reason that you should embrace the ebikes*, in particular class 1, and advocate for their acceptance? You claim to have regular interactions with land managers, so you are in a position to directly influence the acceptance of class 1 bikes. But to just accept the "all electric bikes ban" without rebuttal seems like you accept mtb access restrictions are inevitable.
> 
> You either advocate for the acceptance of class 1 ebikes, or you are complicit in the future restrictions of mtb access. You are not going to stop the wave of ebikes. But at least you could help ensure that wave does no damage to mtbs.


It's no wonder why there's such a disconnect between mtb advocates and ebikers.... Basically just grab them by the balls and tell the rest of us "ebikes are inevitable, just deal with it". At the same time failing to address all the issues that have been plaguing the discussion from the very beginning. Namely the potential of getting all bikes banned non motorized access trails.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Lemonaid said:


> It's no wonder why there's such a disconnect between mtb advocates and ebikers.... Basically just grab them by the balls and tell the rest of us "ebikes are inevitable, just deal with it". At the same time failing to address all the issues that have been plaguing the discussion from the very beginning. Namely the potential of getting all bikes banned non motorized access trails.


I think you miss the point. If ebikes are inevitable and ebikes will soon be indistinguishable from mtbs, then the way to ensure future mtb access is by embracing ebikes.

So many people here justify banning all ebikes because it's hard to distinguish the classes of ebikes. By that same logic, once it's hard to distinguish an ebikes from an mtb, the knee jerk reaction may be to ban all mtbs as well.

Be careful if the arguments you use to justify your biases. They could come back to bite you in the future.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I really confused as to what specifically it is that keep e-bike proponents from doing their own advocacy work.

All I ever see is people insisting that mountain bikers take responsibility for e-bike advocacy. Is there something about e-bikers that renders them unable to fend for themselves? The level of entitlement is off the charts.


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

slapheadmofo said:


> I really confused as to what specifically it is that keep e-bike proponents from doing their own advocacy work.


You'll excuse the probably erroneous internet religious reference:

'Serving God is doing good to man, but praying is thought an easier service and therefore more generally chosen.' --Ben Franklin

Seems the idea is rather old.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> I think you miss the point. If ebikes are inevitable and ebikes will soon be indistinguishable from mtbs, then the way to ensure future mtb access is by embracing ebikes.
> 
> So many people here justify banning all ebikes because it's hard to distinguish the classes of ebikes. By that same logic, once it's hard to distinguish an ebikes from an mtb, the knee jerk reaction may be to ban all mtbs as well.
> 
> Be careful if the arguments you use to justify your biases. They could come back to bite you in the future.


 E bikes are not banned. They are already regulated under motorized access rules that every park already has. If you think that e bikes don't belong there, that is another thing. You are making my point ( your quote) as to why the e bikers need to do their own advocating. Inevitable? Hmmm, not in New England at least from my point of view. You need to pave your own way, really. If e bikes get mt bikes banned, you do you think will face the issues? Who do you think will get booted off the trails? Logic? Kind of a stretch for some here I guess.


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

What kind of advocacy can people do naturally besides just riding their bike visibly in public in a manner that fits, rather than clashes? Give some ideas, or examples of how you advocate for your trail riding? Donating to an advocacy group? 

Targeting people opposed to 'em based on mere principle seems like a logical step. Maybe getting some to convert would snowball the effect. I see the proponents of ebikes just fighting unfair judgment, which seems pre-emptive from my POV. It's like guilty until proven innocent, or profiling (like racial profiling, but with a motor instead of skin color). I see it as pre-emptive since the bigger the ebike rider population is, the more difficult it'll be to pass political legislation on them.

I'd love to see e-bikes replace some vehicle traffic. Getting bikes more safe routes on the road would be a bigger deal than bikes sharing the single track. At least I have multiple options for getting out on the trails, including going out on foot, but the roads are too dominated by cars. Some countries are actually thinking about offering subsidizing for new ebike purchases, such as the UK (France and Sweden already have one).

The problem here isn't the ebike, but the irrational preconceptions, myths, and other logical fallacies (e.g. sliperry slopes). I simply see the motor as being like "mechanical doping", but with what cons? There's very real ones, like batteries and their risk of thermal runaway, and how that can start forest fires. Every con of mtn bikes is amplified further, bringing negative behavior to even more remote areas. What else?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

karmaphi said:


> What kind of advocacy can people do naturally besides just riding their bike visibly in public in a manner that fits, rather than clashes?
> 
> Targeting people opposed to 'em based on mere principle seems like a logical step. Maybe getting some to convert would snowball the effect.
> 
> IMO, I'd love to see e-bikes replace some vehicle traffic. getting bikes safe routes on the road would be a bigger deal than bikes sharing the single track. At least I have multiple options for getting out on the trails, including going out on foot, but the roads are too dominated by cars.


 The issue here is motorized e bikes on natural surface trails. Not paved commute options. No one should have issues with e bike commuters/ paved road users.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

karmaphi said:


> What kind of advocacy can people do naturally besides just riding their bike visibly in public in a manner that fits, rather than clashes? Give some ideas, or examples of how you advocate for your trail riding? Donating to an advocacy group?


Donating is great for those that like to feel like they're doing something without actually doing anything (see Zowie's post above). But until you have groups of people willing to do that actual work of spending the time writing letters and attending meetings with LMs and legislators, there's no one to donate to.

Somebody needs to get off their collective ass and start talking to the people who actually make decisions if they ever expect anything to happen. This is likely going to be incredibly time consuming and quite frustrating at times. I would expect it would take many years of constant communication coupled with good behavior and boots on the ground proving the value of ebikers as a user group (exactly how MTBers did it).

"Just go riding" is a lazy cop-out, as is "where do I send my money". Face time with the powers-that-be presenting well-reasoned arguments for access, and following up with serious sweat equity out on the trails is how things happen.

Crying 'mountain bikers need to adopt us' is never going to work. Mountain bikers have nothing to gain besides tons of aggravation and guilt by association in this equation.

Find out who is in charge of the trail systems you want access to locally and start a conversation. Go from there. Prepare to be grilled many, many times over by experts and hired guns. Expect to be yelled at by old hippies and accused of being an incredible danger to wildlife and children by people who go into the woods once or twice a year. Have your ducks all in a row with regard to studies proving what you say about trail wear and the impact on other users is true. Have good answers regarding exactly how power restrictions will be enforced. Become the 'go to guy' for your local LMs on the subject. That's how it's done.

Now, cue everyone saying "But I don't have time to do all that", to which we mountain bike advocates say "Sorry, be we don't have time to do all that AGAIN for you".


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

That kind of education helps. I'm a casual mtber, riding 1-2 a week, and I don't even do any of that advocacy. I merely volunteered to dig trails that I perhaps would've used in the future. I'd like to think that I lead by example while sharing the passion of biking, but I guess the reality is that either no one notices or the message I'm sending is mixed.

The ebike proponents here seem to be converts. Their arguments *for*, seem to be lacking, and actually working against them. Can argue anything if you speak for others, like the old and disabled; the act of doing so is a poor way of arguing, even if it's your job (politics). The real reasons seem to be selfish reasons, reminding me of all the criticism around assumed "privileges" of new demographics. It's like proponents are asking "why not", and just defending themselves when people list the reasons. Problem is that mtbers can't really list reasons without self-incriminating their own group, besides pull the motor power card, and framing ebikes to be like motos. There's got to be a better strategy than simply being defensive and waiting for the "truth to spread".

