# Are anti-ebikers shooting themselves in the foot?



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

While riding my eMTB yesterday, I passed by a trail that had a new "no e-bikes" sign attached to the trail marker that's been there for decades. It looked to have been installed by a private party, not the forest service, and it got me wondering what the end game will be in this struggle for access.

Will funding for enforcement suddenly materialize, causing ebikers to avoid these trails? Not likely.
Will ebikers with severely limited access in many areas stay off trails like these? Not likely.
Will land managers close these trails to all bikes because they don't have the resources for enforcement, and have a hard time differentiating between E and analog, or navigating the laws surrounding use for disabled riders? Maybe.

It seems to me that if analog riders want to retain access to their present trail systems, and maybe even have their trails systems expanded, they should be advocating for class 1 eMTB's to be treated the same as analog bikes. We can debate all day about the semantics of what an eMTB is or isn't, but from a thirty thousand foot view, they're virtually identical, and should be treated as such.


----------



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

Don't think so. Anti-ebike and pro- non-motorized aren't necessarily the same thing. Just my opinion.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

There are more mountain bikers than ever.

Seems to me the access relationship is between what hikers and horse peoples perceive as mountain bikers. I don't think it takes more than two brain cells to rub together to realize e-bikes are no help in that matter. 

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

Unfortunately, perception is ultimately reality.


----------



## Nosdeho (Jun 16, 2021)

What causing issue in my neck of the woods is e-bikers with zero trail etiquette. Also some of the guys are hacking the e-bikes and getting 25-30 mph thru trails built for pedal bikes. If you actually care about riding your e-bike on trails you are representing a group so remember that when you blast past some old geezer on a mtb.


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

I can't predict how it's going to play out. My wise advice is: "Don't be a dick!" To all those involved...

My position on e-bikes has evolved (or devolved depending on your point of view)... I think they can coexist with other trail users, but the few bad apples will draw unwanted attention to trail access issues (just like the bad apple mountain bikers and equestrians). We don't sign our trails with no e-bikes, despite the fact that that is the current status.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Nosdeho said:


> What causing issue in my neck of the woods is e-bikers with zero trail etiquette. Also some of the guys are hacking the e-bikes and getting 25-30 mph thru trails built for pedal bikes. If you actually care about riding your e-bike on trails you are representing a group so remember that when you blast past some old geezer on a mtb.


That's interesting, because in my area eMTBers seem to be exceptionally friendly and yielding to other users, and personally I find other trail users surprised by the fact that I slow down or stop and say hello. It's the strava crown seeking enduro bros who are the primary problem. I've actually had a couple of them run into me (while riding my analog bike). To a large extent age seems to play a bigger role than bike, and ebikers tend to skew older, slower, and more respectful.

The whole "hacking the bike to go faster" thing just doesn't exist here. Maybe on flat lands, but on trails with any elevation gain, I don't find eMTB's even remotely approaching the governor on climbs, and analog are almost always faster on the downhills. And really, on any trail more difficult than a "rail to trail" or city bike path, the speed is going to be limited by the trail's technical nature long before reaching governed speeds, or allowing somebody to exceed them with a hack.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Individuals slapping No E-Bike stickers on signs just creates apathy and a legitimate excuse to claim ignorance / confusion around actual access. So yes, using these stickers in this way isn't helping their cause. 

*_CJ*'s post above brings up some of the common sense aspects and reality of the ebike discussion. In essence though, all testimonies given here are anecdotal evidence aka not worth anything honestly, and that is pro or against. The actual studies show ebikes have similar impacts as regular bikes, similar perception from *OTHER* user groups (e.g. hikers, equestrians, dog walkers), roughly travel the same and potentially *SLOWER* than regular cyclists, etc. 

Oh you want a reference? I was hoping you'd ask that  Below was a good read but it's a little long for the average attention span. The *Executive Summary *is on pages 1-2, and the* Conclusions* Chapter 8 starts on page 77 for those who just want the TLDR answer. The *Works Cited* section is one of the best reference list around for understanding what studies have actually been performed to date to come to a more recent conclusion of impact (IMBA study and survey was in 2016):



https://assets.bouldercounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/e-bike-literature-review.pdf


----------



## the-one1 (Aug 2, 2008)

While riding my MTB yesterday, I passed by a hiking trail that had a new "no bikes" sign attached to the trail marker that's been there for decades. It looked to have been installed by a private party, not the forest service, and it got me wondering what the end game will be in this struggle for access.

Will funding for enforcement suddenly materialize, causing bikers to avoid these trails? Not likely.
Will bikers with severely limited access in many areas stay off trails like these? Not likely.
Will land managers close these trails to all users because they don't have the resources for enforcement, and have a hard time differentiating between bike and hiker, or navigating the laws surrounding use for all users? Maybe.

It seems to me that if hikes want to retain access to their present trail systems, and maybe even have their trails systems expanded, they should be advocating for MTB's to be treated the same as hikers. We can debate all day about the semantics of what an MTB is or isn't, but from a thirty thousand foot view, they're virtually identical, and should be treated as such.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

baker said:


> I can't predict how it's going to play out. My wise advice is: "Don't be a dick!"


Here's a thought.....what if, some ebikers see the actions of the anti crowd as "being dicks"? And, they ride as outlaws with little regard for anyone else, because that's the position they been forced into? If they were accepted into the community, and treated with respect, maybe they'd be more inclined to treat other trail users with respect.


.


----------



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

roughster said:


> The actual studies show ebikes have similar impacts as regular bikes, similar perception from *OTHER* user groups (e.g. hikers, equestrians, dog walkers), roughly travel the same and potentially *SLOWER* than regular cyclists, etc.




Many ebikes owners on this site say one of their main benefits is that they can get twice the runs in the same time as they otherwise could on an "analog" bike, which doesn't jibe with that study.


----------



## Nosdeho (Jun 16, 2021)

_CJ said:


> That's interesting, because in my area eMTBers seem to be exceptionally friendly and yielding to other users, and personally I find other trail users surprised by the fact that I slow down or stop and say hello. It's the strava crown seeking enduro bros who are the primary problem. I've actually had a couple of them run into me (while riding my analog bike). To a large extent age seems to play a bigger role than bike, and ebikers tend to skew older, slower, and more respectful.
> 
> The whole "hacking the bike to go faster" thing just doesn't exist here. Maybe on flat lands, but on trails with any elevation gain, I don't find eMTB's even remotely approaching the governor on climbs, and analog are almost always faster on the downhills. And really, on any trail more difficult than a "rail to trail" or city bike path, the speed is going to be limited by the trail's technical nature long before reaching governed speeds, or allowing somebody to exceed them with a hack.


I am on The board of a trail organization and some of our members are e-bikers and they represent their group well. We get yahoo's who want to go fast and consider e-bikes dirt bikes with pedals. I have found myself defusing too many situations between land managers e-bikers and xc riders. Xc "Strava" riders have grown to live and live with e-bikes but some new kid finally can keep up with the fast crew and starts showing their rump. Yes some xc riders think they are getting a paycheck to ride fast and rude but people with zero experience going 20+mph worry me more.


----------



## Nosdeho (Jun 16, 2021)

_CJ said:


> Here's a thought.....what if, some ebikers see the actions of the anti crowd as "being dicks"? And, they ride as outlaws with little regard for anyone else, because that's the position they been forced into? If they were accepted into the community, and treated with respect, maybe they'd be more inclined to treat other trail users with respect.
> 
> 
> .


But if a land manager decided e-bikers are not welcome be it for any reason. They manage the land so ignoring rules gives e-bikers a bad name. We worked hard with some patient people to change the opinions of the land manager so enforcement officers wouldn't be called. Trail building is an advocate based thing and so should e-bikers working to change the minds of the land managers to come to a better agreement. I understand your frustrations. 
To clarify we worked hard to Legally allow e-bikes on our trail system it was hard.


----------



## itsky (Jul 26, 2011)

_CJ said:


> While riding my eMTB yesterday, I passed by a trail that had a new "no e-bikes" sign attached to the trail marker that's been there for decades. It looked to have been installed by a private party, not the forest service, and it got me wondering what the end game will be in this struggle for access.
> 
> Will funding for enforcement suddenly materialize, causing ebikers to avoid these trails? Not likely.
> Will ebikers with severely limited access in many areas stay off trails like these? Not likely.
> ...


A. Does the trail allow legitimate access for ebikers? 
B. Does it allow legitimate access for MTB? 

If the answer is "Yes" to B. and "No" to A, then the ebikers are non-compliant and risking future trail access for MTB. It would seem the purpose of this sign is to mitigate this risk.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Nosdeho said:


> people with zero experience going 20+mph worry me more.


This has been my experience in the field as well. E-bikes give inexperienced people with zero exposure to etiquette access to what they typically would not be able to access or even interested in accessing. 

One thing I've specifically experienced are said e-bikers riding up trails that you couldn't possibly ride up on a non-motorized bike. Trails that have long been downhill specific. I'm seeing this more and more at mountain bike specific trail destinations. 

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

baker said:


> My position on e-bikes has evolved (or devolved depending on your point of view)... I think they can coexist with other trail users


Mine has evolved the opposite direction. I used to be in the "co-exist" crowd. I used to ride with a group that had/has eBike riders. And I used to advocate for them (especially in that one riders case). But the more experience I have with other eBike riders, the more I hate them. Watching my female pro XC rider get knocked off her bike by a rider at a bike park on a section of trail labeled "no passing" was a bit of the final straw.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Honestly I think that segregation works great when it comes to trail use. Men here, women there, whites here... JUST KIDDING! I mean that separating groups by mode of transport seems to keep people happier. Bikes get their own trails, equestrians their own, hikers their own, etc. We have some of that here and it seems to help. One argument against segregation is that a user group might lose some trails that they've had and enjoyed for years, so that would be a minus. In places where primitive style trails are popular (The Colorado Trail comes to mind) then it would probably meet with a lot of resistance. However, a trail network purpose built for biking (Galbraith and Sandy Ridge come to mind) is _really_ fun and you don't have to worry about running into a horse around a corner. I'm not sure how to reconcile ebike v. mtb use everywhere but the aforementioned trail networks have climbing lines and one-way descents so it seems to mesh pretty well. They definitely have a bike park feel rather than a backcountry feel though. Tricky problem.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

WHALENARD said:


> This has been my experience in the field as well. E-bikes give inexperienced people with zero exposure to etiquette access to what they typically would not be able to access or even interested in accessing.
> 
> One thing I've specifically experienced are said e-bikers riding up trails that you couldn't possibly ride up on a non-motorized bike. Trails that have long been downhill specific. I'm seeing this more and more at mountain bike specific trail destinations.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


Oh man, I've encountered more people (not just ebikes) going the wrong way on designated one-way trails over the last year or two. It's scary. I'm blasting full-tilt on a DH-only section and suddenly there's some nitwit going UP in order to redo a section or whatever. This happened not only on the local trails but also at the freaking lift-served bike park a few times this summer!


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

No


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> Many ebikes owners on this site say one of their main benefits is that they can get twice the runs in the same time as they otherwise could on an "analog" bike, which doesn't jibe with that study.


What people say (in a forum where they are often forced to defend against accusations of laziness and where being “hardcore” is still regarded as a virtue) vs. what they do in reality can be very different things.

Where I am, the observation is in line with _CJ’s (as little as I ever agree with him on anything). eMTBers skew significantly older than MTBers, and a$shole flyby-ers are invariably Strava-KOM-seeking younger men, sometimes (slightly older) women. The latter is a mystery (to me) demographic, but it’s there.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Many ebikes owners on this site say one of their main benefits is that they can get twice the runs in the same time as they otherwise could on an "analog" bike, which doesn't jibe with that study.


It’s jives just not in the way you may expect. It allows more runs, but what does “run” mean? If you think of it in the classic “skiing” definition it fits best, as in “runs from the top”. So yes an ebike will get you up to the top more times with equal effort and often slightly faster than a mediocre rider, and about the same time as a fit XC rider. 

On the DH times both types are nearly identical with a slight nod to standard bikes on true DHs where pedalling is not involved and to ebikes if there are flat or uphill sections.

What I find is most ebikers ride a more diverse set of trails. Trails that are guarded by steep sustained climb trails are easier to manage on an ebike, so they actually get ridden where normally they are over grown. Plenty of East Bay overgrown / cow trails are being revived due to this. This really doesn’t impact anyone other than spreading people out and actually reducing overall footprint on highly trafficked trails.

I would be highly confident in saying that most ebikers do not go up one trail and down in the same sequence over and over. It’s usually more of a “cool now I can ride multiple different trails” kind of thing.


----------



## natas1321 (Nov 4, 2017)

several trail systems I ride are privately owned and some do not allow ebikes, I only on occasion come across ebikes and really have no issues with them. There are good people who ride ebikes and pedal bikes just like there are idiots that ride both as well. I don't blame the bike, just the person riding it if they are acting like a moron.


----------



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

roughster said:


> It’s jives just not in the way you may expect. It allows more runs, but what does “run” mean?



A run generally means the fun downhill section following an uphill slog. If a rider reports getting twice the runs in the same amount of time then they have to be averaging twice the speed as they would on a standard bicycle.

I don't really have anything to say against that, it is what it is


----------



## Mac_89 (Mar 24, 2021)

WHALENARD said:


> One thing I've specifically experienced are said e-bikers riding up trails that you couldn't possibly ride up on a non-motorized bike. Trails that have long been downhill specific.


This is the only real issue I have with e-bikes, and sadly it's not just the new crowd. "Ah there's nobody around, it'll be fine..."


----------



## Blue Dot Trail (May 30, 2018)

I got my own opinions about eBike that I’ll keep to myself, but I will say… Regardless of “eBike” or non-eBike, MTBers generally have a responsibility to go above and beyond to be polite and courteous to other trail users. If some douche is going way too fast and being reckless with other people around, then they should be banned.


----------



## Rider51 (Jun 6, 2015)

I live in the Northeast where perception, and use, seems to be different than most other places, having lived and traveled across the US (and Canada). For example, if trails out west have a 90/10 ratio of trails that are off-limits to bicycles (meaning 90% of all trails ban riding), it's the opposite in the Northeast, with most everything open to rides. 

This lax thinking also applies to e-bikes. They are allowed in nearly every single trail that you can ride an analog MTB on. Few people question it, and the riders self-police for the most part. 

This works here for several reasons. First, because foot and wheel traffic must co-exist, there is a civility between two groups. Cyclists are very respectful of hikers here, very polite in almost every instance, because the consequences are obvious. 

There are a lot of chunks of wild land that out west would likely be owned by the USFS, BLM, NPS, State Land, etc. that automatically comes with legal restrictions, before mountain biking existed, let alone e-bikes. In the Northeast? that 36 acre parcel of land that's overgrown? It's pretty much fair game for trail building. State parks? We ride those a lot too. How? Park supervisors have two general mindsets. First, they like the idea that riders build their own trails and stay off the main path (or use it slowly as connectors). Many of the trails are made by NEMBA or established builders. E-bikes are simply clumped into this. It's just another bike. 

Environmental impact, soil, foliage, is different in the NE (much of the east) than it is out west. There's no old growth wilderness here, not much of it, and what's here, grows back quickly. Lots of trails here are also over rocks. Lots of rocks.