Long story short, these nonsense arguments between emtb and mtbers is a waste of time. Maybe proponents of emtb should be practicing vs other user groups, since it seems obvious that mtbers who haven't opened themselves up to emtbs, seem to only know a bunch of inaccurate myths about emtb. I feel like I need to do more research before even talking about ebikes myself, before I can be a real proponent. Right now, I'm just sort of anti-stupid, and consider myself ebike curious. Waiting for lower price points, like Deore/SLX STEPS, assuming weight doesn't matter as much.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

SHM: “Crying 'mountain bikers need to adopt us' is never going to work. Mountain bikers have nothing to gain besides tons of aggravation and guilt by association in this equation. 

Not necessarily true. Some emtb riders ARE mtbrs. So “some” mtbrs will gain access for their emtb. Although, I do agree that crying doesn’t help.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Seems to me that the eBikers aren't the ones crying. The alligator tears seem to follow:

-it has a motor.... It's not a mtb! 
-ebikes are poaching our trails! 
-If you haven't earned your fitness, you don't deserve my trails! 
-CLOSING SPEEDS! 
-your bike ain't like my bike! 
- etc.....

The eBike owners are just riding, despite the wailing of the anti-ebikers. The vast majority of mtbers who encounter them on a trail are friendly, welcoming and intrigued by their cool bikes. 

The pro-ebikers aren't whining at all. They are only pointing out the absurdity and futility of the anti-eBikers. 

I have friends who ride class 1 ebikes. Think I'll call some up and see if they'd like to legally join me for a ride where we usually ride... on a BLM non-motorized trail.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Not necessarily true. Some emtb riders ARE mtbrs.


Same can be said of moto, or 4x4ing, or anything else. 
The fact that I mainly ride a mountain bike doesn't mean squat when I'm on or in a different vehicle.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> Seems to me that the eBikers aren't the ones crying. The alligator tears seem to follow:
> 
> -it has a motor.... It's not a mtb!
> -ebikes are poaching our trails!
> ...


Well, ebikes do have a motor, you can't really deny that, can you? Again, bicycles and mtbs do not have motors no matter how desperately you want that to change. And closing speeds are real.

The rest of your list is just you crying, I do not see people posting that stuff.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

karmaphi said:


> That kind of education helps. I'm a casual mtber, riding 1-2 a week, and I don't even do any of that advocacy. I merely volunteered to dig trails that I perhaps would've used in the future. I'd like to think that I lead by example while sharing the passion of biking, but I guess the reality is that either no one notices or the message I'm sending is mixed.


It's very important and helpful for people to get involved at that level also.
Helping out with trail work and being a responsible trail user are definitely part of the solution and gives advocacy leaders solid examples of what kind of trail users we are to hold up. That only works though when there ARE people leading the effort. Right now with off road e-bikers, it seems they mainly just want to argue with mountain bikers rather than talk to the people who actually make decisions. I don't know why the acceptance of MTBrs is important to them, but it appears that it is.

If I personally wanted to get trails in our area opened to e-bikes, I sure as hell wouldn't waste my time on line arguing with strangers who have zero power to actually do anything about it. I'd be talking to The Man.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> Seems to me that the eBikers aren't the ones crying....The eBike owners are just riding


Ya, I saw someone riding their ebike yesterday on the paved bike path around the lake. Didn't look like they were crying. Haven't seen ebikes on any singletrack up here tho, you know, on account they are not allowed to ride them anywhere around here. Good to see ebikers are perfectly happy riding paved bike paths.



Jim_bo said:


> I have friends who ride class 1 ebikes. Think I'll call some up and see if they'd like to legally join me for a ride where we usually ride... on a BLM non-motorized trail.


No your not, because you know ebikes are considered motorized by the BLM. https://www.blm.gov/policy/ib-2015-060
Sooo, post some pics of your ride with your ebike "friends", otherwise your just all talk.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> Same can be said of moto, or 4x4ing, or anything else.
> The fact that I mainly ride a mountain bike doesn't mean squat when I'm on or in a different vehicle.


True that. I mainly ride a mtb also but would love to see trails open up for Class1 emtb. No fumes, no noise. Self policing will weed out the frankenbikes.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

tahoebeau said:


> Haven't seen ebikes on any singletrack up here tho, you know, on account they are not allowed to ride them anywhere around here.


Tahoe as in Lake Tahoe? Who is stopping people from riding assist bikes in Tahoe?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

That guy was a newbie. I thought he was going to have a heart attack! Are they legal there?


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Linktung said:


> Tahoe as in Lake Tahoe? Who is stopping people from riding assist bikes in Tahoe?


The same people that are supposed to stop motos, quads and snowmobiles from riding on non-motorized trails. Unfortunately, I see motos, snowmobiles and even quads on non-moto trails quite often. That doesn't make it ok anymore than riding ebikes on those same trails.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

Gutch said:


> That guy was a newbie. I thought he was going to have a heart attack! Are they legal there?


He was also probably at a higher altitude than normal. Ebikes are not legal on the Tahoe Rim trail. https://tahoerimtrail.org/mountain-biking/


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

chazpat said:


> Well, ebikes do have a motor, you can't really deny that, can you? Again, bicycles and mtbs do not have motors no matter how desperately you want that to change. And closing speeds are real.
> 
> The rest of your list is just you crying, I do not see people posting that stuff.


the logic is making a conventional assuption. It'swhat Kohlberg describes as the childish 'conventional reasoning - law and order' which is all about rigid conventions, rules assumed to be inherently moral and rigid, instead of comprehensive logic that understands more universal ethical principles and the Social Contract. And this seems to be very common among the tiny anti eMTB crowd. It's like the belief some people have that people who smoke pot are bad people because they break the law in their (backwards) states. Under Conventional Reasoning, law is the law, and is unchangeable, not subject to nuance and shifting societal needs, cultural shifts, technology shifts etc.

The rigid logic is this: motor on a bike = not a bike, period. No matter the fact that bike motor has max 1/3hp (=250watts), no matter if it has 1/100hp, or 56hp. No matter the increased practicality without impacting the bike's trail impact, or fitness benefit compared to other MTBs. It is just assumed the laws are valid and fair and inherenelty moral. But otoh we have a massive democratic governance structure put in place to make changes to law on an ongoing basis .. because wiser folks understand that laws are not morality, and need to fit with the complex and changing society they're in.

Meanwhile the Europeans are making mincemeat of the arguments against EMTB. It's not the boogeyman some assume it to be, in fact the EMTB could be seen as a great ally for MTBers in many respects.

-

meanwhile in Canada: just yesterday, a man was rescued by two volunteer rescue crew guys using eMTB here in Canada in the backcountry.

-

on closing speeds ... the problem is that non-e MTB already have huge range in speed. We have a whole genre of XC racers out training where the closing speeds are generally similar or higher to an average dude on a EMTB trail bike. We have downhill riding DH bikes where the speeds are definitely higher than achievable on an EMTB. And if we're talking climbing ... we're talking an eMTB that is going to go uphill hardly faster than a trail runner goes uphill. Add in the newbie factor and that equals slow timid rider anyways, add in the oldie rider and that means slow too.

mmm I think I am talking myself into buying an eMTB lol. Guess I should try one first


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

BCsaltchucker said:


> the logic is making a conventional assuption. It'swhat Kohlberg describes as the childish 'conventional reasoning - law and order' which is all about rigid conventions, rules assumed to be inherently moral and rigid, instead of comprehensive logic that understands more universal ethical principles and the Social Contract. And this seems to be very common among the tiny anti eMTB crowd. It's like the belief some people have that people who smoke pot are bad people because they break the law in their (backwards) states. Under Conventional Reasoning, law is the law, and is unchangeable, not subject to nuance and shifting societal needs, cultural shifts, technology shifts etc.
> 
> The rigid logic is this: motor on a bike = not a bike, period. No matter the fact that bike motor has max 1/3hp (=250watts), no matter if it has 1/100hp, or 56hp. No matter the increased practicality without impacting the bike's trail impact, or fitness benefit compared to other MTBs. It is just assumed the laws are valid and fair and inherenelty moral. But otoh we have a massive democratic governance structure put in place to make changes to law on an ongoing basis .. because wiser folks understand that laws are not morality, and need to fit with the complex and changing society they're in.
> 
> ...


lol, the problem with your argument is that what defines a bicycle is not a law. Funny though, as some of the ebikers have actually used "the law" to support that ebikes are bicycles when governments pass legislation that says they are to be governed as bicycles.