----------



## Mac_89 (Mar 24, 2021)

Nat said:


> Oh man, I've encountered more people (not just ebikes) going the wrong way on designated one-way trails over the last year or two. It's scary. I'm blasting full-tilt on a DH-only section and suddenly there's some nitwit going UP in order to redo a section or whatever. This happened not only on the local trails but also at the freaking lift-served bike park a few times this summer!


A young lad was hospitalised at our local a few months ago after a collision with an e-biker. I **** you not, the guy was climbing a jump line.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

I was brought up very early in this thread about e-bikes with riders who have zero trail etiquette. IMO it is ANYONE with zero trail etiquette, though cyclists get the most gruff for it because they move the fastest. Any negative cyclist encounters screw things up for all of us, and the last thing people who perceive cyclists poorly are going to remember is whether the bike had a motor or not. So far, my very limited experience with e-bike riders has been positive, friendly and with good etiquette. So far.

That said, and I hate to say this but it is true....if the in-the-flesh interactions of e-bike riders are even remotely similar to about 20%+ or so of the ones I've had in this specific e-bike subforum in one single thread, we're all screwed and they need a reformation. I thought there were plenty of Richards in every subforum, and of course there are some in every group on the planet, but this one seems to be the hive.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Mac_89 said:


> A young lad was hospitalised at our local a few months ago after a collision with an e-biker. I **** you not, the guy was climbing a jump line.


I think shops renting e-bikes to noobs should be partially held responsible for this, even in lawsuits. 

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


----------



## RBoardman (Dec 27, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> A run generally means the fun downhill section following an uphill slog. If a rider reports getting twice the runs in the same amount of time then they have to be averaging twice the speed as they would on a standard bicycle.
> 
> I don't really have anything to say against that, it is what it is


I get twice the runs in, but it’s because we don’t hardly take breaks at the top and bottom of trails on an ebike since it required less fitness in general. Climb speed goes from 4mph on normal bike to 6mph on an ebike, on steep climbs. (So ride speed is not doubled, even though I’m getting double the mileage in a 4 hour ride).


----------



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

RBoardman said:


> I get twice the runs in, but it’s because we don’t hardly take breaks at the top and bottom of trails on an ebike since it required less fitness in general. Climb speed goes from 4mph on normal bike to 6mph on an ebike, on steep climbs. (So ride speed is not doubled, even though I’m getting double the mileage in a 4 hour ride).



Damn, that's a lot of resting to add that much more time.

I seem to climb way faster on an ebike, the steeper the gradient the bigger the speed difference.


----------



## RBoardman (Dec 27, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> Damn, that's a lot of resting to add that much more time.
> 
> I seem to climb way faster on an ebike, the steeper the gradient the bigger the speed difference.


Guilty. Our group takes a lot of breaks. And it’s not because people lack fitness. Most the people I ride with ride at a pro-ish level and can bust out a 10k’ climbing day off the couch. 

We almost always ride in a low power eco mode trying to get as much range out of the batteries as possible.


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

I think that anti e-bikers are just trying to save what they love by separating themselves from being classified the same as e-bikers. All the major brands are advertising e-bikes as just another mtb. Mtber's are hated by hikers and equiners enough as it is. Regardless of what an electric motor does or doesn't do for a bike, it kills our image to other trail users that much more.


----------



## JerzyBoy (May 26, 2008)

Analog bikes. What?!?


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

Shane5001 said:


> I think that anti e-bikers are just trying to save what they love by separating themselves from being classified the same as e-bikers. All the major brands are advertising e-bikes as just another mtb. Mtber's are hated by hikers and equiners enough as it is. Regardless of what an electric motor does or doesn't do for a bike, it kills our image to other trail users that much more.


When you try to distance yourself from your closest relation out of fear-of-association and in-the-same-breath try to ingratiate yourself to common enemies that only begrudgingly accepts one of you, but would just as soon have both of you eradicated if given the opportunity... then you know you are a pathetic bootlicker.

Is that, given your description, your judgement of who anti e-bikers are?


----------



## RBoardman (Dec 27, 2014)

Shane5001 said:


> I think that anti e-bikers are just trying to save what they love by separating themselves from being classified the same as e-bikers. All the major brands are advertising e-bikes as just another mtb. Mtber's are hated by hikers and equiners enough as it is. Regardless of what an electric motor does or doesn't do for a bike, it kills our image to other trail users that much more.


The only glares of disapproval I get while on my ebike are from other mountain bikers. Zero issue with hikers or horse people on the trails I ride, considering I always slow down to a walking pace and I doubt most even know my bike has a motor.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

WHALENARD said:


> This has been my experience in the field as well. E-bikes give inexperienced people with zero exposure to etiquette access to what they typically would not be able to access or even interested in accessing.
> 
> *One thing I've specifically experienced are said e-bikers riding up trails that you couldn't possibly ride up on a non-motorized bike. Trails that have long been downhill specific. I'm seeing this more and more at mountain bike specific trail destinations.*
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


This...

This is what I'm encountering with ebike riders. With a motor...they are riding up trails they would not be riding up if they were riding an NA bike. A lot of them are riding aggressively uphill and expect you to move aside for them.


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

WHALENARD said:


> One thing I've specifically experienced are said e-bikers riding up trails that you couldn't possibly ride up on a non-motorized bike. Trails that have long been downhill specific. I'm seeing this more and more at mountain bike specific trail destinations.





RS VR6 said:


> This is what I'm encountering with ebike riders. With a motor...they are riding up trails they would not be riding up if they were riding an NA bike. A lot of them are riding aggressively uphill and expect you to move aside for them.


Unless a trail is explicitly designated as a one-way trail... regular trail right-of-way applies, and that's always that the uphill party has the right-of-way. So yeah, you do need to move aside for them. You are confusing your (convenient for your course-of-action) assumptions for rights that you don't actually have.

Does your argument have a leg to stand on if a hiker was coming up the trail that you deemed one-way just because you judged it to be unrideable on a nonelectric MTB?

Your inabilities are your own, and have no bearing on how anybody else should use the trail unless there was explicit policy from an authority.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Well yeah...without the motor...they would not be riding those trails.


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

DtEW said:


> When you try to distance yourself from your closest relation out of fear-of-association and in-the-same-breath try to ingratiate yourself to common enemies that only begrudgingly accepts one of you, but would just as soon have both of you eradicated if given the opportunity... then you know you are a pathetic bootlicker.
> 
> Is that, given your description, your judgement of who anti e-bikers are?


Possibly, but think of yourself as not an e-biker for a moment. Personally I'm over it, I even put my friends e-bike together and demoed it. There's know way it would damage the trails anymore than a regular mtb. Most people would not know the difference between his e-bike and my "analog" bike. That being said, just associating the word motor with bike makes people nervous. Whether hikers and equiners are friendly or not, it's crazy not thinking they're using the "motor" as fuel for trail access restrictions. As far as e-bikes increasing the #'s and the voice of cycling, that's all I can hope for.


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

RS VR6 said:


> Well yeah...without the motor...they would not be riding those trails.


Brings up another valid point.


----------



## blkdout (Oct 3, 2021)

I typically yield to larger and faster. If eBikes were allowed where I ride, I wouldn't automatically claim the right-of-way simply because my machine is traditional or whatever. If an eBike is barreling towards me, I'm moving out of the way. They're out having fun, I'm out having fun, don't really care.


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

RS VR6 said:


> Well yeah...without the motor...they would not be riding those trails.





Shane5001 said:


> Brings up another valid point.


But they do have the motor assistance. And therefore they could ride those trails. Just like how the hiker can come up those very trails as well.

Once again, your own inability to ride that trail at-best creates a norm for an older paradigm (and frankly, a fanciful one that pretends that no hikers will come up that trail), but does not in itself create actual policy that supercedes the existing rules of the trail. It is nothing more than self-serving wishful thinking 

It is possible (and probably recommended) for an authority to take the prior norms into account to create policy changes in order to minimize conflicts. But before that happens, it is on you to obey the right-of-way rules of the trail, instead of complaining at the surprise that somebody else could do something that you can't.


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

WHALENARD said:


> There are more mountain bikers than ever.
> 
> Seems to me the access relationship is between what hikers and horse peoples perceive as mountain bikers. I don't think it takes more than two brain cells to rub together to realize e-bikes are no help in that matter.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


Exactly


----------



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

Shane5001 said:


> Possibly, but think of yourself as not an e-biker for a moment. Personally I'm over it, I even put my friends e-bike together and demoed it. There's know way it would damage the trails anymore than a regular mtb. Most people would not know the difference between his e-bike and my "analog" bike.



True for many class 1 bikes but not for others. Some very popular mail order brands ride nothing like a human powered bike and it's easy to see the difference when someone's riding one. I understand that many (e.g. you) don't care and that's fine but for me the fear of allowing motorized things in certain areas is totally justified.


----------



## r-rocket (Jun 23, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> Damn, that's a lot of resting to add that much more time.
> 
> I seem to climb way faster on an ebike, the steeper the gradient the bigger the speed difference.


The phrase we use in groups rides is "Slow-man gets no rest". That's where we stop every 5-10 minutes to make sure the slowest person can keep up with the group, but then soon after the whole group is back together the faster riders go sprinting off. 

Poor guy who is Slow-man pretty much does the entire ride with very little rest, while the fastest riders get lots of rest, but it definitely adds much more time to rides.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

DtEW said:


> But they do have the motor assistance. And therefore they could ride those trails. Just like how the hiker can come up those very trails as well.
> 
> Once again, your own inability to ride that trail at-best creates a norm for an older paradigm (and frankly, a fanciful one that pretends that no hikers will come up that trail), but does not in itself create actual policy that supercedes the existing rules of the trail. It is nothing more than self-serving wishful thinking
> 
> It is possible (and probably recommended) for an authority to take the prior norms into account to create policy changes in order to minimize conflicts. But before that happens, it is on you to obey the right-of-way rules of the trail, instead of complaining at the surprise that somebody else could do something that you can't.


That's a cool story and all...but yeah...if they didn't have the motor...they would not be riding up those trails...and no...hikers don't come up that trail.


----------



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

r-rocket said:


> The phrase we use in groups rides is "Slow-man gets no rest". That's where we stop every 5-10 minutes to make sure the slowest person can keep up with the group, but then soon after the whole group is back together the faster riders go sprinting off.
> 
> Poor guy who is Slow-man pretty much does the entire ride with very little rest, while the fastest riders get lots of rest, but it definitely adds much more time to rides.



lol, so true. That's the way most group rides I've been on have went. Most of my rides are solo so I only stop when I have to pee, something about the way I'm wired just makes me want to keep going.


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

J.B. Weld said:


> True for many class 1 bikes but not for others. Some very popular mail order brands ride nothing like a human powered bike and it's easy to see the difference when someone's riding one. I understand that many (e.g. you) don't care and that's fine but for me the fear of allowing motorized things in certain areas is totally justified.


Oh, I'm not pro e-anything, I'm just over the hate and fight that I can't do anything about. E-bikes were legalized in my area a few years ago. Prior to that when the local shop was pimping them out, I actually contacted BLM and sent them their own law banning them. My buddie has the Motobecane Hal e-boost. Rides similar to a turbo levo in my limited opinion, just gives you Lance Armstrong's legs when climbing. Feels like a 60lb turd when going downhill.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

JerzyBoy said:


> Analog bikes. What?!?


Never repeat those words again.


----------



## r-rocket (Jun 23, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> lol, so true. That's the way most group rides I've been on have went. Most of my rides are solo so I only stop when I have to pee, something about the way I'm wired just makes me want to keep going.


At least you stop when you have to pee.....


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

And yes, the fear is most definitely there, exactly what prompted this thread.


----------



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

Shane5001 said:


> Oh, I'm not pro e-anything, I'm just over the hate and fight that I can't do anything about. E-bikes were legalized in my area a few years ago. Prior to that when the local shop was pimping them out, I actually contacted BLM and sent them their own law banning them. My buddie has the Motobecane Hal e-boost. Rides similar to a turbo levo in my limited opinion, just gives you Lance Armstrong's legs when climbing. Feels like a 60lb turd when going downhill.



I've got no hate and I'm not fighting it either, too many more important things in life to attend to first. I can see the motor- no motor cutoff argument though and if there's any kind of vote on it I'd cast my ballot to divide certain access restrictions along those lines.

Seriously though some of these mail order ebikes are crazy powerful and they're selling like hotcakes where I'm at. Nothing like a Levo.


----------



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

r-rocket said:


> At least you stop when you have to pee.....



Ha ha, I'm not _*that*_ committed! Sometimes I can make it 4 hours without a stop though, pretty good for an old dude.


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

RS VR6 said:


> That's a cool story and all...but yeah...if they didn't have the motor...they would not be riding up those trails...and no...hikers don't come up that trail.


Alright dude. Keep living the fantasy.


----------



## Slowanimalswin (Apr 25, 2021)

If we're talking about Federally managed land, e-bikes are considered motorized vehicles. They are permitted wherever other motorized vehicles are permitted and not permitted on non-motorized trails. On a case-by-case basis e-bike use may (and in many places has been) be permitted on specific trails by the land manager. The responsibility lies with the user to know whether or not their activity is allowed in a certain area.

Paper and digital Motor vehicle use maps (MVUMs) are free and available for every National Forest in the country.


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

Slowanimalswin said:


> If we're talking about Federally managed land, e-bikes are considered motorized vehicles. They are permitted wherever other motorized vehicles are permitted and not permitted on non-motorized trails.


*CATEGORICALLY FALSE.*



https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so_3376_-_increasing_recreational_opportunities_through_the_use_of_electric_bikes_-508_0.pdf











Federal Electric Bike Rulemaking - Electric Bikes | PeopleForBikes


Federal land management agencies that regulate the use of electric bicycles on motorized and non-motorized trails (the U.S. Forest Service – within the U.S. Department of Agricultu ...




www.peopleforbikes.org













Major change in US regulations: e-bikes no longer defined as motor vehicles


WASHINGTON, USA – The sales of e-bikes in the US are expected to be given a boost now that the Department of the Interior released final rules for electric bicycle use on public lands. This new regulation more clearly defines electric bicycles and no longer describes them as motor vehicles. This...




www.bike-eu.com


----------



## Slowanimalswin (Apr 25, 2021)

USFS is dept of Agriculture. I mispoke when I said federally managed, should have specified Forest Service. Thanks for catching my error.


----------



## blkdout (Oct 3, 2021)

Nice. Finally the motor wattage appears on an official document. I see a lot of questions on that subject.


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

Slowanimalswin said:


> USFS is dept of Agriculture. I mispoke when I said federally managed, should have specified Forest Service. Thanks for catching my error.


Whatever you are implying now about USFS policy is also the opposite of current reality, and will become even more so in the near future as they open more access.

"Currently, e-bikes are allowed on nearly 60,000 miles of Forest Service trails, more than any other federal land management agency."









Forest Service Seeks a Balanced Approach to Access as Popularity of Electric Bicycles Surge | US Forest Service


The gravel popping under the bicycle’s tires had a familiar sound. The trail would soon make an abrupt turn upwards, marking the beginning of a grueling climb up miles of steep terrain.




www.fs.usda.gov









__





Electronic Bicycle Use | US Forest Service


Forest Service Statement on Electronic Bicycle Use:




www.fs.usda.gov


----------



## DtEW (Jun 14, 2004)

blkdout said:


> Nice. Finally the motor wattage appears on an official document. I see a lot of questions on that subject.