And it doesn't matter how low power the motor is, it is still a motor that in some form propels the bike; it's not a purely human propelled vehicle. Not a true motorcycle, not a true bicycle. It's an ebike. What's wrong with that?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Everyday Ebikes are being talked about more and more. It’s no doubt the only hot topic in the “bike” industry- hence ebike.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

chazpat said:


> lol, the problem with your argument is that what defines a bicycle is not a law. Funny though, as some of the ebikers have actually used "the law" to support that ebikes are bicycles when governments pass legislation that says they are to be governed as bicycles.


 As discussed earlier, there is a legal definition for "motorized vehicle", and it does not encompass a class 1 eBike.



chazpat said:


> And it doesn't matter how low power the motor is, it is still a motor that in some form propels the bike; it's not a purely human propelled vehicle. Not a true motorcycle, not a true bicycle. It's an ebike. What's wrong with that?


So, to use an absurd analogy that anti eBikers hate, if I taped 5v fan to the handle bars of my mtb, you are saying that makes my bike illegal on "non motorized" trails? Ridiculous! As Jordan Peterson said, degree matters... otherwise, raindrops would be the same as atom bombs!


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> So, to use an absurd analogy that anti eBikers hate, if I taped 5v fan to the handle bars of my mtb, you are saying that makes my bike illegal on "non motorized" trails? Ridiculous! As Jordan Peterson said, degree matters... otherwise, raindrops would be the same as atom bombs!


So in your opinion at what point does something become motorized? 251 watts? 301? Some other arbitrary number?

A non-legal, common sense definition-



> mo·tor·ize
> ˈmōdəˌrīz/
> verb
> past tense: motorized; past participle: motorized
> ...


A 5v fan won't propel your vehicle so have at it!


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

My opinion of what a motorized vehicle is is irrelevant. The law's definition simply does not include class 1 ebikes. 

And I agree, a 5v fan will not propel your bike. But it will assist. Just like a class 1.


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> My opinion of what a motorized vehicle is is irrelevant.


Well you didn't mind sharing your opinion about in your last post.

If an electric bicycle isn't motorized how come they aren't legal everywhere that bicycles are?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Everyday Ebikes are being talked about more and more. It's no doubt the only hot topic in the "bike" industry- hence ebike.


Seriously? The only hot topic? This demonstrates just how out of touch some people are about advocacy issues and the real issues facing cyclists.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Wannabe lawyers always have to take things into the realm of idiocy.

Present the fan argument to the people that actually make decisions on this stuff.
Bring it up in public at a meeting on the subject and see how it goes. Please get video.


I agree that current motorized vehicle restrictions in some places don't make sense for e-bikes. They are a new class of motorized vehicle that should be treated as such. That in no way makes them bicycles by default. Derrrrr....


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> Wannabe lawyers always have to take things into the realm of idiocy.
> 
> Present the fan argument to the people that actually make decisions on this stuff.
> Bring it up in public at a meeting on the subject and see how it goes. Please get video.
> ...


It's amusing to watch the frenzied spinning that goes on while the people who actually have to deal with the public on their land for a living are pretty rational about the whole thing. If ebike proponents adressed their concerns as an organization, they'd get a lot more access than they will with "They're coming, they're just bikes, get over it". An individual won't accomplish much unless they have an in, as land managers get an endless stream of people teliing them how to do their jobs, so a single person will just get ignored.

They're not coming here since there's essentially nowhere to ride them that justifies spending the $$$, which isn't unusual in much of the country. LBS have dropped emtbs from their inventory and have added more e-commuters.

The only ebike I've seen on singletrack has been one of these, so ermagawd, it's true! The idiots are ignoring the rulz! 

https://www.google.com/search?q=chi...IDCgD&biw=1263&bih=1031#imgrc=AaK3WfjRFodZrM:


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> Seriously? The only hot topic? This demonstrates just how out of touch some people are about advocacy issues and the real issues facing cyclists.


Yes, sorry governor of bike world, but yes in the industry this is the hottest topic since 29" wheels.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> It's amusing to watch the frenzied spinning that goes on while the people who actually have to deal with the public on their land for a living are pretty rational about the whole thing. If ebike proponents adressed their concerns as an organization, they'd get a lot more access than they will with "They're coming, they're just bikes, get over it". An individual won't accomplish much unless they have an in, as land managers get an endless stream of people teliing them how to do their jobs, so a single person will just get ignored.
> 
> They're not coming here since there's essentially nowhere to ride them that justifies spending the $$$, which isn't unusual in much of the country. LBS have dropped emtbs from their inventory and have added more e-commuters.
> 
> ...


Depends on where you live possibly. I do see more e-commuters popping up, but also the bike shops stocking a few emtbs. More E-bike only shops popping up.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Yes, sorry governor of bike world, but yes in the industry this is the hottest topic since 29" wheels.


Strange, I don't see articles about emtbs popping up on any of the popular mountain biking web sites. No recent articles on emtbs on this website mtbr, pinkbike or vitalmtb.

Gravel bikes are more of a hotter topic in the mtb industry right now than emtbs, which tells us a lot right there


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I didn’t say that they were outselling gravel bikes, they are a hotter topic because they are in there infancy. Five years ago did every manufacturer have a emtb? Five years from now? Roll eyes...


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> Depends on where you live possibly. I do see more e-commuters popping up, but also the bike shops stocking a few emtbs. More E-bike only shops popping up.


Sure, it absolutely depends where you live. It's the chicken and egg thing, no emtb access, no point in selling them. The ebike only shops I see here are selling hub motor ebikes for people who don't want to pedal on the bike paths. I saw a guy a couple of days ago, obviously disabled with a converted trike cruising around headed into the grocery store. A great non-car solution


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Gutch said:


> I didn't say that they were outselling gravel bikes, they are a hotter topic because they are in there infancy. Five years ago did every manufacturer have a emtb? Five years from now? Roll eyes...


And I didn't say you said they were out selling gravel bikes. What the hell are you talking about?

I said gravel bikes are a hotter topic than emtbs in the mtb industry right now, which says a lot right there.

If emtbs are such a hot topic in the mountain bike industry, then explain why there is not one article about emtbs on any of those mtb websites I mentioned. There isn't even an ebike forum on pinkbike and this forum is a joke


----------



## matt4x4 (Dec 21, 2013)

Gotta have a few bicycle setup for whatever you want, I have the 45H mxus 3000W direct drive in 4T so its sluggish on takeoff with 26" wheels, but plans are for 17" motorcycle rim which converts to ~22" bicycle diameter and most likely a radial lace because they are 115mm in 12G. Can dump way more amps into it then a higher (T)urn count motor.

TBH I dont go fast, only the rare occasion on the paved roads. I like to cruise at 20-25mph and I ride in the Provincial Park where they are forbidden, but that park is in a city and they do plaster signs everywhere. Its not obvious to anyone I am on an ebike. What my joys and "e-grin"  are - Is crushing hills, SILENTLY! so no mid-drive. I've ridden one powerful mid drive and it would climb anything, but it was noisy. People could hear me coming from behind them from a long distance away. Direct Drive motors with Sinewave controller, it is super silent! Perhaps a custom Direct Drive Mid Drive fabrication is in order. More "stuff" for other people to figure out its an ebike though. 

My next build is going to be a pedal assist so I can break a sweat instead of always using the throttle and never pedaling. I have a dinky department store P.O.S. I will setup well. Not sure if the typical 9C 1kw motors will suffice with my fat obese weight. True Torque Sensing is quite expensive, so maybe a KT display type kit with different PAS levels.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

tahoebeau said:


> And I didn't say you said they were out selling gravel bikes. What the hell are you talking about?
> 
> I said gravel bikes are a hotter topic than emtbs in the mtb industry right now, which says a lot right there.
> 
> If emtbs are such a hot topic in the mountain bike industry, then explain why there is not one article about emtbs on any of those mtb websites I mentioned. There isn't even an ebike forum on pinkbike and this forum is a joke


Whatever bud, I don't really care.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Whatever bud, I don't really care.


Then please stop with the gibberish.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Likewise.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Jimbo, is that you?


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Whatever bud, I don't really care.


Says the guy with over 25 posts (lost count) in this thread alone. :lol:


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

tahoebeau said:


> Says the guy with over 25 posts (lost count) in this thread alone. :lol:


What I meant was I don't care what YOU think. I care about Ebikes for sure because I own them and ride them, unlike most of the posters here. I didn't create Ebikes and I ride them legally, so why don't you take an interest in something you enjoy and maybe stop posting in this "lame" forum as you call it? Crack a PBR, throw on your flannel, trim your beard and go hang on Pinkbike.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

chazpat said:


> Jimbo, is that you?


I know you're just trying to be confrontational, but since you brought it up, you tell me... Is that guy's bike illegal on non motorized trails?


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> ... Is that guy's bike illegal on non motorized trails?


No, perfectly fine. I'd use a jet engine though


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> No, perfectly fine. I'd use a jet engine though


The fan bike pollutes, has serious safety issues, and it's noisy as Hell. So explain how that's different or preferable to an eBike....


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

Tailwind for that rider, and headwind (or cooling breeze) for those behind him. xD


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> The fan bike pollutes, has serious safety issues, and it's noisy as Hell. So explain how that's different or preferable to an eBike....


It could be an electric fan, pedal assist of course. Use at your own risk.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> I know you're just trying to be confrontational, but since you brought it up, you tell me... Is that guy's bike illegal on non motorized trails?


Illegal, that's why he rides it in a parking lot.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Gutch said:


> What I meant was I don't care what YOU think


Ah, that makes more sense, because, ya, it's obvious you care a lot about what people post and say about ebikes on here. However, I would point out that major mtb websites and other outlets not having any articles or showing any interest for embts is not just what I think or believe, it is what is really happening. This site your posting on doesn't even give a f about ebikes. When was the last article written here on ebikes?



Gutch said:


> Crack a PBR, throw on your flannel, trim your beard and go hang on Pinkbike.


I will, along with the rest of the next generation of mountain bikers whom all don't give a **** about ebikes, hence why there is not one article about them. Over there on those other sites like pinkbike that have a much younger user base, we pretty much consider ebikes the same as mobility scooters designed for out of shape baby boomers with lots of money.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

tahoebeau said:


> Ah, that makes more sense, because, ya, it's obvious you care a lot about what people post and say about ebikes on here. However, I would point out that major mtb websites and other outlets not having any articles or showing any interest for embts is not just what I think or believe, it is what is really happening. This site your posting on doesn't even give a f about ebikes. When was the last article written here on ebikes?
> 
> I will, along with the rest of the next generation of mountain bikers whom all don't give a **** about ebikes, hence why there is not one article about them. Over there on those other sites like pinkbike that have a much younger user base, we pretty much consider ebikes the same as mobility scooters designed for out of shape baby boomers with lots of money.


? good shot!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

tahoebeau said:


> we pretty much consider ebikes the same as mobility scooters designed for out of shape baby boomers with lots of money.


Kinda like BMXers look at MTBs I guess.
Not without good reason.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

chazpat said:


> Illegal, that's why he rides it in a parking lot.


I'll let you and J.B. Weld argue about whether the fan bike is legal or not.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

tahoebeau said:


> Ah, that makes more sense, because, ya, it's obvious you care a lot about what people post and say about ebikes on here. However, I would point out that major mtb websites and other outlets not having any articles or showing any interest for embts is not just what I think or believe, it is what is really happening. This site your posting on doesn't even give a f about ebikes. When was the last article written here on ebikes?
> 
> I will, along with the rest of the next generation of mountain bikers whom all don't give a **** about ebikes, hence why there is not one article about them. Over there on those other sites like pinkbike that have a much younger user base, we pretty much consider ebikes the same as mobility scooters designed for out of shape baby boomers with lots of money.


You do understand that you are in an eBike forum... don't you? And obviously, you do have some level of interest in eBikes, or you would have never even entered the forum, much less this thread. So I guess I don't understand all the self righteous condescension.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

E bikes are the same as mobility scooters for out of shape baby boomers? Nice. Might be my new sig line.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

leeboh said:


> E bikes are the same as mobility scooters for out of shape baby boomers? Nice. Might be my new sig line.


Seeing as how multiple DH pros are now training using eMTBs, It would be cool to lay that line on them.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Still an awesome line, way.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Cuz we all know there aren't any out of shape baby boomers riding MTBs. 

Right?


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

slapheadmofo said:


> Cuz we all know there aren't any out of shape baby boomers riding MTBs.
> 
> Right?


I would guess a significant percentage of high end MTB sales would be to out of shape baby boomers.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> Cuz we all know there aren't any out of shape baby boomers riding MTBs.
> 
> Right?


 My fuel is coffee, bacon and ipa's.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> My fuel is coffee, bacon and ipa's.


I run mainly on piss and vinegar.

(And occasionally your chili and bourbon porters! )


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Funny, everyone that i ride emtbs with are totally in shape and can haul the mail on anything two wheels. Need for speed.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

tahoebeau said:


> Ah, that makes more sense, because, ya, it's obvious you care a lot about what people post and say about ebikes on here. However, I would point out that major mtb websites and other outlets not having any articles or showing any interest for embts is not just what I think or believe, it is what is really happening. This site your posting on doesn't even give a f about ebikes. When was the last article written here on ebikes?
> 
> I will, along with the rest of the next generation of mountain bikers whom all don't give a **** about ebikes, hence why there is not one article about them. Over there on those other sites like pinkbike that have a much younger user base, we pretty much consider ebikes the same as mobility scooters designed for out of shape baby boomers with lots of money.


Here's one for you, directly from Pinkbike, May 28th 2018. Current enough?
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/ghost-hybride-sl-amr-x-s77-lc-first-ride.html


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Here's one for you, directly from Pinkbike, May 28th 2018. Current enough?
> https://www.pinkbike.com/news/ghost-hybride-sl-amr-x-s77-lc-first-ride.html


Hey, nice catch! One article on ebikes out of like the last 500. Is that your definition of a hot topic for the industry?

Since your so good at finding needles in a hay stack, when was the last article about ebikes on this web site? Was it actually about a bike or access, because I seem to remeber the last ebike article here was on access, not an actual bike review, but it's been so long I can't remember.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Here's one for you, directly from Pinkbike, May 28th 2018. Current enough?
> https://www.pinkbike.com/news/ghost-hybride-sl-amr-x-s77-lc-first-ride.html


155 mm cranks, me want! Well actually 160 would be what I'd like to try (have 170's on now) as I'm not sure if 155 while standing on the pedals while descending would give enough stability for me.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Zinfan said:


> I would guess a significant percentage of high end MTB sales would be to out of shape baby boomers.


Maybe? I really don't know, however, luckily for the rest of us who ride bicycles, we don't need an exceessive amount of disposable income to ride. Unlike with ebikes, where one needs to pretty much be part of the elite class to own one or a baby boomer with a nice pention, whatever that is.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

tahoebeau said:


> Hey, nice catch! One article on ebikes out of like the last 500. Is that your definition of a hot topic for the industry?
> 
> Since your so good at finding needles in a hay stack, when was the last article about ebikes on this web site? Was it actually about a bike or access, because I seem to remeber the last ebike article here was on access, not an actual bike review, but it's been so long I can't remember.