Yeah, I just found the DOI document. I had misstated in some other thread that the Federal government didn't assign Class I/II/III definitions, but here it is.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

_CJ said:


> Here's a thought.....what if, some ebikers see the actions of the anti crowd as "being dicks"? And, they ride as outlaws with little regard for anyone else, because that's the position they been forced into? If they were accepted into the community, and treated with respect, maybe they'd be more inclined to treat other trail users with respect.
> .


It is weak arguments like this that work towards delegitimizing the ebike movement.


----------



## Slowanimalswin (Apr 25, 2021)

I'm not sure what's disagreed upon here? I did not intend to imply that ebikes are not allowed on USFS trails. Yeah, I know that they're allowed on lots of trails. They are still classified separately from bicycles and still not permitted on non-motorized trails. 

The line officer may (and has in many cases as you helpfully linked) change a designation of a trail to allow their use. The classification lets the line officer allow e-bikes but continue to disallow motorcycles, for example, just like some trails are open to motorcycles but not jeeps.

The responsibility is still on the user to know what's allowed.


----------



## crockej (Jun 4, 2019)

First, I don’t think the term “e-bike” works because it lumps all 3 classes into one category. A class 1, pedal assist bike is a completely different bike from a throttle controlled motorized bike (Class 2). Class 3 is pedal assist only but assists up to 28mph which is intended for city commuting, not trail riding. Class 1 is what we are all referring to when it comes to mtbing but I think the public perception doesn’t understand the “assist” part of it. When talking to others, I always refer to my bike as a “pedal assist” bike, not an e-bike. I think it’s an unwritten rule that trails open to “e-bikes” are open to class 1 only but I’m not sure that is specified.

But that said, the demand on our outdoor resources in my area, require shared use of trails by hikers, dog walkers, joggers, horse riders, and bike riders. As mentioned by others in this thread, it comes down to being respectful and courteous to fellow outdoor enthusiasts by slowing down and letting people know you are approaching from the rear or moving off the trail to let them pass. This rule applies to everyone whether on an analog bike or pedal assist bike - which makes sharing trails workable for all.


----------



## JerzyBoy (May 26, 2008)

Nat said:


> Never repeat those words again.


Up until browsing this thread I had never heard this term before. I can only hope that I never hear it again. I know how Marty Mcfly felt in Back to the Future part 2 now when he acquired the hoverboard. That's exactly how I feel returning to mountain biking after a 12 year break from it. Bikes pedal themselves now, and people are riding downhill bikes uphill.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

JerzyBoy said:


> Up until browsing this thread I had never heard this term before. I can only hope that I never hear it again. I know how Marty Mcfly felt in Back to the Future part 2 now when he acquired the hoverboard. That's exactly how I feel returning to mountain biking after a 12 year break from it. Bikes pedal themselves now, and people are riding downhill bikes uphill.


It doesn’t make any sense. Analog is not the opposite of electric… if that is what people are going for. Mountain bikes can still just be called mountain bikes and class 1, 2, and 3 electric motor bikes can be called as such. I’m not intrinsically anti e bike, I just don’t appreciate all of the misleading and incorrect language and how that all may negatively impact trail access for mountain bikes. Just as I’m concerned about impolite mountain bikers ruining it for the rest of us. I have no problem whatsoever with responsible e bike users following their local trail access rules.


----------



## JerzyBoy (May 26, 2008)

Monty219 said:


> It doesn’t make any sense. Analog is not the opposite of electric… if that is what people are going for. Mountain bikes can still just be called mountain bikes and class 1, 2, and 3 electric motor bikes can be called as such. I’m not intrinsically anti e bike, I just don’t appreciate all of the misleading and incorrect language and how that all may negatively impact trail access for mountain bikes. Just as I’m concerned about impolite mountain bikers ruining it for the rest of us. I have no problem whatsoever with responsible e bike users following their local trail access rules.


As far as ebikes go I'm not even gonna begin to try and understand what each class is, or does or anything else about them for that matter. There just isn't enough hours in the day. All this ebike stuff is so far out of my wheelhouse but the fact that they now exist and we are sharing trails with motorized vehicles just seems odd to me. It's like everything else in life. No one wants to put in the work. Why build up strength, endurance, or stamina when you can just crank up a motor and ride.


----------



## mnpikey (Sep 18, 2017)

Can I use my e-shoes to run a marathon?


----------



## JerzyBoy (May 26, 2008)

mnpikey said:


> Can I use my e-shoes to run a marathon?


Yes. As long you turn the battery off and run on the downhill sections.


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

This can be a serious discussion as soon as people stop using the term analog bike...

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Ebike vs Mebike. The Mebike is powered by me.


----------



## blkdout (Oct 3, 2021)

I heard them called acoustic in another thread lol. Makes more sense than analog.


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

_*Hey look, another thread about E-bikes!*_


----------



## JSGN (Feb 27, 2019)

My biggest concern in all of this is where I live, land owners hate motorized bikes and when they get enough damage on their land because of motorized bikes they will start working for to get a ban on everything except hikers on their land. Sweden is a very open country when it comes to the rights to move around in the forests. This has already started sparks to keep people on bikes out because of the motorized bikes increased damage on their land. 

It is a stated fact that land owners here does not want motorized vehicles on their land and some doesnt even want bikes on their land either. This will just make it easier for them to get what they want and after a while we will only be allowed to ride bikes in bike parks. This is not what we want over where I live.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

_CJ said:


> Here's a thought.....what if, some ebikers see the actions of the anti crowd as "being dicks"? And, they ride as outlaws with little regard for anyone else, because that's the position they been forced into? If they were accepted into the community, and treated with respect, maybe they'd be more inclined to treat other trail users with respect.
> 
> 
> .


Forced? I respect your opinion and you articulate it well, but I think you're reaching on this one.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

blkdout said:


> I heard them called acoustic in another thread lol. Makes more sense than analog.


Ban!


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

Nat said:


> Oh man, I've encountered more people (not just ebikes) going the wrong way on designated one-way trails over the last year or two. It's scary. I'm blasting full-tilt on a DH-only section and suddenly there's some nitwit going UP in order to redo a section or whatever. This happened not only on the local trails but also at the freaking lift-served bike park a few times this summer!


There's a special place in hell for those people. I was at Killington Bike Park, where that's probably the only real rule you gotta follow. Roll up on a drop and there's 2 idiots directly below it sizing things up ... If I hadn't ridden it 100 times and knew I could pull right without crashing, I'd have been in a hospital right now. 

I'm an idiot too, but it amazes me just how clueless and non self aware so many people seem to be.


----------



## frana (Jan 5, 2008)

blkdout said:


> I heard them called acoustic in another thread lol. Makes more sense than analog.


Just call them mtn bikes!!! We shouldn't have to adjust our style of riding for the E bike.🤨


----------



## frana (Jan 5, 2008)

mnpikey said:


> Can I use my e-shoes to run a marathon?


This is the analogy I like to use.


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

Mac_89 said:


> A young lad was hospitalised at our local a few months ago after a collision with an e-biker. I **** you not, the guy was climbing a jump line.


One way trail?


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

RS VR6 said:


> This...
> 
> This is what I'm encountering with ebike riders. With a motor...they are riding up trails they would not be riding up if they were riding an NA bike. A lot of them are riding aggressively uphill and expect you to move aside for them.


How many have you move aside for in the last two years?


----------



## monstertiki (Jun 1, 2009)

Remember next time your using a cordless power drill you are cheating. You should be using a manual hand drill. Earn your turns lol. I don't call regular bikes acoustic or amish or analog. They are "normal" bikes to me. My Ebike has done wonders for my chronic knee arthritis, I love riding mountain bikes, but years of abuse catches up eventually. Ebikes when used responsibly and with proper etiquette can be great tools.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

monstertiki said:


> Remember next time your using a cordless power drill you are cheating. You should be using a manual hand drill. Earn your turns lol. I don't call regular bikes acoustic or amish or analog. They are "normal" bikes to me. My Ebike has done wonders for my chronic knee arthritis, I love riding mountain bikes, but years of abuse catches up eventually. Ebikes when used responsibly and with proper etiquette can be great tools.


That analogy works until you bring a crew of power drill wielding carpenters to an Amish person’s house…


----------



## monstertiki (Jun 1, 2009)

Monty219 said:


> That analogy works until you bring a crew of power drill wielding carpenters to an Amish person’s house…


lol true, but lots of amish seem to have embraced the ebike https://amishamerica.com/amish-e-bikes/


----------



## NoCanSurf (Feb 19, 2021)

monstertiki said:


> Ebikes when used responsibly and with proper etiquette can be great tools.


I think this tread boils down to that... 

It seems e-bike has unleashed a new(ish) type of riders, that enjoys all the perks that would have come with years of riding and practice without the putting in the work, and those lack the understanding that come with years of being part of the MTB community. These same riders feel like Superman blasting up and down the trail with little effort... They haven't paid their dues; they lack respect for other trail users and are give all MTBs a bad name._ They want all the freedoms/privileges of a MTB, without the work (responsibility) of being part of the MTB community. _

They new(ish) riders aren't here on the board, in this tread, because they just don't care. We knew these types of people on the road, in their BMWs cutting trough traffic like manic boy-racer. Or at the bar/restaurant in their $80 name brand cotton t-shirt, snapping at the waitress, for another round of semi-expensive beers that make them look _so cool_. Or at the coffee shop with the stupid difficult-fancy-ass "coffee" orders that's more of a status symbol than drink. You know the type.

Most folks on this board care. That's why we are here. We are part of an established community and understand what's at risk when these knobs act like... knobs! I've made this comment before, but I think it holds true here. They are people (like these knob e-bike riders) that demand all the freedoms/privilege, but don't want to have the responsibility/work; this toxic culture of entitlement harms everyone. The "_I bought this e-bike and I have the *right* to ride it anyway I want!_" It's these people that are the root of the problems, not the e-bikes, or drills, or what ever fancy technology. It's the people that are the problem.


----------



## PTCbiker (Sep 15, 2020)

Nosdeho said:


> What causing issue in my neck of the woods is e-bikers with zero trail etiquette. Also some of the guys are hacking the e-bikes and getting 25-30 mph thru trails built for pedal bikes. If you actually care about riding your e-bike on trails you are representing a group so remember that when you blast past some old geezer on a mtb.


I know nothing about e-bikes but I saw a strange looking e-bike going uphill faster than I go downhill. It had smaller wheels, maybe smaller than 26", looked like a commuter bike. Looked dangerous to me.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

JerzyBoy said:


> As far as ebikes go I'm not even gonna begin to try and understand what each class is, or does or anything else about them for that matter. There just isn't enough hours in the day. All this ebike stuff is so far out of my wheelhouse but the fact that they now exist and we are sharing trails with motorized vehicles just seems odd to me. It's like everything else in life. No one wants to put in the work. Why build up strength, endurance, or stamina when you can just crank up a motor and ride.


Careful out there...I made a post simply _asking_ about the physical aspect and the mindset, and you'd think I'd punched a little old lady in the head and posted it online.

My knees are shite, but I can probably go another decade on this creaky old corpse before considering a powered bike.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

monstertiki said:


> Remember next time your using a cordless power drill you are cheating. You should be using a manual hand drill. Earn your turns lol. I don't call regular bikes acoustic or amish or analog. They are "normal" bikes to me. My Ebike has done wonders for my chronic knee arthritis, I love riding mountain bikes, but years of abuse catches up eventually. Ebikes when used responsibly and with proper etiquette can be great tools.


I understand ebikes for folks like yourself, older riders, mtbers who occasionally ebike, downhillers who are avoiding shuttling/lifts. It's people that buy an ebike and come onto the trails having never been a mountain biker that I worry about. A lot of these people would be on dirtbikes if they were allowed on the trails but they aren't, so they buy an ebike instead. I suspect someone who starts on an ebike will never ride an Abike (the A doesn't stand for "analog" or "acoustic", it stands for "actual". It's a joke, don't take it too seriously). And I think this is bad for the sport of mountain biking. 

It will mean our numbers will lessen. I will continue to ride a bicycle and I'm sure some others will as well, even some noobs, but if I'm constantly having to pull over on our narrow trails to let ebikes pass, it will be very disruptive, and no, it's not an ego thing. It's a numbers things, I'm seeing a lot of ebikes on the trails now but they aren't currently an issue. If the majority of bikes change to ebikes in the future, it will be. I'd say around me, the ebikes are ridden by kids up to folks in their 30s and most are beginners.


----------



## Mac_89 (Mar 24, 2021)

tom tom said:


> One way trail?


Yes and it's signposted. It's a series of roughly 20 foot tabletops. Not particularly steep but it's fast and quite blind with all the trees. We've had problems with people pushing back up at the side of the trail (despite a clearly signposted pushup trail) but at least they're not actually on the jumps and can get out of the way easily. This guy was powering back up the landings and rolling down the takeoffs for reasons known only to him. Kid broke his collar bone and had to have stitches in his face, but was doing ok last I heard. About 15 years old. Luckily at that age you heal well. I dread to think if it had been one of the older guys or girls or someone else on an e-bike.


----------



## Pmrmusic26 (Apr 21, 2014)

ebikes are cool and fun but they actually ruin trails. I ride mine maybe once a week on a recovery ride but generally speaking the majority of our trails here have been getting destroyed from ebikes. They are different from regular bikes...twice and sometimes triple the weight of a normal bike so the abuse they put on trails is amplified. Yes some DH bikes weigh the same....but you're not trail riding that dh bike lol. If you want to make a new trail or widen or modified a trail, you just ride it and the ebike does the cutting and packing...The park rangers have pretty much gibrn up and spend their time bother runners and hikers with their dogs off leash these days haha or pulling out an ebiker 20 miles in whose battery died or dehydrated.


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

Back to the original topic. The Forest Service considers all ebikes motorized vehicles so why is a sign that's installed by a user group or individual, which clarifies their policy an issue?


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

As a trail steward and retired director at a bike park the most shooting self in foot I see are some e-bike riders. For anti-e-bike riders matters are really simple. We have state laws for e-assist bikes where most all local and county government adopt it as ordinances.


----------



## blkdout (Oct 3, 2021)

Nat said:


> Ban!





frana said:


> Just call them mtn bikes!!! We shouldn't have to adjust our style of riding for the E bike.🤨


Don’t shoot the messenger lol. I couldn’t care less what they’re called but admittedly do find this banter hilarious.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

blkdout said:


> Don’t shoot the messenger lol. I couldn’t care less what they’re called but admittedly do find this banter hilarious.


There's a long tradition of killing messengers.

"Amish bikes" is kind of funny at least.


----------



## Muggsly (Nov 9, 2005)

Here in NC around Dupont E-bikers are screwing themselves over hardcore. The forest service has a no motorized vehicles and instead of working with the forest service they just ride trails they are not supposed to and now they get ticketed like crazy at the trail heads and on the trails. All this is doing is making the people in charge dig their heels in when it comes to e-bikes and e-bike access. They will reap what they sow and instead of working to change the mind of people that these are just normal bikes they will come across as hooligans and disrespectful individuals. 

It is definitely a few bad apples but those bad apples seem to have a level of entitlement that screws over everyone.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

A few bad apples in the ebikes *or* standard bike barrel(s) hurts everyone, that is for sure. So if we conclude that it is people and not the ebike, shouldn't we be addressing the issues with the rider not through trail access? Let's not forget, Covid has put TONS of new riders on both ebikes and standard riders on the trails.