Well, the owner of this site FC started a post on the Focus Jam2 bike. Also 3 weeks ago he mentioned the BMC Speedfox. But you're right- they are not into Ebikes.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

tahoebeau said:


> Maybe? I really don't know, however, luckily for the rest of us who ride bicycles, we don't need an exceessive amount of disposable income to ride. Unlike with ebikes, where one needs to pretty much be part of the elite class to own one or a baby boomer with a nice pention, whatever that is.


I'm sure you're the baddest endurobro on the Mtn! Oh, why do you keep posting here? Closet ebiker?


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

Gutch said:


> Here's one for you, directly from Pinkbike, May 28th 2018. Current enough?
> https://www.pinkbike.com/news/ghost-hybride-sl-amr-x-s77-lc-first-ride.html


Hey, nice catch.

So, REI sell Ghost MTBs, and they sell other brands of eBikes. How long before this one arrives at REI where the Sierra clubbers can go just as apeshit as the endurobros do on mtbr?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Just 4 U LBB.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Just 4 U LBB.


Fortunately everyone else can see it too.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

honkinunit said:


> Hey, nice catch.
> 
> So, REI sell Ghost MTBs, and they sell other brands of eBikes. How long before this one arrives at REI where the Sierra clubbers can go just as apeshit as the endurobros do on mtbr?


Can't wait to see the Sierra clubbers go apeshit. It's a nice ebike.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> Fortunately everyone else can see it too.


Good, if I'm being stereotyped I want to make sure people get the correct profile of a emtbr.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

tahoebeau said:


> Maybe? I really don't know, however, luckily for the rest of us who ride bicycles, we don't need an exceessive amount of disposable income to ride. Unlike with ebikes, where one needs to pretty much be part of the elite class to own one or a baby boomer with a nice pention, whatever that is.


I only see a couple e-bikes ridden regularly around here.
Neither rider is anything close to fitting your description.


----------



## Twimby (Jun 27, 2013)

Gutch said:


> I'm sure you're the baddest endurobro on the Mtn! Oh, why do you keep posting here? Closet ebiker?


If you look a TB's post history you have to look hard not to find a post other than on E-Bikes. There was one where he offered abuse to PDR in Nor Cal.
Maybe the Rock Hudson of the E-Bike forum


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Gutch said:


> I'm sure you're the baddest endurobro on the Mtn! Oh, why do you keep posting here? Closet ebiker?


Thanks! Not sure why you think I am such a bad ass endurobro, but if that's what you want to think of me, go ahead. As far as why I post here, this is the internet forum where those who want to keep ebikes off motorized trails post. Not sure why that's not completely obvious to you or anyone else here. Because, there is really no useful information to anyone who rides ebikes on this forum, but there is a ton of information about why ebikes should not be allowed on non-moto trails. You know, this being a mtb website after all. And I do ride ebikes. I work for an outfit that rents them in the summer. Worked there last year and again this year.



slapheadmofo said:


> I only see a couple e-bikes ridden regularly around here.
> Neither rider is anything close to fitting your description.


Well, there is allways exceptions. However, I see a lot of people who are interested in ebikes and the below descriptions of the demographics of ebike riders is spot on with what I see. What's funny about these articles is that you can tell they want ebikers to be a younger demographic, but the all the data shows that's not how it is.

"As the only national organisation in the U.S. concentrating on the consumer to retailer segment, we know the true demographics of the current U.S. customer base for "legal" pedal-assist, electric bikes.

The U.S. consumer for e-bikes comes from the Baby-Boomer category. Our leading age groups are 45-54, 55-64, and 65+. In terms of interest, while the EU tends to be more male dominant at around 90%, in the U.S. our ratios show a 70% male, 30% female buyer ratio.

We have extensive studies from more than 15,000 consumers that have come through the Electric Bike Expos all across the country to back up these positions."
https://cyclingindustry.news/electr...demographics-are-the-customers-of-the-future/

And...

"...talking to Leon Ollerton, Director of All Seasons Electric Bikes (one of the UK's leading suppliers of electric bikes online and via retail networks) the core ebike market is 50-70-year-old AB (upper and middle class on the socio-economic scale) class males and females."
Who are Electric Bikes for? - Ebike Class

And...

"In terms of use by different age groups (in eroupe), e-biking accounts for one third of all cycling kilometres travelled by adults age 65 and above, 6% for adults aged up to 50 years and only 1% for adults aged up to 35."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692316301934


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Thank you TB for pointing out EXACTLY why Class 1 Pedelecs aren’t a big deal. Because mature riders will be on the trail with gobs of Mtb experience. Perfect. 

Now for marketing... hmm older well off individuals to sell a product to? Nope, let’s put our knowledge into gravelers..

Listen, I understand, if my job was to rent Ebikes to newbs all day- id go crazy. Unless of course I owned the business 😳. Are you renting emtbs? If you really are that mad about experienced mature riders on emtbs and want to ban them, then I’d suggest standing at the trail head in a cop uniform holding a no ebike sign. Because the reality what we are seeing is no signage, no problem. Real world.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

The e-bikers I see regularly are commuters. 
One is ~mid 30s and has an e-recumbant and looks white-collarish.
The other one is ~45ish and is a bit of a kook who uses it as his sole form of transportation (judging by the boozy concoction he runs in his water bottles on his bike, it's likely not by choice).


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Thank you TB for pointing out EXACTLY why Class 1 Pedelecs aren't a big deal. Because mature riders will be on the trail with gobs of Mtb experience...
> 
> ...Listen, I understand, if my job was to rent Ebikes to newbs all day- id go crazy.


Ebikers I see are the later with just about no sense when it come to riding a bike let alone not having "gobs of mtb experience". They seem to be attracted to the ebikes because they require very little effort, and pedal bikes, as one renter told me, "are just too much work which is why (they) never got into them." Also, as long as ebikes stay a product that really only 50-60 years and above are interested in i wouldn't be so concerned. But, as you can read in the articles I posted, the ebike industry wants younger riders and will be focusing on advertising more to them. Then the concern becomes how much power do these youngsters want and how fast do they want to go?

The class system is not enforceable with no distinguishable difference between a 250w powered ebike and a +1000w powered one, therefore it is completely irrelevant. There are already tons of ebikes, here in the states, on the market for sale with more than 750watts. In this country of more power, more power sells which is why there are so many ebikes for sale that exceed what the legal limit of power for an ebike is.

Ebike proponents say there is an "e-revolution" coming, and with the class system being totally useless, ebikes will have much more power and speed than the ones that exceed the class system limits now, and that is what I am concerned about.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

This is true, however, how fast can the majority of people actually ride a said trail? I know experienced riders can shred, and will, but they are just that - experienced. And the newbie riders cannot haul in technical because they have no skill level. Frankenbikes will always be the minority, hence why every manufacturer (main stream) is on the 250w pedelec band wagon.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Gutch said:


> This is true, however, how fast can the majority of people actually ride a said trail? I know experienced riders can shred, and will, but they are just that - experienced. And the newbie riders cannot haul in technical because they have no skill level. Frankenbikes will always be the minority, hence why every manufacturer (main stream) is on the 250w pedelec band wagon.


So are you saying that inexperienced riders will only ride powerful (read 750w and up) eBikes on tight technical trails..... Please understand that not every trail is tight and restrictive enough to keep powerful eBikes slowed down. Most of the trails in SoCal that are mutli-use allow hikers, MTB and Horseback riders and are not tight and techy, they are open and flowy and do allow for someone without experience to jam on them into sweeping blind corners.

Please remember when making your arguments that one needs to consider all possible trail styles and not just pick and choose trails that help your argument.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Klurejr said:


> So are you saying that inexperienced riders will only ride powerful (read 750w and up) eBikes on tight technical trails..... Please understand that not every trail is tight and restrictive enough to keep powerful eBikes slowed down. Most of the trails in SoCal that are mutli-use allow hikers, MTB and Horseback riders and are not tight and techy, they are open and flowy and do allow for someone without experience to jam on them into sweeping blind corners.
> 
> Please remember when making your arguments that one needs to consider all possible trail styles and not just pick and choose trails that help your argument.


True, are you saying they will go faster on the flow trails on an ebike versus a Mtb?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I seems that generally with MTB, as the machines have gotten more advanced, many (particularly newer) riders tend to expect to struggle less while feeling entitled to easy speed and not having to ever stop for challenging sections. I would imagine many e-bikers would escalate that trend and you'd see even further dumbing down of trails to accommodate higher speeds, crappier handling, and a general mindset of "I paid a lot of money for this thing, damned if I'm going to ever get off and walk it down the trail". See plenty of that from MTBers these days; going to imagine that eMTBers aren't going to be immune.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I rarely see an emtb anytime, maybe others see more. I personally don’t see newbie older people shredding singletrack on emtbs. Why?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> I seems that generally with MTB, as the machines have gotten more advanced, many (particularly newer) riders tend to expect to struggle less while feeling entitled to easy speed and not having to ever stop for challenging sections. I would imagine many e-bikers would escalate that trend and you'd see even further dumbing down of trails to accommodate higher speeds, crappier handling, and a general mindset of "I paid a lot of money for this thing, damned if I'm going to ever get off and walk it down the trail". See plenty of that from MTBers these days; going to imagine that eMTBers aren't going to be immune.


I see the same with the younger generation as well. I'm 47 and a bunch has changed in the Mtb scene. XC is a dying sport (at least where I live)


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> You do understand that you are in an eBike forum... don't you? And obviously, you do have some level of interest in eBikes, or you would have never even entered the forum, much less this thread. So I guess I don't understand all the self righteous condescension.


Actually this is an eBike section on a Mountain Bike Forum, just one small section on a HUGE website called MTBR, not one of the hundreds of other sections of the forum are dedicated to eBikes.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Gutch said:


> True, are you saying they will go faster on the flow trails on an ebike versus a Mtb?


I cannot say for a fact what the riders of eBikes will do, but they certainly will have the capability to go faster on a trail with an eBike than they could with a mountain bike that has no motor, again I am referring to 750w bikes and above.

It is possible that 100% of the riders who purchase higher powered eBikes will ride them in a very responsible way on MUTs and not greatly increase Closing speeds with other trail users and cause conflicts.

I do not think that is very likely at all however.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I see the same with the younger generation as well. I'm 47 and a bunch has changed in the Mtb scene. XC is a dying sport (at least where I live)


Why do you say that (XC is a dying sport)? I would think most of the trails around you are XC.

It does seem like there has been a big shift to smoother flow trails and away from technical riding. But are those not also XC trails? And it seems like they are more suited to XC bikes, not needing a lot of travel.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Klurejr said:


> I cannot say for a fact what the riders of eBikes will do, but they certainly will have the capability to go faster on a trail with an eBike than they could with a mountain bike that has no motor, again I am referring to 750w bikes and above.
> 
> It is possible that 100% of the riders who purchase higher powered eBikes will ride them in a very responsible way on MUTs and not greatly increase Closing speeds with other trail users and cause conflicts.
> 
> I do not think that is very likely at all however.


I agree with you. The 750w legal classification has hurt the chances of ebikers. Why not 250w from the get go?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> Why do you say that (XC is a dying sport)? I would think most of the trails around you are XC.
> 
> It does seem like there has been a big shift to smoother flow trails and away from technical riding. But are those not also XC trails? And it seems like they are more suited to XC bikes, not needing a lot of travel.


Mainly meant XC racing is not the rage. You can ride any bike where I ride, but very rarely do you see bikes like Specialized Epics with steep head tubes and long stays ripping through Pisgah. Although that's exactly what I rode 5 yrs ago! Speeds are faster, more air time etc. Honestly, most people are probably riding too much bike for the trails, (including myself) but as I get older, don't mind the extra "oh ****!" factor.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Mainly meant XC racing is not the rage. You can ride any bike where I ride, but very rarely do you see bikes like Specialized Epics with steep head tubes and long stays ripping through Pisgah. Although that's exactly what I rode 5 yrs ago! Speeds are faster, more air time etc. Honestly, most people are probably riding too much bike for the trails, (including myself) but as I get older, don't mind the extra "oh ****!" factor.


I think those bikes phased out because most people don't race and people have finally figured out that there's really no reason to spend all your time on fragile, whippy bikes that beat you up n the rough when there are so many better alternatives for day-to-day use.

The riding is still XC, but the bike are just much more sensible.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Gutch said:


> Mainly meant XC racing is not the rage. You can ride any bike where I ride, but very rarely do you see bikes like Specialized Epics with steep head tubes and long stays ripping through Pisgah. Although that's exactly what I rode 5 yrs ago! Speeds are faster, more air time etc. Honestly, most people are probably riding too much bike for the trails, (including myself) but as I get older, don't mind the extra "oh ****!" factor.


Oddly enough, many of the top times on popular trails in Pisgah are owned by people on 69 degree HTA 100mm bikes.

When I lived in VA, and went down to Pisgah, most of the bikes I saw on trails that required you to climb something other than a fire road to get to them were XC bikes. Very rarely saw AM bikes on singletrack climbs. When I did , they were pushing.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Le Duke said:


> Oddly enough, many of the top times on popular trails in Pisgah are owned by people on 69 degree HTA 100mm bikes.
> 
> When I lived in VA, and went down to Pisgah, most of the bikes I saw on trails that required you to climb something other than a fire road to get to them were XC bikes. Very rarely saw AM bikes on singletrack climbs. When I did , they were pushing.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


For racing, no doubt.


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

Klurejr said:


> I cannot say for a fact what the riders of eBikes will do, but they certainly will have the capability to go faster on a trail with an eBike than they could with a mountain bike that has no motor, again I am referring to 750w bikes and above.
> 
> It is possible that 100% of the riders who purchase higher powered eBikes will ride them in a very responsible way on MUTs and not greatly increase Closing speeds with other trail users and cause conflicts.
> 
> I do not think that is very likely at all however.


Well worded, but I have to question the focus on 750 W bikes and above. It would've been true for any motor assist of 50 W or more. I actually think 50 W is a generous estimate on how much power it takes to offset the weight penalty of a motor, battery, and basic reinforcement.

I'd love to strike a conversation about the positives of pedal assist bikes, weighing them against the negatives. If only people weren't quick to dismiss claims that were too "far fetched" or unrelated. People don't care about the issues of declining health? What's more lazy than an ebike? Does the big picture not matter?

The problem of emtbs having all the issues of mtbing has, only amplified, brings negative association with other mtn bikers. If the answer can't be to ban anything that results in significantly amplified problems, like much improved capability and range, what other solutions can there be that can be mostly hands-off or low-effort?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Le Duke said:


> Oddly enough, many of the top times on popular trails in Pisgah are owned by people on 69 degree HTA 100mm bikes.
> 
> When I lived in VA, and went down to Pisgah, most of the bikes I saw on trails that required you to climb something other than a fire road to get to them were XC bikes. Very rarely saw AM bikes on singletrack climbs. When I did , they were pushing.


Racers tend to be faster than 'regular' riders. Don't think it's primarily because of the bikes they ride though.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

karmaphi said:


> Well worded, but I have to question the focus on 750 W bikes and above.


750w and above is unknown. Europe has standards for lower wattage ped-elec ebikes and so far the small amount of speed boost one can get from those bikes has been a non-factor in the issues that can get trails shutdown to bikes, namely Closing Speed and trail damage.