I recently watched a youtube video of a new rider (low end polygon bike) literally overriding every corner, going off trail, slamming on his brakes and skidding up to the lip of jumps it was clear he wasn't going to hit. As the trail builder of the system he was on, should I then start saying, well since new MTB riders are riding like aholes I should pursue only building trails that are suited for ebikes (guarded by steep ass climbs)? Should we consider officially excluding "new" riders from the area because of this one kid?

I am more of the, let's let the community start to address these issues to make it better for all of us. I know the kid's bike and green hair is kind of a giveaway. You can bet your ass the next time I see him out on the trails, I will B-line straight for him to discuss trail etiquette.


----------



## ziscwg (May 18, 2007)

Mac_89 said:


> This is the only real issue I have with e-bikes, and sadly it's not just the new crowd. "Ah there's nobody around, it'll be fine..."


I've come across some very fit mtb riders climbing up normally DH section. They do it for the challenge. The ones I have come across know they are going the "wrong way" and are aware someone could be coming down. 

Then there's some ebikers that climb up a DH section unaware and aware that it's DH normally.

So, as I ride E almost all the time now because of an injury, this saying applies to all......................."Just because you can, does not mean should"


----------



## ziscwg (May 18, 2007)

Mac_89 said:


> A young lad was hospitalised at our local a few months ago after a collision with an e-biker. I **** you not, the guy was climbing a jump line.


You can't fix stupid. Unfortunately, "stupid" this time got someone else hurt. I hope the ebiker was gracious enough to stop, help and learn a lesson.


----------



## ziscwg (May 18, 2007)

roughster said:


> A few bad apples in the ebikes *or* standard bike barrel(s) hurts everyone, that is for sure. So if we conclude that it is people and not the ebike, shouldn't we be addressing the issues with the rider not through trail access? Let's not forget, Covid has put TONS of new riders on both ebikes and standard riders on the trails.
> 
> I recently watched a youtube video of a new rider (low end polygon bike) literally overriding every corner, going off trail, slamming on his brakes and skidding up to the lip of jumps it was clear he wasn't going to hit. As the trail builder of the system he was on, should I then start saying, well since new MTB riders are riding like aholes I should pursue only building trails that are suited for ebikes (guarded by steep ass climbs)? Should we consider officially excluding "new" riders from the area because of this one kid?
> 
> *I am more of the, let's let the community start to address these issues to make it better for all of us. I know the kid's bike and green hair is kind of a giveaway. You can bet your ass the next time I see him out on the trails, I will B-line straight for him to discuss trail etiquette.*


When you do encounter him and school him on trail etiquette, offer to teach to way to hit or by pass said jump.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Mac_89 said:


> Yes and it's signposted. It's a series of roughly 20 foot tabletops. Not particularly steep but it's fast and quite blind with all the trees. We've had problems with people pushing back up at the side of the trail (despite a clearly signposted pushup trail) but at least they're not actually on the jumps and can get out of the way easily. This guy was powering back up the landings and rolling down the takeoffs for reasons known only to him. Kid broke his collar bone and had to have stitches in his face, but was doing ok last I heard. About 15 years old. Luckily at that age you heal well. I dread to think if it had been one of the older guys or girls or someone else on an e-bike.


The question I would ask is, where you there? Do you know the facts or heard about it through the grapevine? Maybe the ebiker was riding straight up the middle of a jumpline, but let's all be realistic, that doesn't smack of reasonable at all. My spidey senses would immediately having me question what actually happened and that has nothing to do with pro / anit-ebikes. If he was, that sounds like mental illness or extreme stupidity, nothing to do with the ebike. 

Let's just assume he was going straight up, he now represents ALL ebikers, and as a result, all ebikes should be banned. By virtue of your own admission that standard riders ALSO are a problem pushing back up the perimeters of the jumpline, I would suggest we close this entire trail down because your local community clearly lacks the understanding or mental capacity to understand how they work. Fair right?

Watch any youtube video at any bike park and marvel at the voluminous stupidity of many standard riders riding up the trail, pushing up the DHs, stopping in middle of trails. By virtue of these guys representing ALL standard riders, we should outlaw all standard riders... Fair right?


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

roughster said:


> I am more of the, let's let the community start to address these issues to make it better for all of us. You can bet your ass the next time I see him out on the trails, I will B-line straight for him to discuss trail etiquette.


100% this. 
This to me is the difference between a once very graceful and polite community to the ever more encroaching bad apples. 

I've been mountain biking since the '80s. At some time, in our not to distant history, we crescendoed to a point where trail etiquette was cool. I feel like that's sliding the other way. If you're not the voice to point out somebody is being a dickhead who will? 

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

I think far too many people feel entitled to be that guy. Screw everyone else, you're more important. It's going to cause no end of issues if it continues.


----------



## LITEPHIL (Jan 6, 2005)

I think there's a place for E bikes but my personal experience is, the faster it will go, the faster they will go and that leads to trail deterioration since you are harder on the brakes and just all around harder on the trail. Also, most I have encountered, but not all are jerks that will fly on by since they easily go faster and I don't think they realize how rude they are. I have come across only a very few that will pass in a respectful way. I have never ridden one nor do I want to ride one but I'm sure they are a lot of fun and my thought is that they do have a motor and should be reserved for people with disabilities when ridden on mountain bike trails or have their own trails. But if your not disabled then I see no point since you will get less exercise and if it's all for fun, buy a dirt bike. I am 62 with very bad arthritis in my hands and all those old peoples woes but again, reserve them for those that need them and put no trail restrictions on them at that point. My opinion.. thank you


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

dysfunction said:


> I think far too many people feel entitled to be that guy. Screw everyone else, you're more important. It's going to cause no end of issues if it continues.


100% agree with this as well. This is a cultural shift though and is not ebike/standard bike issue. Some of the biggest local offenders of riding off trail, straight down / fall line hills are standard riders, not ebikers. I see it on their Stravas and have repeatedly commented on it or discussed in person with them, but I can't "stop" them. I try to remind them their actions reflect on the broader community but I have yet to see it really curb them from doing it. In fact, some are now developing into actual fall line trails and when we do get rain, they are going to erode like mad and make huge scars visible from the neighborhoods below, which will prompt complaints for sure.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

roughster said:


> 100% agree with this as well. This is a cultural shift though and is not ebike/standard bike issue. Some of the biggest local offenders of riding off trail, straight down / fall line hills are standard riders, not ebikers. I see it on their Stravas and have repeatedly commented on it or discussed in person with them, but I can't "stop" them. I try to remind them their actions reflect on the broader community but I have yet to see it really curb them from doing it. In fact, some are now developing into actual fall line trails and when we do get run, they are going to erode like mad and make huge scars visible from the neighborhoods below, which will prompt complaints for sure.


I totally agree. Locally, most of our trails are on NFS land, so if there are eBikes on them, acting like this.. it's just a double whammy (so now you've got multiple things that could piss people off). Right or wrong.

It's the same reason I won't go ride on the local National Park lands, despite there being some trails that'd be awesome there.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> Many ebikes owners on this site say one of their main benefits is that they can get twice the runs in the same time as they otherwise could on an "analog" bike, which doesn't jibe with that study.





WHALENARD said:


> One thing I've specifically experienced are said e-bikers riding up trails that you couldn't possibly ride up on a non-motorized bike. Trails that have long been downhill specific. I'm seeing this more and more at mountain bike specific trail destinations.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


It's funny this comes up. A thread I saw on PinkBike has been kicking around in my head- people complaining that local ebike riders have been cutting switchbacks on a local trail system, because suddenly a 20% grade from one turn to the one above it isn't a barrier, it's just mash the 'turbo' mode and you get to the top faster than using the 8% grade climbing trail. 
This is a real-world example of both 'hypotheticals' mentioned above. 
I'll try to find the thread over on PB, but my google-fu is limited and things move fast over there.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Rod said:


> Back to the original topic. The Forest Service considers all ebikes motorized vehicles so why is a sign that's installed by a user group or individual, which clarifies their policy an issue?


You're missing the point, not looking at the big picture.

At the end of the day, if no access is allowed (or in the case of my local area, eMTB's are limited to 10's of miles of single-track, but surrounded by thousands of miles of non-motorized trails), people are just going to go and do what they want. I'm not advocating for this, or saying it's right or wrong, it's just what happens, much in the same way enduro-bros in my area build illegal trails because none of the land managers want to deal with a high maintenance unsustainable trail with fall line descents, jumps, etc. I do however have an opinion about which group causes more damage to public lands, or the reputation of MTBers' in the eyes of the public and land managers, and find it quite ironic that the latter group are usually the loudest voices protesting against eMTB's.

Also, please take a look at the Forest Service's updated policies on eMTB's. All references to "motorized" are gone. Official policy changes happen at a glacial pace with the NFS, but what the NFS does with incredible speed is close trails. It's really their only management tool, and they love to use it. _In my opinion_, the more anti-ebikers complain, put up their own fake signs, etc. the more likely it is that the NFS will just close the "problem trails" to all bikes. Better to advocate for E inclusion, and stop crying about who should and shouldn't be allowed to recreate in a manner that's about 1% different than you.


.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

So, your point is that eBikes should just ignore usage limitations? I'm getting confused.


----------



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

Impetus said:


> It's funny this comes up. A thread I saw on PinkBike has been kicking around in my head- people complaining that local ebike riders have been cutting switchbacks on a local trail system, because suddenly a 20% grade from one turn to the one above it isn't a barrier, it's just mash the 'turbo' mode and you get to the top faster than using the 8% grade climbing trail.
> This is a real-world example of both 'hypotheticals' mentioned above.
> I'll try to find the thread over on PB, but my google-fu is limited and things move fast over there.




The post you quoted of mine was neither hypothetical or critical. Just repeating what many real world users here have reported.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> The post you quoted of mine was neither hypothetical or critical. Just repeating what many real world users here have reported.


I am in no way disagreeing with you. 
To quote Uncle Ben, "with great power comes great responsibility". IMO modding ebikes for more power and cutting trail corners because suddenly "nothing is too steep" is not using that power wisely.

To be clear- I'm not 100% anti-ebike. I would buy one for my wife, who is....eh....fitness limited....but her favorite riding area is posted 'No eBikes', so, there's that.


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

Anyone on a bike shooting themselves need to properly handle their firearms 

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## nilswalk (Nov 26, 2014)

I can't believe how fast this train wreck overtook the other train wreck.


----------



## NoCanSurf (Feb 19, 2021)

Wait, are we switching the conversation to tubeless tires already?


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

nilswalk said:


> I can't believe how fast this train wreck overtook the other train wreck.


Oh no, that bushwacks-a-lot one will be King of the hill for a while. Wowsers.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Let me ask you guys a serious question because I have the ability:
As local trail builder, if I decide to make all future climbing trails locally 10-20% from here on out, will it be considered a negative if the standard riders decide they want to anti-cut the corner because it’s too steep for them? Serious question…


----------



## rton20s (Aug 27, 2010)

roughster said:


> Let me ask you guys a serious question because I have the ability:
> As local trail builder, if I decide to make all future climbing trails locally 10-20% from here on out, will it be considered a negative if the standard riders decide they want to anti-cut the corner because it’s too steep for them? Serious question…


So long as your provide a cache of TowWhee straps at the base of the climb that we can lasso eBikers with, I am good with those steep grades.


----------



## r-rocket (Jun 23, 2014)

LITEPHIL said:


> I think there's a place for E bikes but my personal experience is, the faster it will go, the faster they will go and that leads to trail deterioration since you are harder on the brakes and just all around harder on the trail.


Couldn't the same be said about modern 29" full suspension mountain bikes compared to 1980's 26" MTB's with canti's and no suspension? I guess we could all go back to 80's MTB's to save wear on the trails.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

roughster said:


> Let me ask you guys a serious question because I have the ability:
> As local trail builder, if I decide to make all future climbing trails locally 10-20% from here on out, will it be considered a negative if the standard riders decide they want to anti-cut the corner because it’s too steep for them? Serious question…


Will you be ok if you're not allowed to build those 10-20% climbs because you are required to build to allow for all bicycles? If ebikers want to be treated the same as bicycles, they should expect to be held to the same standards of all inclusiveness.


----------



## monstertiki (Jun 1, 2009)

roughster said:


> Let me ask you guys..........


can you armor those trails with boulders so we can have some sweet techy climbs? that would be awesome.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Will you be ok if you're not allowed to build those 10-20% climbs because you are required to build to allow for all bicycles? If ebikers want to be treated the same as bicycles, they should expect to be held to the same standards of all inclusiveness.


Why would that be if standard MTBs are advocating against eMTBs? Isn’t the whole premise they (eMTBs) would jeopardize access if allowed on “standard mtb” trails? If that’s the case, then wouldn’t it actually be preferred for eMTB trail builders to specifically build for eMTBs and actually do what they can to prevent them from being ridden by standard MTBs if we were looking at it for a tit for tat perspective?

Or is this kind of a it’s only good if it’s standard only (no eMTBs) or shared but no good if it’s eMTB only? Obviously I am not advocating this, just pointing out the hypocrisy.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

roughster said:


> Why would that be if standard MTBs are advocating against eMTBs? Isn’t the whole premise they (eMTBs) would jeopardize access if allowed on “standard mtb” trails? If that’s the case, then wouldn’t it actually be preferred for eMTB trail builders to specifically build for eMTBs and actually do what they can to prevent them from being ridden by standard MTBs if we were looking at it for a tit for tat perspective?
> 
> Or is this kind of a it’s only good if it’s standard only (no eMTBs) or shared but no good if it’s eMTB only? Obviously I am not advocating this, just pointing out the hypocrisy.


I’ll take 10%, no 20% please. Does 20% convert to 1056 ft per mile? Is that even rideable on an ebike if its not straight up fire road/smooth pack trail? If there is much tech involved i dont think the motor would help much anyway.

Edit: well, a motor could helpninshort bursts with room for proper set up for the move but when things get too techy i would guess the weight is too much of a hindrance when you need to use your whole body to get the bike up and not just rely on drive wheel torque.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Monty219 said:


> I’ll take 10%, no 20% please. Does 20% convert to 1056 ft per mile? Is that even rideable on an ebike if its not straight up fire road/smooth pack trail? If there is much tech involved i dont think the motor would help much anyway.
> 
> Edit: well, a motor could helpninshort bursts with room for proper set up for the move but when things get too techy i would guess the weight is too much of a hindrance when you need to use your whole body to get the bike up and not just rely on drive wheel torque.


Actually you would be surprised. I've already built a few "e-bike bypasses" on the main climbing trail which after about 6 months only the ebikes are using since they are steep, off camber, and fairly technical. I've watched a few standard bikes try them and they usually end up walking part of them. Sure a very fit and competent rider could make the bypasses as a technical challenge, but I think they quickly realize its not worth the effort when there is a perfectly good "standard climb trail" I also built. 

As I mentioned previously, I'm not advocating ebike only climb trails, also because I still ride standard as well, but I think there are some hypocritical elements to the anti argument given the current trend seems that many trail builders are moving to ebikes for obvious reasons (easier and faster to get to dig location, easier to transport tools, easier to ride out when you are beat up after digging for 8 hours, makes it possible to ride the day after digging, etc.). 

Just something to think about.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

roughster said:


> Why would that be if standard MTBs are advocating against eMTBs? Isn’t the whole premise they (eMTBs) would jeopardize access if allowed on “standard mtb” trails? If that’s the case, then wouldn’t it actually be preferred for eMTB trail builders to specifically build for eMTBs and actually do what they can to prevent them from being ridden by standard MTBs if we were looking at it for a tit for tat perspective?
> 
> Or is this kind of a it’s only good if it’s standard only (no eMTBs) or shared but no good if it’s eMTB only? Obviously I am not advocating this, just pointing out the hypocrisy.


I'm pointing out the hypocrisy if emtbers expect to be treated exactly as mtbrs and have full access everywhere mtbs are allowed but then want to build emtb exclusive trails. In other words, if emtbers want the trails to be equitable, they should realize that's a two way trail, er street. 

Here is what you said:



roughster said:


> Let me ask you guys a serious question because I have the ability:
> As local trail builder, if I decide to make all future climbing trails locally 10-20% from here on out, will it be considered a negative if the standard riders decide they want to anti-cut the corner because it’s too steep for them? Serious question…


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

DtEW said:


> But they do have the motor assistance. And therefore they could ride those trails. Just like how the hiker can come up those very trails as well.
> 
> Once again, your own inability to ride that trail at-best creates a norm for an older paradigm (and frankly, a fanciful one that pretends that no hikers will come up that trail), but does not in itself create actual policy that supercedes the existing rules of the trail. It is nothing more than self-serving wishful thinking
> 
> It is possible (and probably recommended) for an authority to take the prior norms into account to create policy changes in order to minimize conflicts. But before that happens, it is on you to obey the right-of-way rules of the trail, instead of complaining at the surprise that somebody else could do something that you can't.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

chazpat said:


> I'm pointing out the hypocrisy if emtbers expect to be treated exactly as mtbrs and have full access everywhere mtbs are allowed but then want to build emtb exclusive trails. In other words, if emtbers want the trails to be equitable, they should realize that's a two way trail, er street.
> 
> Here is what you said:


Understood, but that's kind of my point. eMTBs want equal access and I believe eMTB trail builders are wholly onboard with creating trails that are reasonable for both std and ebikes. I am just pointing that together as a common "user group" we actually have more pull. When Std riders attack eMTBs, which is acknowledged in the study from Boulder, and lets be clear most people complaining about ebikes are standard MTB riders not other user groups, it is currently and could lead us even further down the road where eMTB trailbuilders, which are not so slowly becoming the majority, are little less inclined to build for both styles of riding if standard riders continue to be the primary antagonists against eMTB access.

To make sure I support my statement, this is taken vebatum from the boulder study I linked earlier:



> _Anecdotally, online and intercept surveys conducted during Boulder County’s pilot study revealed that cyclists with high levels of experience (i.e., pro-cyclist) are opposed to sharing the trail with e-bikes. The most common dispute is that e-bikes provide an unfair advantage for less experienced riders who have not “earned their stripes” in the cycling world._


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

roughster said:


> eMTB trailbuilders, which are not so slowly becoming the majority


Is that true?


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Go to youtube and lookup some videos of "trail building". It's pretty clear. For example locally, MBOSC, now SCMTS, which are not pro-ebike by any stretch, use eMTBs for trail crews and trail bosses. Many trail building crews are switching to ebikes from _actual_ motorized-vehicle (aka motos / ATVs) because of the smaller eco footprint and simplicity of maintenance, AND being able to test what's being built. 

It's just logical. Anyone who builds trail knows the physical toll it takes on you and how it can make riding immediately after, and even in the following days, much more challenging due to it's physical rigor. e-bikes solve this issue for many builders. A good example of the growing adoption of ebikes by pro-riders, including cutting edge trailbuilders, can be found on Remy's channel. Fast forward to 4:20 to hear his thoughts specifically of the usefulness of ebikes in trail building and trail maintenance: _(I can provide more links if you would like highlighting ebikes integration into trailbuilding. This is the one that just immediately sprang to mind upon reading your question)_


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

I'll just thropw this link up since it directly supports and basically completely re-iterates what I state above. Turn on CC English since is not in english.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

roughster said:


> When Std riders


Dude, acoustic and analog are bad enough…now regular mtn bikes are called STD? This has gone too far! (Humor intended)


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Monty219 said:


> Dude, acoustic and analog are bad enough…now regular mtn bikes are called STD? This has gone too far! (Humor intended)


Hahah, sorry that was just me being lazy and not typing out standard. I personally think the "acoustic" or "analog" are weird descriptors / labels given they imply other non-MTB elements. To me, standard MTBs are just that, the current standard ... for now. I don't think there is anyone reading this that doesn't see the writing on the wall if they are being honest with themselves. There is wishing for a different outcome, and there is a reality of the most probable outcome. We all know what the probable outcome of market share of eMTB versus standard MTB regardless of what side of the support curve you are on.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

roughster said:


> Go to youtube and lookup some videos of "trail building". It's pretty clear. For example locally, MBOSC, now SCMTS, which are not pro-ebike by any stretch, use eMTBs for trail crews and trail bosses. Many trail building crews are switching to ebikes from _actual_ motorized-vehicle (aka motos / ATVs) because of the smaller eco footprint and simplicity of maintenance, AND being able to test what's being built.
> 
> It's just logical. Anyone who builds trail knows the physical toll it takes on you and how it can make riding immediately after, and even in the following days, much more challenging due to it's physical rigor. e-bikes solve this issue for many builders. A good example of the growing adoption of ebikes by pro-riders, including cutting edge trailbuilders, can be found on Remy's channel. Fast forward to 4:20 to hear his thoughts specifically of the usefulness of ebikes in trail building and trail maintenance: _(I can provide more links if you would like highlighting ebikes integration into trailbuilding. This is the one that just immediately sprang to mind upon reading your question)_


Ahhh, okay. I misunderstood your term "eMTB trail builders." I read it as meaning "trail builders who are building trails specific to eMTBs" rather than "trail builders who use eMTBs to do their work."


----------



## RickBullottaPA (Mar 4, 2015)

baker said:


> I can't predict how it's going to play out. My wise advice is: "Don't be a dick!" To all those involved...
> 
> My position on e-bikes has evolved (or devolved depending on your point of view)... I think they can coexist with other trail users, but the few bad apples will draw unwanted attention to trail access issues (just like the bad apple mountain bikers and equestrians). We don't sign our trails with no e-bikes, despite the fact that that is the current status.


Bad apples or other trail douchery is not restricted to eBikers. Plenty of douches on regular MTB's too. Douchery is associated with the rider, not the bike.


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

RickBullottaPA said:


> Bad apples or other trail douchery is not restricted to eBikers. Plenty of douches on regular MTB's too. Douchery is associated with the rider, not the bike.


I hear an echo around here...


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

roughster said:


> Go to youtube and lookup some videos of "trail building". It's pretty clear. For example locally, MBOSC, now SCMTS, which are not pro-ebike by any stretch, use eMTBs for trail crews and trail bosses. Many trail building crews are switching to ebikes from _actual_ motorized-vehicle (aka motos / ATVs) because of the smaller eco footprint and simplicity of maintenance, AND being able to test what's being built.
> 
> It's just logical. Anyone who builds trail knows the physical toll it takes on you and how it can make riding immediately after, and even in the following days, much more challenging due to it's physical rigor. e-bikes solve this issue for many builders. A good example of the growing adoption of ebikes by pro-riders, including cutting edge trailbuilders, can be found on Remy's channel. Fast forward to 4:20 to hear his thoughts specifically of the usefulness of ebikes in trail building and trail maintenance: _(I can provide more links if you would like highlighting ebikes integration into trailbuilding. This is the one that just immediately sprang to mind upon reading your question)_


I'm not sure that's valid reasoning though. They allow bulldozers to build roads but then you can drive one down the road once it's completed. I'm not saying ebikes tear up the trail or should or shouldn't be allowed, just saying that saying ebikes should be allowed because they are helpful to trail builders isn't very valid.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Impetus said:


> It's funny this comes up. A thread I saw on PinkBike has been kicking around in my head- people complaining that local ebike riders have been cutting switchbacks on a local trail system, because suddenly a 20% grade from one turn to the one above it isn't a barrier, it's just mash the 'turbo' mode and you get to the top faster than using the 8% grade climbing trail.
> This is a real-world example of both 'hypotheticals' mentioned above.
> I'll try to find the thread over on PB, but my google-fu is limited and things move fast over there.





roughster said:


> Let me ask you guys a serious question because I have the ability:
> As local trail builder, if I decide to make all future climbing trails locally 10-20% from here on out, will it be considered a negative if the standard riders decide they want to anti-cut the corner because it’s too steep for them? Serious question…


I assumed your post was a response to Impetus' post and it sounded like you were defending ebikers cutting switchbacks, saying that it's ok because mtbers would do the same if a trail was built that ebikers could ride but they couldn't.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

chazpat said:


> I'm not sure that's valid reasoning though. They allow bulldozers to build roads but then you can drive one down the road once it's completed. I'm not saying ebikes tear up the trail or should or shouldn't be allowed, just saying that saying ebikes should be allowed because they are helpful to trail builders isn't very valid.


Sorry maybe I wasn't clear, this wasn't justification for allowing ebike access, I was highlighting that more and more trail builders are starting to routinely incorporate ebikes as part of trail building activities and there may be risk of demonizing ebikes when the very people creating the trails are trending towards their use.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

chazpat said:


> I assumed your post was a response to Impetus' post and it sounded like you were defending ebikers cutting switchbacks, saying that it's ok because mtbers would do the same if a trail was built that ebikers could ride but they couldn't.


Not defending ebike corner / switchback cutting (on the steeper / more direct side), if anything that drives me crazy as a trail builder. More of just trying to spark thought around what if the roles were reversed and trails were built more ebike specific (once again, not advocating that) or in realty started as hiking trails. Would people have the same reaction to an alternative line developing on the "less steep" side deviating from a steeper switchback? 

In my experience, standard riders have no problem with riding off trail just as much as ebike riders, and one fairly local to me trail system has some very steep switchbacks that standard riders have clearly cut a larger turning radius / lower angle grade line in. Doesn't seem to be a lot of people pointing these types of lines out as "bad behavior", but I know they exist in many areas / trails I've ridden. And this is not just in the Western US, but trails I have seen this occur across the broader continental US, Central & South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

roughster said:


> Not defending ebike corner / switchback cutting (on the steeper / more direct side), if anything that drives me crazy as a trail builder. More of just trying to spark thought around what if the roles were reversed and trails were built more ebike specific (once again, not advocating that) or in realty started as hiking trails. Would people have the same reaction to an alternative line developing on the "less steep" side deviating from a steeper switchback?
> 
> In my experience, standard riders have no problem with riding off trail just as much as ebike riders, and one fairly local to me trail system has some very steep switchbacks that standard riders have clearly cut a larger turning radius / lower angle grade line in. Doesn't seem to be a lot of people pointing these types of lines out as "bad behavior", but I know they exist in many areas / trails I've ridden. And this is not just in the Western US, but trails I have seen this occur across the broader continental US, Central & South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa.


I've seen cut-thrus/"ride" arounds that I assumed were started by mtbers but it was pointed out that they were more likely hikers.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

chazpat said:


> I've seen cut-thrus/"ride" arounds that I assumed were started by mtbers but it was pointed out that they were more likely hikers.


That sounds a lil' bit like rationalization  The examples I am thinking of very clearly MTB lines. Hikers typically don't walk in uniform radii, but the arc of MTB wheel? Pretty obvious!

But definitely agree it actually could be, and in many cases is, hikers that do both aspects, wide and low and steep and direct. The bigger issue is once the "line" is established regardless of who started, it is often considered fair game by all user groups from that point on. Super frustrating from a trail builder perspective for sure!


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

I also want to recognize that this thread has actually exceeded my expectations by a long shot in the actual quality of conversation. Nicely done all involved in not letting it fall into the usual well beaten pathways!


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Monty219 said:


> Dude, acoustic and analog are bad enough…now regular mtn bikes are called STD? This has gone too far! (Humor intended)



Yeah, maybe "Basic" would be more accurate.





__





Urban Dictionary: Basic


only interested in things mainstream, popular, and trending




www.urbandictionary.com





😁


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Unlikely yourself but maybe somebody else's foot.










Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

roughster said:


> That sounds a lil' bit like rationalization  The examples I am thinking of very clearly MTB lines. Hikers typically don't walk in uniform radii, but the arc of MTB wheel? Pretty obvious!
> 
> But definitely agree it actually could be, and in many cases is, hikers that do both aspects, wide and low and steep and direct. The bigger issue is once the "line" is established regardless of who started, it is often considered fair game by all user groups from that point on. Super frustrating from a trail builder perspective for sure!


Well, the one spot in particular I was thinking of didn't really create a better/faster line so it probably was hikers. And there are hiker only trails with just as many. This is in a NPS NRA, my mtb group helps with trail maintenance, sometimes on non-bike trails as well.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

_CJ said:


> Yeah, maybe "Basic" would be more accurate.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My bicycle is only interested in things mainstream, popular, and trending? These descriptors continue to make no sense.


----------



## nmxtrdr (Sep 30, 2008)

Monty219 said:


> My bicycle is only interested in things mainstream, popular, and trending? These descriptors continue to make no sense.


Turning the most brilliant, capable means of human powered transport into an insanely overpriced moped also makes no sense.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

I wrote this last Summer on this very topic...









An Open Letter to All Mountain Bikers: "Why Can't We All Just Get Along?"


Nonmotorized access laws were instituted to limit trail access for gas-powered motorcycles, quads/four-wheelers, and other off-road vehicles that are noisy and damage trails. Other levels of access exist for such human-powered activities as...




www.skitalk.com


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

Pmrmusic26 said:


> ebikes are cool and fun but they actually ruin trails. I ride mine maybe once a week on a recovery ride but generally speaking the majority of our trails here have been getting destroyed from ebikes. They are different from regular bikes...twice and sometimes triple the weight of a normal bike so the abuse they put on trails is amplified.


Hmmm do they? Actually they do not do more damage and there are studys to show. HERE is one. 

Results from the field experiment show that, under this set of conditions, soil displacement and tread disturbance from *Class 1 eMTBs1 and traditional mountain bikes were not significantly different,* and both were much less than those associated with a gasoline-powered motorcycle.​
So you are saying that there should be a weight limit on trails? If so, exactly what should that be, 200lb, 250lb ... 300lb? If the latter, I have a friend that is 275lb, a big boy, riding a 35lb bike ... do you want to tell him he can't ride? 

As far as inexperienced eMTB'ers...almost everyone I meet where _I ride_ are long time riders, since the 80's and 90's and _know_ trail etiquette. Are there e-holes out there, of course, just as there are a-hole regular riders. I got stuck behind one last week. It was a long climb, this guy just would not stop to let me pass. I was not riding up his ass, I was no less than 5 bike lengths behind the whole way. He looked back at me nuerous times so he knew I was back there. I came to the conclusion that he probably drives a Prius and sits the left lane at 2-3MPH under the limit ... because he can.