750w bikes can hit 30mph, bikes with more wattage have been clocked as high as 80mph. Having that sort of machinery with that capability is a different discussion than having a 250w Class1 Ped-elec.

This argument does not take into account the fact that just about any 250w eBike can be modified to perform in the 750 and above category.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> I agree with you. The 750w legal classification has hurt the chances of ebikers. Why not 250w from the get go?


I asked the lawyer who writes the legislation for P4B, and A) He seemed puzzled that it's different in the EU (no sh!t), and B) said that since there were already companies selling 750w ebikes here, that's why they went with 750w. It's also why they included a class with throttles. They really didn't think it through regarding access, they were just accomodating the sellers, it's an industry group afterall.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> I asked the lawyer who writes the legislation for P4B, and A) He seemed puzzled that it's different in the EU (no sh!t), and B) said that since there were already companies selling 750w ebikes here, that's why they went with 750w. It's also why they included a class with throttles. They really didn't think it through regarding access, they were just accomodating the sellers, it's an industry group afterall.


Go figure... At the time weren't the 750watters like Turbo's and road machines? I can't think of one major manufacture that offers a 750w emtb. I know they exist, but the big boys aren't producing them.


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

Klurejr said:


> This argument does not take into account the fact that just about any 250w eBike can be modified to perform in the 750 and above category.


So you're saying here that if a motor rated for 250 W continuous is modded to go over the 28 MPH cut-off defined by class 3, it goes into the undefined or moped/motorcycle classification?

Reminds me of that story about the Italians fining the rider on a modded ebike 8000 euros, since their vehicle is technically no longer a class 1 ebike, but instead is a motorcycle (which needs license, insurance, etc.). Not sure if it's true or not, but with that kind of enforcement, maybe we can rest easy. xD


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> Go figure... At the time weren't the 750watters like Turbo's and road machines? I can't think of one major manufacture that offers a 750w emtb. I know they exist, but the big boys aren't producing them.


The big ebike sellers in this country were, and are all making hub motor ebikes, which are mostly 500-1000w. 750w was and is the current fed CPSC reg for an ebike. Emtbs are small potatoes compared to them, and the bike companies are making them in EU compliance, since that's where the market is.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> The big ebike sellers in this country were, and are all making hub motor ebikes, which are mostly 500-1000w. 750w was and is the current fed CPSC reg for an ebike. Emtbs are small potatoes compared to them, and the bike companies are making them in EU compliance, since that's where the market is.


10-4. I would vote 750w commuter /road. 250w emtb. But it doesn't matter!


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> Oddly enough, many of the top times on popular trails in Pisgah are owned by people on 69 degree HTA 100mm bikes.
> 
> When I lived in VA, and went down to Pisgah, most of the bikes I saw on trails that required you to climb something other than a fire road to get to them were XC bikes. Very rarely saw AM bikes on singletrack climbs. When I did , they were pushing.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Really? That is not my experience at all. Except on race days.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

Gutch said:


> I can't think of one major manufacture that offers a 750w emtb. I know they exist, but the big boys aren't producing them.


Well, unfortunately the big boys (typical bicycle manufactures like giant, trek and specialized) are not major players in the ebike industry, there not even close. So the power of the ebikes they make is pretty much irrelevant. I think if they did have as big of a market share as they do for pedal bikes, then they could have an impact in helping to keep the power to 250w nominal.

But for people looking to buy an ebike very few (16%) buy their ebike from a traditional bike retailers. Most buy online where you'll find lots of +750 watt and above ebikes for sale. And the rest buy from ebike only retailers who do not sell pedal bikes so the major bicycle players have very little impact. Brand name is not a very important factor, if at all, to the majority of those looking to buy an ebike.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

singletrackmack said:


> Well, unfortunately the big boys (typical bicycle manufactures like giant, trek and specialized) are not major players in the ebike industry, there not even close. So the power of the ebikes they make is pretty much irrelevant. I think if they did have as big of a market share as they do for pedal bikes, then they could have an impact in helping to keep the power to 250w nominal
> 
> But for people looking to buy an ebike very few (16%) buy their ebike from a traditional bike retailers. Most buy online where you'll find lots of +750 watt and above ebikes for sale. And the rest buy from ebike only retailers who do not sell pedal bikes so the major bicycle players have very little impact. Brand name is not a very important factor, if at all, to the majority of those looking to buy an ebike.


Does this hold true for emtbs or road Ebikes?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> Does this hold true for emtbs or road Ebikes?


Most ebikes sold in the US are class 2(ish) hub drives intended to ride on the road, like what pedego sells. While these sellers sell efatbikes of mediocre quality, or cheap hardtails, they're not selling true emtbs yet. I've seen a few middrives teased with the new bafang 1000w ultra motor, so I expect they'll start stocking them.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Harryman said:


> Most ebikes sold in the US are class 2(ish) hub drives intended to ride on the road, like what pedego sells. While these sellers sell efatbikes of mediocre quality, or cheap hardtails, they're not selling true emtbs yet. I've seen a few middrives teased with the new bafang 1000w ultra motor, so I expect they'll start stocking them.


Had a big dude riding an e-fatbike blow by me on a trail in Fort Collins this past weekend. Then he promptly ran into a rock. Bike looked full off-road, MTB capable. I'm guessing it was at least a 1000w motor, based on the fact that he had his seat super low, was only pedaling occasionally, the rate at which he passed me, his weight and the grade.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

You guys amaze me how you argue over made up issues. 

Someone show me where BLM or USFS is concerned that class 1 eBikes are 750W vice 250W. This is just an issue raised as an opinion by a couple posters here and it's being argued as if it is the basis of law. It is not.

The truth is, BLM and USFS have only declared eBikes to be "motorized vehicles" and restricted their use based on prior rules governing OHVs. I have seen nothing from BLM or USFS that states any objections to eBikes based on anything such as power, effect on environment, safety, etc. If these were real concerns to them, they should be addressing them. Instead, all of these issues are simply made up issues and then argued as if they are real. If BLM and USFS have specific concerns, they should be based on actual data and rational thought. That would result in a reasonable conversation. But it seems to me that BLM and USFS speak volumes with their silence.

USFS and BLM claim that ALL eBikes are classified as "motorized vehicles" and fit into the OHV category despite the contrary language of the law with respect to class1. That is a legitimate topic to discuss because the agencies have made a claim. 

But it also seems to me that it should offend everyone here that the eBikes are being pigeon holed into the OHV category. You want to talk about closing speeds and disparity in power? Compare a class 1 eBike to a 500cc, 2 stroke dirt bike or a 1000cc side-by-side!

eBikes are not specifically MTBs. But they are clearly not OHVs. And if there will only be two choices of trail types to choose from, MTB and OHV trails, then clearly class 1 and class 2 eBikes are far more appropriate on MTB trails.

The point is, if we encourage the agencies to restrict access for anyone based on standards that are clearly inappropriate and out of context just because they fit our immediate personal agendas, then what prevents these agencies from restricting MTBs based on standards that are clearly inappropriate and out of context? It is a cowardly position to argue that "if eBikers are being treated unjustly, that's for them to deal with and not us". For an injustice to one is an injustice to all. And on the big spectrum of things, we sit way to close to class 1 eBikes to turn a blind eye to injustices towards them to expect that some of that injustice not spill over on us.


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> But it also seems to me that it should offend everyone here that the eBikes are being pigeon holed into the OHV category.


By that reasoning why shouldn't everyone be offended if electric bikes were pigeon holed into the bicycle/pedestrian category? Mtb trails might be appropriate for ebikes but electric bikes may or may not be appropriate on mtb trails.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> By that reasoning why shouldn't everyone be offended if electric bikes were pigeon holed into the bicycle/pedestrian category? Mtb trails might be appropriate for ebikes but electric bikes may or may not be appropriate on mtb trails.