----------



## Art666 (Aug 4, 2018)

I am all about emtb. 
I think that the main way emtb can cause more trail damage is after major rain storms (in California). Based on my own experience with emtb I had no trouble riding usually almost non ridable wet muddy trail. Many trails here are closed after rain anyway, but I was on non closed section.
I also observed at Water dog in Belmont that emtb riders can easily shred uphill on wet muddy trails , and I can barely walk the bike same sections on a side (I try to avoid such conditions, but it happens). For that exact reason many OHV areas closed for some time after the rain.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

SkiTalk'er said:


> Hmmm do they? Actually they do not do more damage and there are studys to show. HERE is one.
> 
> Results from the field experiment show that, under this set of conditions, soil displacement and tread disturbance from *Class 1 eMTBs1 and traditional mountain bikes were not significantly different,* and both were much less than those associated with a gasoline-powered motorcycle.​
> So you are saying that there should be a weight limit on trails? If so, exactly what should that be, 200lb, 250lb ... 300lb? If the latter, I have a friend that is 275lb, a big boy, riding a 35lb bike ... do you want to tell him he can't ride?
> ...


I vote for a 175lb limit.  

If you were no less than 5 bike lengths behind him, he probably didn't think you wanted to pass. I wouldn't pull over for someone that far back. He kept looking to see if you had caught up to him.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

A lot of the rhetoric about emtb’s today, is similar to what we had in NorthVan 20 years ago. We were characterized as lazy, because we shuttled. Our big bikes destroyed the trails. We were dirt bags because we’d get changed at our cars, that were parked in residential areas. Many were seen as A-Holes because they flew by hikers.

To answer the OP’s question, yes they are. As a group, MTB’ers want trail access. Ideally bike specific trails. While we may see a difference between a MTB, and an EMTB, I do not think those outside of our culture do.

I highly doubt those who oppose bike access in general, care less about having a motor or not. We need to stick together.


----------



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

NS-NV said:


> I highly doubt those who oppose bike access in general, care less about having a motor or not. We need to stick together.


I don't think so, I know for many hikers the motor-no motor thing is a pretty big deal. People drive away from cities to escape that noise and imo it's important for such places to exist.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

J.B. Weld said:


> I don't think so, I know for many hikers the motor-no motor thing is a pretty big deal. People drive away from cities to escape that noise and imo it's important for such places to exist.


What noise? And are you talking about the hikers that are out there wearing their earbuds ... when being "one with nature"?


----------



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

SkiTalk'er said:


> What noise? And are you talking about the hikers that are out there wearing their earbuds ... when being "one with nature"?



I was using the word "noise" metaphorically. You may or may not agree but a fair amount of people want non-motorized areas to be available. That was my only point.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

J.B. Weld said:


> I was using the word "noise" metaphorically. You may or may not agree but a fair amount of people want non-motorized areas to be available. That was my only point.


If we want to talk 4 wheelers, jeeps and motorcycles. I will agree. EMTB's are no different to the hiker than any mountain bike.


----------



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

SkiTalk'er said:


> EMTB's are no different to the hiker than any mountain bike.


Disagree. You can't speak for all hikers and neither can I.

Also the most common "e-bikes" I see in the shop by far these days are 100 lb. throttle controlled 30mph machines with 4" tires that from 10 ft. away more resemble a motorbike than a bicycle. I hate to bring up the supposedly irrelevant slippery slope thing but it's easy to understand why many think the presence of a motor is a logical cutoff point for certain wilderness areas.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Disagree. You can't speak for all hikers and neither can I.
> 
> Also the most common "e-bikes" I see in the shop by far these days are 100 lb. throttle controlled 30mph machines with 4" tires that from 10 ft. away more resemble a motorbike than a bicycle. I hate to bring up the supposedly irrelevant slippery slope thing but it's easy to understand why many think the presence of a motor is a logical cutoff point for certain wilderness areas.


Come on, can we at least try to avoid throwing up complete hyperbole? Literally 100lbs motorcycles are not an ebike period. They ARE motorcycles both in visual appearance AND legal status. No one would confuse it for an ebike on the trail.


----------



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

roughster said:


> Come on, can we at least try to avoid throwing up complete hyperbole? Literally 100lbs motorcycles are not an ebike period. They ARE motorcycles both in visual appearance AND legal status. No one would confuse it for an ebike on the trail.




Literally and legally they are class III ebikes.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

chazpat said:


> If you were no less than 5 bike lengths behind him, he probably didn't think you wanted to pass. I wouldn't pull over for someone that far back. He kept looking to see if you had caught up to him.


If someone is more than five bike lengths behind me I’m not pulling over yet either. I’ll wait until he’s a bit closer. You can usually tell when someone wants to pass because they either say something (“Mind if I pass?” “How’s it going?”) or they make typically-unnecessary sounds (e.g., shifting, dropper extension clacking, backpedaling freewheel, coughing, etc.).


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

Ebikes cause more damage not be being heavier, but by the shear number of laps they can do. A fit rider can do 2-3 drops several days a week and an ebike can do 6-7 everyday they can ride.

Also ebikes allow users that didn't have the fitness or desire to suffer up the climbs access to hard to reach trails.

In our park this contributed to about 3x the usage of trails. Combine this with zero rain and the trails simply couldn't handle the extra traffic.

You can be a dick on any bike, horse, foot... Don't be a dick! And use a [email protected] bell. Ding ding.

I do feel that anti-bike users are just as anti-ebike and do know the difference. A small percentage my not realize the difference, but it is easy to spot.

Ebikes are cheating. Ebikes will continue to get faster with longer range in the arms race between manufactures. My Kenevo is basically a mini-moto that I can get away with riding on non-motorized trails. I wish it was faster with longer rage. It's not like any single track is legal in my park anyway.


----------



## DrDon (Sep 25, 2004)

roughster said:


> Come on, can we at least try to avoid throwing up complete hyperbole? Literally 100lbs motorcycles are not an ebike period. They ARE motorcycles both in visual appearance AND legal status. No one would confuse it for an ebike on the trail.


I’ve never seen that. What I have seen are ebikers that have been friendly. I have seen them bootlegging trails. Not a fan of that, but I see non assist bikers bootlegging trails. If I think either becomes a big issue, I’ll report it and the land managers can determine whether they wish to deal with it. I’m making a gross generalization here, but I don’t think most ebikers are enthusiasts like the posters here. Most people can’t afford a good ebike and the ones that can tend to park them in the garage. Mountain biking is a sport of pain and developed skill. Could be wrong  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## maynard4130 (May 12, 2019)

I judge the hell out of e bikers. I know it's irrational, but it is what it is. I instantly think they are out of shape, lazy and cheating. Probably not very hard working. The beauty of cycling is that it human powered IMO. I understand some people are older and/or disabled....and I will be someday too. There honestly is this strange hate for them deep down inside. I can't explain it.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

maynard4130 said:


> I judge the hell out of e bikers. I know it's irrational, but it is what it is. I instantly think they are out of shape, lazy and cheating. Probably not very hard working. The beauty of cycling is that it human powered IMO. I understand some people are older and/or disabled....and I will be someday too. There honestly is this strange hate for them deep down inside. I can't explain it.


Consider therapy.


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

maynard4130 said:


> I judge the hell out of e bikers. I know it's irrational, but it is what it is. I instantly think they are out of shape, lazy and cheating. Probably not very hard working. The beauty of cycling is that it human powered IMO. I understand some people are older and/or disabled....and I will be someday too. There honestly is this strange hate for them deep down inside. I can't explain it.


Cool story bro...


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Here's an idea, how about banning whichever group complains the most about other trail users? It's neck and neck between Flintstone bikers and hikers at this point imho.


----------



## Tickle (Dec 11, 2013)

slapheadmofo said:


> Consider therapy.


Can't fix stupid


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

maynard4130 said:


> I judge the hell out of e bikers. I know it's irrational, but it is what it is. I instantly think they are out of shape, lazy and cheating. Probably not very hard working. The beauty of cycling is that it human powered IMO. I understand some people are older and/or disabled....and I will be someday too. There honestly is this strange hate for them deep down inside. I can't explain it.


Okay.


----------



## nilswalk (Nov 26, 2014)

maynard4130 said:


> I judge the hell out of e bikers. I know it's irrational, but it is what it is. I instantly think they are out of shape, lazy and cheating. Probably not very hard working. The beauty of cycling is that it human powered IMO. I understand some people are older and/or disabled....and I will be someday too. There honestly is this strange hate for them deep down inside. I can't explain it.


I have a theory where the hate comes from: it's threatened identity. We don't just ride mountain bikes, we like to think of ourselves as "mountain bikers". There's an identity attached to that. And for lots of people a big part of that is being fit, and strong, and skilled, and able to do this adventurous sport that lots of people can't do. That, and having big-ass mountain biker calves. Admit it, you're kinda proud of them.

Then along comes this group of people who (to the outside observer anyway) sort of look like you, wear the same clothes, ride a similar looking bike on the same trails but... man, they sure ain't you. They couldn't care less how tough and fit you are and they sure as hell don't care that your FTP is close to 400. In short, it's a bunch of people who (mostly) don't share all the same values that you do and how you see your sport. It's people from outside your in-group stepping on your toes in your territory and they don't value the things that you think are important about something that is probably a big part of your life and identity. That's going to annoy pretty much anybody.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

nilswalk said:


> That's going to annoy pretty much anybody who's insecure and childish.


fify


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

nilswalk said:


> I have a theory where the hate comes from: it's threatened identity. We don't just ride mountain bikes, we like to think of ourselves as "mountain bikers". There's an identity attached to that. And for lots of people a big part of that is being fit, and strong, and skilled, and able to do this adventurous sport that lots of people can't do. That, and having big-ass mountain biker calves. Admit it, you're kinda proud of them.
> 
> Then along comes this group of people who (to the outside observer anyway) sort of look like you, wear the same clothes, ride a similar looking bike on the same trails but... man, they sure ain't you. They couldn't care less how tough and fit you are and they sure as hell don't care that your FTP is close to 400. In short, it's a bunch of people who (mostly) don't share all the same values that you do and how you see your sport. It's people from outside your in-group stepping on your toes in your territory and they don't value the things that you think are important about something that is probably a big part of your life and identity. That's going to annoy pretty much anybody.


While I tend to agree to some degree with your theory (as revised above by slappy), I know lots of people who generally identify with what you have described, have been biking at a competitive level for decades, yet also have an e-bike in their quiver. I know people who largely define themselves by biking - their attire, their vacations, their reading material, their GF, their discussion topics, their exercise, their priorities, THEIR EXISTENCE - yet own an e-bike, among numerous other bikes.

The hatred by some may be a money thing as well.


----------



## nilswalk (Nov 26, 2014)

mtnbkrmike said:


> While I tend to agree to some degree with your theory, I know lots of people who generally identify with what you have described, have been biking at a competitive level for decades, yet also have an e-bike in their quiver. I know people who largely define themselves by biking - their attire, their vacations, their reading material, their GF, their discussion topics, their exercise, their priorities - yet own an e-bike, among numerous other bikes.


Of course - I never claimed everybody was like that. But enough are to trigger the type of reaction I described.


----------



## Jack7782 (Jan 1, 2009)

All this reminds me about the time long ago when lycra clad roadies would pass you on the trail and not even say Hi or ask if you need help etc. (I am a former roadie by the way)


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

mtnbkrmike said:


> While I tend to agree to some degree with your theory (as revised above by slappy), I know lots of people who generally identify with what you have described, have been biking at a competitive level for decades, yet also have an e-bike in their quiver. I know people who largely define themselves by biking - their attire, their vacations, their reading material, their GF, their discussion topics, their exercise, their priorities, THEIR EXISTENCE - yet own an e-bike, among numerous other bikes.
> 
> The hatred by some may be a money thing as well.


Yah, it's none of that for me.

It's that 90% of e-bikers are riding green 2 way low sight visibility trails while not having near enough skill for the speeds that their motorbike allows them to travel endangering other trail users, in particular my wife and child who both are petite and wombling down the local green trails at 4 mph. I've seen it, several times now. I have to ride in front, they can't go without me, and these jackasses can't even control their speed when we encounter them head on and often zip right by us on either side (and I mean either side, not their right side) at double digit speeds yelling 'sorry!'. F*ck them. You can say 'it's the user not the bike' but I don't encounter this ever at all with bicycles and encounter this 95% of the time with e-bikes.

Just today my family went for a ride and my wife has learned and is very insistent that I ride in front, she is flat scared of the e-bikes after what she has seen. Out of control *ssholes.

The other 10% of e-bike users are accomplished talented mountain bikers that have no excuses, but they just want to haul ass. Which I get. At least they stick to steep 1 way trails for the most part.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Suns_PSD said:


> Yah, it's none of that for me.
> 
> It's that 90% of e-bikers are riding green 2 way low sight visibility trails while not having near enough skill for the speeds that their motorbike allows them to travel endangering other trail users, in particular my wife and child who both are petite and wombling down the local green trails at 4 mph. I've seen it, several times now. I have to ride in front, they can't go without me, and these jackasses can't even control their speed when we encounter them head on and often zip right by us on either side (and I mean either side, not their right side) at double digit speeds yelling 'sorry!'. F*ck them. You can say 'it's the user not the bike' but I don't encounter this ever at all with bicycles and encounter this 95% of the time with e-bikes.
> 
> ...


Happy to live where I live I guess. I don’t see any of that here.

First of all, people who have no skill generally don’t drop the cash on an e-bike.

In any event, I don’t think anyone would get away with that here. People aren’t afraid to call someone out, regardless of what they are riding or how much skill they may or may not have. If you aren’t being courteous on the trail, you will hear about it. People are generally well behaved on the trails I ride.

PS - I am out there year round 3 to 5 times a week with my daughter. I see a lot, but none of what you are describing. If I did, it would piss me off too. I suspect there would be numerous altercations.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

Regarding the "cheating"?

This isn’t a race, unless we are actually talking about a race. Seriously, who are they cheating? If someone uses a vehicle shuttle to a peak for a downhill or even to access a trailhead, couldn't that also be considered cheating? 
I am cheating myself. Really, cheating myself of what? You assume to know what my goals are when riding that I am cheating myself from fitness or other assumptions? Maybe my goal is to go out and enjoy the scenery while getting a nice workout, yes a workout because I will come back 3-5 pounds down after a nice 2 hour ride. 
You want the purity of a ride? Go back to a rigid hardtail beach cruiser like Gary Fischer and Joe Breezer used to ride on the hills outside of San Francisco not the 150-180mm travel full suspension 200mm disc brake bikes that you are riding.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

mtnbkrmike said:


> Happy to live where I live I guess. I don’t see any of that here.
> 
> First of all, people who have no skill generally don’t drop the cash on an e-bike.
> 
> ...


Same here. Where I ride, the vast majority eMTB riders I see and talk to on the trail are long time riders and many will say that they are having more fun on their e bike than any of their other bikes. The older riders have experience dating back to the 80's. I do see a lot of 30 somes out there too.


----------



## rod9301 (Oct 30, 2004)

Monty219 said:


> I’ll take 10%, no 20% please. Does 20% convert to 1056 ft per mile? Is that even rideable on an ebike if its not straight up fire road/smooth pack trail? If there is much tech involved i dont think the motor would help much anyway.
> 
> Edit: well, a motor could helpninshort bursts with room for proper set up for the move but when things get too techy i would guess the weight is too much of a hindrance when you need to use your whole body to get the bike up and not just rely on drive wheel torque.


Not true, the motor helps in uphill technical singletrack that would be impossible on a regular bike

Sent from my SNE-LX1 using Tapatalk


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Literally and legally they are class III ebikes.


Technically no, max mph is 28  And no one here is arguing for class iii that I’ve seen. Pretty much all arguments are pedal assist / non-throttle class 1.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

SkiTalk'er said:


> Same here. Where I ride, the vast majority eMTB riders I see and talk to on the trail are long time riders and many will say that they are having more fun on their e bike than any of their other bikes. The older riders have experience dating back to the 80's. I do see a lot of 30 somes out there too.


If people behaved like that I strongly suspect there would be some serious trail side behavioural corrections. I have no idea why that is not happening where this kind of $hit show is apparently occurring.


----------



## blkdout (Oct 3, 2021)

SkiTalk'er said:


> Regarding the "cheating"?
> 
> This isn’t a race, unless we are actually talking about a race. Seriously, who are they cheating?


Skimming along this thread and kept thinking the same thing. Unless e-bikes are being snuck into races, I’m just not making the connection with cheating. It actually sounds like people are making up their own little races and competing against unknowing participants lol. The best part is the fact they’re losing, at their own event, that exists only in their mind. Talk about your own worst enemy.

Honestly laughing way too hard at this concept lol. I don’t know anything though… I don’t compete. I don’t even consider this a sport. I just ride a bicycle.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

I associate E-bikes with the general downfall of personal health. I realize there is a minority that use them for accessibility/handicaps, but the vast majority use them as a crutch when they are otherwise healthy. We are making everything too easy and our health is being sacrificed. Progress isn't having to come up with new medical procedures and fields of study because the entire population is now obese. Again, I realize a few use them for legitimate purposes, but the whole "I wanna keep up" and "I don't have enough time to get in shape" and all of that mess is just laziness. It's killing us. Literally.


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

Jayem said:


> I associate E-bikes with the general downfall of personal health....Again, I realize a few use them for legitimate purposes, but the whole "I wanna keep up" and "I don't have enough time to get in shape" and all of that mess is just laziness. It's killing us. Literally.


E-bikes are literally killing us...lmfao gtfo


----------



## Ripbird (Jun 25, 2020)

mlx john said:


> E--bikes are literally killing us...lmfao gtfo


I know. What a ....ing stupid comment from a guy who isn’t stupid, but just a bit delusional and misinformed!


----------



## Ripbird (Jun 25, 2020)

alexbn921 said:


> Ebikes are cheating. Ebikes will continue to get faster with longer range in the arms race between manufactures.


Please tell us how Class 1 Ebikes are going to get faster when there’s a maximum 
20 mph assist in the US?


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

What is also funny is that eMTB's are living rent free in these people heads especially when out on the trail. We are hearing comments line "I don't care what anyone else does,_ but._.." (It's always the _but_.) If you don't care, what the hell you are doing in the eMTB section? I don't care about single speeds or DH bikes, do you see me in those areas sprewing my opinions?


----------



## blkdout (Oct 3, 2021)

I’m going to have to see some serious stats before believing e-bikes have contributed to a “general” decline in health lol. Something tells me people have been unhealthy long before those became popular.

Sorry to burst anyone’s bubble but bikes just aren’t that important to the majority of people …and the majority of people aren’t obese. Cars are more popular than bikes. Might as well call people who drive lazy as well lol.


----------



## Jack7782 (Jan 1, 2009)

blkdout said:


> Cars are more popular than bikes. Might as well call people who drive lazy as well lol.


And don't forget that an eMTB gives you a better chance to ride to your local trail vs. always using a car or truck to get there.


----------



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

roughster said:


> Technically no, max mph is 28  And no one here is arguing for class iii that I’ve seen. Pretty much all arguments are pedal assist / non-throttle class 1.




Ha ha, my bad. Yeah, 28mph, not 30.

I wasn't arguing for or against ebikes, just saying I think it's fair that some want motor-less areas available and that ebikes have motors. Some bigger than others.


----------



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

Jayem said:


> I associate E-bikes with the general downfall of personal health. I realize there is a minority that use them for accessibility/handicaps, but the vast majority use them as a crutch when they are otherwise healthy. We are making everything too easy and our health is being sacrificed. Progress isn't having to come up with new medical procedures and fields of study because the entire population is now obese. Again, I realize a few use them for legitimate purposes, but the whole "I wanna keep up" and "I don't have enough time to get in shape" and all of that mess is just laziness. It's killing us. Literally.



I see lot's of people regularly riding ebikes who would otherwise not be riding at all. They may not be for you or me but they get many folks off the couch and out into the fresh air. How does that contribute to the downfall of their personal health?


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

blkdout said:


> I’m going to have to see some serious stats before believing e-bikes have contributed to a “general” decline in health lol. Something tells me people have been unhealthy long before those became popular.
> 
> Sorry to burst anyone’s bubble but bikes just aren’t that important to the majority of people …and the majority of people aren’t obese. Cars are more popular than bikes. Might as well call people who drive lazy as well lol.


Plus, to the extent there are obese lazy masses out there ripping it up on e-bikes, then the _opposite_ may be true - e-bikes may be providing a means for these people to actually get out and get some exercise, when they wouldn’t otherwise do so, thereby _addressing_ whatever societal laziness problem exists (I highly suspect that all of this - obese laziness, and unskilled obese masses ripping it up on e-bikes on biking trails found in the mountains and otherwise relatively remote locations - may be a regional thing, cuz I don’t see any of this in my area).

And who are we to dictate what someone can or can’t do, based on our own idea of what is right or wrong for society? What’s next? Removing potato chips from the shelves of grocers? How about replacing chair lifts with skins? Or maybe limiting the gear ratios on drivetrains to a 42 tooth granny? Hasn’t the onset of Eagle equally resulted in some softening of riders, enabling us old schoolers to get a little lazy out there too? Who here is not rocking a 50 tooth+ cassette (and don’t give me the old “I just increased my ring to a 36” response, at least not without pics)?

I agree though - lots of stated “facts” and conclusions in this thread with no empirical evidence. And lots of people who compassionately claim to care about societal laziness and their fellow human being (and who cite deteriorating trail conditions with no proof, who probably ride in the wet and whose bike and body collectively weigh more than those of lots of e-bikers, and whose trails are also occupied by equestrian folks), who are leveraging this to crap all over e-bikes, using leaps of logic in the process, in the absence of any empirical data.

These obese masses riding e-bikes on mountain trails…is the hypothesis that in the absence of e-bikes, they would buy a Wahoo and open a Zwift account? Or struggle with a non e-bike on a trail, pushing it on all the ups, risking a heart attack, but becoming strong and less lazy in the end?

But really, why so much hate? Some of the crazy reasons people are citing here in opposition to e-bikes is almost desperate (@Suns_PSD aside - that would infuriate me too - more about that below though). Means justifying the ends, regardless of whether they are without foundation.

I’m thinking post #167, amended by post #168, may be closer to the truth than I originally thought. I also think it may be a money thing - people being able to buy their way in, thereby offending those of us who have earned our turns over the years. I wonder how many of the naysayers would turn down an e-bike if it was given to them, to add to their quiver. Come on. They are fun. Nobody is saying they are identical to traditional biking - they don’t need to be. It can be a different kind of fun. Complimentary.

*And be careful - some of you guys who are crapping all over them…we will be watching to see how many of you have in fact added one to your quiver some time down the road. We have saved some your saltier comments from this thread for future reference* 

But laziness? Ruining society? And eroding and otherwise ruining trail conditions? Seriously? At least the dude in post #161 wasn’t disingenuous about things.

So yeah - the more I think about the posts in this thread, the more I _do_ think the anti e-bikers are shooting themselves in the foot. Again, aside from the points raised by @Suns_PSD - I do think though that there should be some collective trail side behavioural correction administered in those parts to address that - to me, that’s more of a lack of decorum and failure to self-police, than an e-bike problem. That kind of bull$hit can be caused by any a-hole, regardless of what type of bike he or she is riding. There are unskilled novice bada$$ non e-bikers out there too that need to learn early on what is not acceptable on the trails. We all started somewhere.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

maynard4130 said:


> There honestly is this strange hate for them deep down inside. I can't explain it.


Talk about microcosm of the of society today. At least you are acknowledging it, many people cannot.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

SkiTalk'er said:


> Talk about microcosm of the of society today. At least you are acknowledging it, many people cannot.


Agreed. As I said in my post above, “At least the dude in post #161 wasn’t disingenuous about things.”


----------



## rod9301 (Oct 30, 2004)

My personal experience.

I used to mountain bike 4 days a week, 8 hours total. I weighed 180, not fat, but no six pack.

Bought an e mtn bike 4 years ago. Riding now 6 days a week, 12 hours 

I'm in the best aerobic shape I've ever been, at least in the last 25 years.
I weigh 160 more, didn't lose any muscle or strength.



Sent from my SNE-LX1 using Tapatalk


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

mtnbkrmike said:


> Plus, to the extent there are obese lazy masses out there ripping it up on e-bikes, then the _opposite_ may be true - e-bikes may be providing a means for these people to actually get out and get some exercise, when they wouldn’t otherwise do so, thereby _addressing_ whatever societal laziness problem exists (I highly suspect that all of this - obese laziness, and unskilled obese masses ripping it up on e-bikes on biking trails found in the mountains and otherwise relatively remote locations - may be a regional thing, cuz I don’t see any of this in my area).


Very true, it is bringing people like myself, my wife and a good friend back to to the sport and riding. The three of us are down a combined 60 pounds because of eMTBs. Could we have been down that from a regular bike? Sure, the same could be said about going to the gym, running or swimming but none of that would have happened.



mtnbkrmike said:


> I also think it may be a money thing - people being able to buy their way in, thereby offending those of us who have earned our turns over the years.


I am sure a good amount of the "purists" here are riding bikes that are in a similar price range than many of the eMTB's that they saying "buy their way in". I earned my turns, I paid my time, I started riding mountain biking back in the 90's with hard tails. 2" travel forks 1.8" tires and cantilevers. When full suspensions started getting good, boy did we feel like we were cheating, going downhill with so much control, then V-Brakes, cheating momentum then hydraulics and discs, 27.5, 29" wheels, 180mm travel, the list of cheating going on in this sport to make it easier ... and faster. All levels of progression have been referred to as "cheating". Not unlike when shape skis started arriving in the ski industry, they were called "cheaters" too, powder skis, cheaters. What to we call of all of these now? Skis.

Haters keep coming back to the speed ... the speed ... well, you need to slow the ^&*( down too then, There is a group I go out with (strong riders on analog bikes)that other than a few climbs I am in the middle of the pack and the decent, near the back, yep speed is the issue. I chuckle with the comments like the "fat lazy ridders_ ripping _around". Ripping around? That means they have skills and if they are ripping...doesn't sound like they are lazy. Do you even read what you are writing????


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

mtnbkrmike said:


> And who are we to dictate what someone can or can’t do, based on our own idea of what is right or wrong for society?... who are leveraging this to crap all over e-bikes, using leaps of logic in the process, in the absence of any empirical data.


Gatekeepers are annoying. Like gnats or mosquitoes buzzing around your ear. 



mtnbkrmike said:


> But really, why so much hate? Some of the crazy reasons people are citing here in opposition to e-bikes is almost desperate Means justifying the ends, regardless of whether they are without foundation.


So much pearl clutching.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

mlx john said:


> Gatekeepers are annoying. Like gnats or mosquitoes buzzing around your ear.
> 
> 
> 
> So much pearl clutching.


I would add that I think some of the haters hate being passed on the trail by those who they consider to be lesser riders who short circuited all the rites of passage and bought their way in. Hence cheaters. Kinda the same thing others have stated previously.

I have heard it said that most MTBers see each ride as a movie of sorts, in which they are the star. To be upstaged by a new kid on the block with no formal acting background is a bit of a pi$$er.

If true, why not just own it, instead of offering up a bunch of reasons having no merit?


----------



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

mtnbkrmike said:


> I have heard it said that most MTBers see each ride as a movie of sorts, in which they are the star. To be upstaged by a new kid on the block with no formal acting background is a bit of a pi$$er.



That would be really sad if true but thankfully it isn't in my little world. My friends seem to do it just for fun.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

This is what this ebiker did for the local community today ... Many ebike naysers, I hope you are contributing as well ... In coming, "I clear sticks when I see them" comments ...


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

I'm not aware of a single eMTB rider in my area without years of experience riding analog. Not a chance some Jerry who's never ridden a mountain bike is going to go out and drop $5k+ on a proper class 1 eMTB. All these stories about novices riding too fast with no knowledge of trail etiquette are complete BS imho, especially when I compare the Strava data from my own analog and eMTB rides, and see that there's generally a difference of 3-4mph in average speed.

I DO however pass analog riders on a dirt road climb going up to the trails at about 2x their speed.....10mph instead of 5mph, and it probably seems like I'm absolutely flying to them. I'm also at an age in life where I carry some extra weight, so it might be easy for them to assume I'm some fat old lazy guy with no experience, despite the fact that I've been riding for over 30 years, and put my own blood and sweat into building/maintaining many of the trails they're riding, often before they were born.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

roughster said:


> This is what this ebiker did for the local community today ... Many ebike naysers, I hope you are contributing as well ... In coming, "I clear sticks when I see them" comments ...
> 
> View attachment 1954787
> 
> ...


And that's another thing, DH trails should be such that you can hit all the features without pedaling IMO. It gets old really fast when you have to pedal like a madman and still can't make the gaps (as an elite racer) because the damn grade has been flattened out too much.


----------



## OneTrustMan (Nov 11, 2017)

_CJ said:


> I'm not aware of a single eMTB rider in my area without years of experience riding analog. Not a chance some Jerry who's never ridden a mountain bike is going to go out and drop $5k+ on a proper class 1 eMTB. All these stories about novices riding too fast with no knowledge of trail etiquette are complete BS imho.


Believe it or not, but here in europe it's very common that people who can't ride, drop $5k, or more on proper eMtbs. 
Heck, over 90% of all sold eMtbs here in germany are being sold because they either look cool, or are comfortable to ride. The best those bikes will ever see are mild fire, or forest roads. 
But a few will get to the trails. 
Where I live, some riders call them screaming cheaters, because they ride up the trails super fast, but on the downhills they are super slow and scream like they are literally dying. 
It looks super awkward watching this. Can't even make fun of them. 
Of course there are also some really good emtb riders who have an actual background of riding normal mtbs, but they are not much. I see more people riding old 26er on the trails than ebikers.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Jayem said:


> I associate E-bikes with the general downfall of personal health. I realize there is a minority that use them for accessibility/handicaps, but the vast majority use them as a crutch when they are otherwise healthy. We are making everything too easy and our health is being sacrificed. Progress isn't having to come up with new medical procedures and fields of study because the entire population is now obese. Again, I realize a few use them for legitimate purposes, but the whole "I wanna keep up" and "I don't have enough time to get in shape" and all of that mess is just laziness. It's killing us. Literally.


Nope, they are just more fun for “most” that try them.


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

Gutch said:


> Nope, they are just for fun for “most” that try them.


Motorcycles are fun too!