I'm not exactly sure I understand your point.

But my point is simple. A class 1 eBike is the first cousin of an MTB. But it ain't even a distant relative of an OHV. So, as I said, an injustice for one is an injustice for all. That's kinda philosophical. However, the closer to you on the spectrum those injustices occur, the more you should be concerned about them. Given that class1 eBikes are a close first cousin to the MTB, we should be very concerned about how they are treated by regulatory agencies.


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> I'm not exactly sure I understand your point.
> 
> But my point is simple. A class 1 eBike is the first cousin of an MTB. But it ain't even a distant relative of an OHV.


That's your opinion, I disagree. You talk of justice but completely ignore those who value non-motorized spaces.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> Given that class1 eBikes are a close first cousin to the MTB, we should be very concerned about how they are treated by regulatory agencies.


As pointed out many, many times here in this forum, the class system is not effective, cannot be enforced and therefore irrelevant. Sounds great on paper, but very difficult to translate into the real world. Given that, ebikes are ebikes regardless of how much power they have, just like cars are cars regardless of thy have 80hp or 800hp. If class 1 ebikes are opened up to a trail, then ebikes that exceed the class limits will also be open to those trails since there is no practical way to differentiate the two.

The BLM and forest service can't enforce the class system any better than other agencies, but they can easily enforce motorized and non-motorized so that is what they will do.

Instead of just complaining about your rights or whatever, first come up with a practical way to enforce the class system. After you have established that, then you can move onto what you think "your rights" are.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> That's your opinion, I disagree. You talk of justice but completely ignore those who value non-motorized spaces.


I do speak of justice. You speak of preference. It is unjust to deny access based on inappropriate reasons. It would violate your preference if access to MTB trails was granted to class 1 eBikes whether that decision was just or not.

Two very different things. I care about justice. I care little about your preference because the next guy is going to have a contrary preference. Policy should be based upon justice... not preference.


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> It is unjust to deny access based on inappropriate reasons.


Who decides what an inappropriate reason is?


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> I do speak of justice. You speak of preference.


Also many people prefer bigger motors. Where's the justice


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> It is unjust to deny access based on inappropriate reasons. It would violate your preference if access to MTB trails was granted to class 1 eBikes whether that decision was just or not.
> 
> Two very different things. I care about justice. I care little about your preference because the next guy is going to have a contrary preference. Policy should be based upon justice... not preference.


Policy also needs to be enforceable. Again, if trails are opened up to class 1 ebikes then they are opened up to all ebikes. You can ignore this fact all you want, but that will not make it go away. If you want class 1 ebikes to be be allowed in certain areas, how will ebikes that exceed the class 1 limit be restricted?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> I do speak of justice. You speak of preference. It is unjust to deny access based on inappropriate reasons. It would violate your preference if access to MTB trails was granted to class 1 eBikes whether that decision was just or not.
> 
> Two very different things. I care about justice. I care little about your preference because the next guy is going to have a contrary preference. Policy should be based upon justice... not preference.


 Deny access. Hmmm. Rules regarding motorized vehicles are already in place. Don't like the rules? That's your issue. Justice? For trail use? Seems a little bit of a stretch. Like freedom of speech or right to vote etc. And e bikes have access, they are welcome to ride where motos are allowed.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

> The point is, if we encourage the agencies to restrict access for anyone based on standards that are clearly inappropriate and out of context just because they fit our immediate personal agendas, then what prevents these agencies from restricting MTBs based on standards that are clearly inappropriate and out of context? It is a cowardly position to argue that "if eBikers are being treated unjustly, that's for them to deal with and not us". For an injustice to one is an injustice to all. And on the big spectrum of things, we sit way to close to class 1 eBikes to turn a blind eye to injustices towards them to expect that some of that injustice not spill over on us.


 "All for one and justice for all" Lone ranger? Superman? Close to class one? Umm, no motor on my bike. Let us know how your meetings go with the fed agencies in regards to e bike class, motorized access and injustices upon the downtrodden and oppressed. Really.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

karmaphi said:


> So you're saying here that if a motor rated for 250 W continuous is modded to go over the 28 MPH cut-off defined by class 3, it goes into the undefined or moped/motorcycle classification?
> 
> Reminds me of that story about the Italians fining the rider on a modded ebike 8000 euros, since their vehicle is technically no longer a class 1 ebike, but instead is a motorcycle (which needs license, insurance, etc.). Not sure if it's true or not, but with that kind of enforcement, maybe we can rest easy. xD


Yes, if a motor rated at 250w is modified to become something that goes over 28mph, it for sure changes the definition of that thing is.

That said, will the police be riding Motorcycles on MUT to try and police these sorts of things? Doubtful. Land Mangers are more likely to just ban ALL eBikes. The precedent has already been set at a park in NorCal where all Bicycles were banned because a few yahoo's we bombing the MUT's and posting there speeds to strava.

This is mostly speculation.


----------



## howardv (Nov 11, 2016)

tahoebeau said:


> Policy also needs to be enforceable. Again, if trails are opened up to class 1 ebikes then they are opened up to all ebikes. You can ignore this fact all you want, but that will not make it go away. If you want class 1 ebikes to be be allowed in certain areas, how will ebikes that exceed the class 1 limit be restricted?


Hmmm, maybe bikes shouldn't be allowed at all on trails. If bikes are allowed, then it opens the trails to all bikes, and some bikers will ruin the land by biking off trail, going downhill irresponsibly, and injuring hikers/equestrians.

There are bad apples are out there, but we won't punish the masses for the irresponsible few. It's the same with e-bikes. I agree there will be those with high power home built ebikes, but those few shouldn't ruin it for the masses.

And as is, some e-bikes look like regular bikes. As technology advances, they'll soon be even less indistinguishable. And so far, nothing is being enforced in my area. Not sure how it would be. As one Ranger said, they can't prove the motor was being used, so they just don't enforce it.

Am I the only person on this board who rides both types of mountain bikes on a regular basis? I love both!


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

howardv said:


> And as is, some e-bikes look like regular bikes. As technology advances, they'll soon be even less indistinguishable. And so far, nothing is being enforced in my area. Not sure how it would be. As one Ranger said, they can't prove the motor was being used, so they just don't enforce it.


You make the obvious point that soon an eBike will be indistinguishable from an mtb. So for the "policy has to be enforceable" crowd, you are just inviting all bikes to lose access.

I'm really surprised at how little thought people put into forming a opinion.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> You make the obvious point that soon an eBike will be indistinguishable from an mtb. So for the "policy has to be enforceable" crowd, you are just inviting all bikes to lose access.
> 
> I'm really surprised at how little thought people put into forming a opinion.


Ebikes with enough power to be practical will never get to the point that you can't tell it has a motor or power supply. Sure, there are ways to place very small hidden electric motors in the frame with a small battery in the seat bag or water bottle. But that is not practical and wouldn't be worth the effort for the vast majority. Technology will advance, but physical limitations will allways be there.

As for class 1 ebikes and the BLM and forest service, there is not federal class system for ebikes. The class system is only relevant in a handful of states so the BLM and forest service do not recognize the class of an ebike. The forest serive is interested in keeping things equal and not discriminating. They state "restrictions on motor vehicle use that are applied consistently to everyone have been repeatedly been shown to not be discriminatory."
So, basically, if they allow class 1 ebikes on non-motorized trails, they would be discriminating against other motorized users. That is why their policy is in fact just and true and makes perfect sense.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

ALimon said:


> I always knew it would be just a matter of time before land managers found themselves on an eMTB. This should be interesting...https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/colorado-land-managers-are-using-electric-bikes/


I am trying to figure out how the current discussion in this thread has anything to do with the initial post and thread title.


----------