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

Hard for bikers to prove their point by using terms like analog or acoustic, it is just a bike. Ebikes are a different sport then mountain biking, if the ebikers would acknowledge that there would not be problems. I don’t care what you ride, but don’t compare the sports. That where the rub is. Not that hard to figure out.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Arm&Hammer said:


> Motorcycles are fun too!


Your not shitting! Motos are awesome fun.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Arm&Hammer said:


> Hard for bikers to prove their point by using terms like analog or acoustic, it is just a bike. Ebikes are a different sport then mountain biking, if the ebikers would acknowledge that there would not be problems. I don’t care what you ride, but don’t compare the sports. That where the rub is. Not that hard to figure out.


Mtbs and emtbs are different no doubt, but different “sports” not even close. Everything is identical except for the assist, that’s it.


----------



## blkdout (Oct 3, 2021)

It's not a sport unless you're competing... and if you keep competing with e-bikes, you're gonna lose every time lol. Reading the arguments, it just doesn't sound like electric bikes are a universal problem. Sounds pretty isolated actually. If it's so bad, report them and move it up the chain. In the meantime, what's wrong with just sharing the trails and calling out the baddies... like always?

This argument sounds like taking your stock toyota to the track and getting mad when the built toyotas pass you lol. I seriously cannot stop laughing at this ridiculous concept.


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

blkdout said:


> It's not a sport unless you're competing... and if you keep competing with e-bikes, you're gonna lose every time lol. Reading the arguments, it just doesn't sound like electric bikes are a universal problem. Sounds pretty isolated actually. If it's so bad, report them and move it up the chain. In the meantime, what's wrong with just sharing the trails and calling out the baddies... like always?
> 
> This argument sounds like taking your stock toyota to the track and getting mad when the built toyotas pass you lol. I seriously cannot stop laughing at this ridiculous concept.


More like taking a horse to the track and losing to a car, one with a motor and one without.


----------



## blkdout (Oct 3, 2021)

Made Up, Fake Competition.


----------



## OneTrustMan (Nov 11, 2017)

Awww, that reminds me of my short time working at a bike shop. 
When asking customers about buying a bike that's more than 1K, they told you that pricing is insane, a bicycle shouldn't cost more than 500.

But in the very next moment they drop 5K on an ebike. If you asked them again they would respond "Yes, but this on has a motor, it's not a bicycle"  

Honestly, I don't care what people ride, or for what reasons. Just don't be an asshole. 
No one, not even other ebikers like those arrogant, smug typ of riders. Be it with, or without E, that think they own the trails. 

And about the whole fitness argument. 
I know a few ebikers who ride more than ever since switching to an emtb. But literally all of them have lost their stamina over time which is very noticeable when they ride a normal bike again on the same trails. 
I think a healthy mix of riding both, E and normal is the way to go.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Arm&Hammer said:


> Hard for bikers to prove their point by using terms like analog or acoustic, it is just a bike. Ebikes are a different sport then mountain biking, if the ebikers would acknowledge that there would not be problems. I don’t care what you ride, but don’t compare the sports. That where the rub is. Not that hard to figure out.


Yet one ebiker on here is allowed to continuously troll the non-ebikers. And he's the one with the biggest chip on his shoulder.


----------



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

OneTrustMan said:


> Awww, that reminds me of my short time working at a bike shop.
> When asking customers about buying a bike that's more than 1K, they told you that pricing is insane, a bicycle shouldn't cost more than 500.
> 
> But in the very next moment they drop 5K on an ebike. If you asked them again they would respond "Yes, but this on has a motor, it's not a bicycle"


Strange, I've worked in various bike shops forever and have never heard anyone say anything close to resembling that.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Arm&Hammer said:


> More like taking a horse to the track and losing to a car, one with a motor and one without.


On this topic, how did this conversation go the last time you were in a wilderness area and a ranger / equestrian saw you on your "non-mechanical" bike? ...


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

The fitness argument is total BS. If you have the mindset that your workouts are pushing you towards a fitness goal then they will. It's just like saying eating food makes you fat. It doesn't, eating wrong does.

One of the most important things that we are all fighting for is access and ebikes for the most part are lumped in with bikes. The general public does care enough to differentiate. Especially with Covid the trails have become more crowded with increased user conflicts.

All our trails are thrashed and it 100% because it didn't rain for 9 months and traffic increased 4X+. Although it just rained and the trail gnomes have been out in force. 

I ride mountain bikes, motorcycles and ebikes. They are all different and fun.

For better or worse ebikes are here to stay. The question is how do we move forward and keep our trail is great condition.


----------



## OneTrustMan (Nov 11, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Strange, I've worked in various bike shops forever and have never heard anyone say anything close to resembling that.


Nothing strange. 
I think the mentality in the us and europe is just different on certain topics. 

My point is. 
Normal people don't want to buy expensive bikes unless it has motor. 
I think it's understandable. If you are willing to drop 3-10K on a bike. Going for an ebike is a no brainer. Some brands even spec their ebikes with good components at the same price as normal bikes.

In germany, ebikes are selling like hot cakes. 
Some bike shopes don't even bother to sell normal bikes anymore, well except kids bikes.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

mtnbkrmike said:


> Happy to live where I live I guess. I don’t see any of that here.
> 
> First of all, people who have no skill generally don’t drop the cash on an e-bike.
> 
> ...


I would seriously disagree with your assessment about newbs not dropping real money on an e-bike. 

First you need to realize that this group sees them for exactly what they are, low powered motorcycles. Therefore the expenditure makes way more sense that spending even half that on an actual bicycle. 

I rode in CO 2 years ago and those boring ass road climbs and 1 way descents make perfect sense for an e-bike although not all trails there are built that way. 

But in TX we mostly have tight 2 way trails, which is exactly why the TX State Legislature, in a rare wise move, specifically prohibits e-bikes unless motorized vehicles are specifically allowed. 
Unfortunately the pro e-bike movement and the mental gymnastics they use to justify them are in full effect here, just as they are online. 

As far as confronting someone regarding thier illegal e-bike usage, there was a time when I would have happily done that. But the reality is yesterday on a beautiful Sunday afternoon someone here in Texas got shot and killed over a parking spot. A permit is not required to carry a handgun in the state of Texas. Some things are just better left alone. 

All I can do is try to protect my family, refuse to ride or associate with e-bikers, & try to educate people on their illegality when the opportunity arises. 

Ironically, the e-bike crowd in large part is the anti-EV group and usually arrive in a lifted deleted Superduty. In large part, they are the MX crowd, not the biking crowd. But that's just a general observation.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

OneTrustMan said:


> In germany, ebikes are selling like hot cakes.
> Some bike shopes don't even bother to sell normal bikes anymore, well except kids bikes.


I noticed this my last trip back.


----------



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

OneTrustMan said:


> Nothing strange.
> I think the mentality in the us and europe is just different on certain topics.
> 
> My point is.
> ...



Yeah I guess you're right, here in the us plenty of "normal" people are happy to drop 3-10k on a standard bike even though they could get an ebike for the same $$$.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

I'll give the rest of my yesterday as just more anecdotal, potentially trolling (?), perspective. Yesterday, as I already mentioned, I got up early, and at the crack of dawn finished the latest feature on a new trail I am working on, then rode down to a jump that had seen better days and completely re-did the lip and ramp as well as the landing. I rode home. Keep reading this is ebike related, I promise!

A good friend came out to ride. We met up after I rested for about an hour. He was on his Santa Cruz High Tower. We headed back up, its 2 blocks from my house, and rode about 4 miles. Our local area has a lot of short steep punchy climbs. After 4 miles, I noticed he was lagging a bit, no worries though, I am used to riding both standard and on-e with standard riders. I slowed my pace and asked him how his legs were feeling. He mentioned they were feeling a little tired as he had rode more than usual in the last week. I casually asked, "Interested in riding back to the house real quick and you can switch to my son's ebike?" As you can guess, he said yes, so that's what we did.

We cranked out another 10 miles with him hooting and hollering the whole time. After we finished up, we cracked a few beers in the backyard and chatted. He mentioned he was definitely interested in getting an ebike, but knew the wait times are long. I told him I was thinking about selling my 1st ebike (1st gen Levo). He said to let him know the price and he would come pick it up.

This is where this conversation is going. This is directly supported by ebike vs. standard bike sales. This is the future. Trolling or not, you should probably start working on getting used to it.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

roughster said:


> We cranked out another 10 miles with him hooting and hollering the whole time. After we finished up, we cracked a few beers in the backyard and chatted. He mentioned he was definitely interested in getting an ebike, but knew the wait times are long. I told him I was thinking about selling my 1st ebike (1st gen Levo). He said to let him know the price and he would come pick it up.


You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ...


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

SkiTalk'er said:


> You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ... You're one of us ...


I agree with this, with one not so subtle twist,

You will be one of us eventually ... You will be one of us eventually ... You will be one of us eventually ... You will be one of us eventually ... You will be one of us eventually ... You will be one of us eventually ... You will be one of us eventually ...

EDIT: Oh and I should mentioned for full transparency, as a trail builder, I was totally anti-ebike initially. It was mostly based on observing a few noob riding who happened to be on ebikes doing things I didn't like. As I talked to them about it, I realized they were actually doing the same things that other "standard" riders were also doing, I was just mentally singling them out because they had e-bikes, not that they were actually doing novel things.

After they started getting more popular locally, I bought my first one because I realized I was just getting worked trying to ride after digging. It was kind of a, "I can dig or I can ride, but really can't do both in the same day" kind of thing.

Actually owning an ebike and riding it as my "main" bike, given I still do ride regular on occasion, I, along with most other people who actually get an ebike, realized that most of the fear around ebikes is from ignorance and not actual knowledge, experience, and understanding how they ride, what their capabilities are, and looking at _actual_ impact.


----------



## OneTrustMan (Nov 11, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Yeah I guess you're right, here in the us plenty of "normal" people are happy to drop 3-10k on a standard bike even though they could get an ebike for the same $$$.


Yup, that's what I mean.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

@roughster quite a few on our trail bulding crew have eMTB's in their stables.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

SkiTalk'er said:


> @roughster quite a few on our trail bulding crew have eMTB's in their stables.


Absolutely, they solve that conundrum of dig and/or ride in the same day/day after. This trend is pretty evident in youtube videos on trailbuilding as well.


----------



## maynard4130 (May 12, 2019)

I love it because it is hard. Climbing...scratching and clawing your way up the climbs here in Colorado is the real test for me. If I loved the downhill more and climbing was just a chore to get out of the way I might feel different


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

This thread is absolute gold. I care NOTHING about riding a DH bike, but I don't go over to the DH forum and crap all over them saying that they're destroying our societal health cuz everybody's riding lifts up and bombing down on them. They have their place, just not for me. So I stay away from the convo's about them and don't sit around and call the riders of them lazy. Good grief.


----------



## maynard4130 (May 12, 2019)

BmanInTheD said:


> This thread is absolute gold. I care NOTHING about riding a DH bike, but I don't go over to the DH forum and crap all over them saying that they're destroying our societal health cuz everybody's riding lifts up and bombing down on them. They have their place, just not for me. So I stay away from the convo's about them and don't sit around and call the riders of them lazy. Good grief.


The original post was about someone posting a NO EBIKES sign on a trail and the reasoning behind it. I'm just trying to give some insight on what others may think about it. Im not trying to call anybody out specifically. I'm sure when people see me driving qith my bike on my car instead of riding to the trailhead they think that's lazy. Just depends on where you draw the line. Truthfully some people (myself) are very passionate about the simple beauty of a bicycle being human powered and have an irrational hate for e-bikes. I know I do. I shouldn't care about what other people do but....I'm a retro grouch.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

roughster said:


> On this topic, how did this conversation go the last time you were in a wilderness area and a ranger / equestrian saw you on your "non-mechanical" bike? ...


"It's just a little mechanical and I still have to move my legs to get it to go"


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

maynard4130 said:


> Truthfully some people (myself) are very passionate about the simple beauty of a bicycle being human powered and have an irrational hate for e-bikes. I know I do. I shouldn't care about what other people do but....I'm a retro grouch.


I hope you are riding a fully rigid MTB the, 3x6 or 3x7...some nice friction thumb shifters, maybe toe clips.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

BmanInTheD said:


> This thread is absolute gold. I care NOTHING about riding a DH bike, but I don't go over to the DH forum and crap all over them saying that they're destroying our societal health cuz everybody's riding lifts up and bombing down on them. They have their place, just not for me. So I stay away from the convo's about them and don't sit around and call the riders of them lazy. Good grief.


All the newest posts show up in one big "Recommended for You" list when I open up this site, regardless of what subforum they're in. 
If e-bikers in the e-bike subforum stopped obsessing about what mountain bikers think of them and making threads about them and instead just talked about their e-bikes, they probably wouldn't pull so many non-e-bikers in. Sort of like if there were regular threads showing up made by DH riders bitching and complaining about non-DH riders in that subforum. But there aren't, because it seems that e-bikers and "hardcore" XC types are the ones most likely to ***** about others around here.

Nothing personal, just stating the obvious.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Edit: apologies for this post. I have removed it.


----------



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

SkiTalk'er said:


> I hope you are riding a fully rigid MTB the, 3x6 or 3x7...some nice friction thumb shifters, maybe toe clips.



I think the ebike hate is a little weird and ultimately self destructive but I do get what he's saying about the difference between riding a bike vs ebike and imo your analogy about thumb shifters, etc is inaccurate. For myself using 100% human power is the main buzz, better components are just a refinement of the same old thing.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

roughster said:


> This is what this ebiker did for the local community today ... Many ebike naysers, I hope you are contributing as well ... In coming, "I clear sticks when I see them" comments ...
> 
> View attachment 1954787
> 
> ...


I don't even know what to say about that sort of trail, except that it's probably really tough to make that fun without a motor, that I get.

You have somewhat power sapping dirt, wide open spaces, you can safely see at least 40 yards down the trail, and it's basically one way if you want to catch the lips.

The lesson here is that trails are RADICALLY different based on geography and that most certainly should effect your local acceptance of e-bikes.

I can't speak to your situation just like you can't speak to mine.


----------



## bingemtbr (Apr 1, 2004)

wow. skimmed through the first few pages. wow. the resentful, entitled attitude....definitely not why I got into mountain biking. If half of the actions posted in this thread are real, then we can only blame our fellow riders when we get banned. 

I've seen 2 trail systems (one was an entire park district) closed in my lifetime. Neither ever reopened. And once the "no bikes" signs were posted, you can bet the rangers and police were there to issue you a ticket and impound your bicycle. 

but...really...we are better than the destructive, narcissistic comments in this thread.


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

maynard4130 said:


> I love it because it is hard. Climbing...scratching and clawing your way up the climbs here in Colorado is the real test for me. If I loved the downhill more and climbing was just a chore to get out of the way I might feel different


Me too...I love the suffering of a good climb here in New Mexico on my bike. I also like riding my E-bike.

Not mutually exclusive.

You're not special.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think the ebike hate is a little weird and ultimately self destructive but I do get what he's saying about the difference between riding a bike vs ebike and imo your analogy about thumb shifters, etc is inaccurate. For myself using 100% human power is the main buzz, better components are just a refinement of the same old thing.


pffft, human powered my ass. Suspension is "gravity assist" in the same way ebikes are "pedal assist".


.


----------



## maynard4130 (May 12, 2019)

mtnbkrmike said:


> Well, plus you judge the hell out of e-bikers and have a self-proclaimed strange hatred deep down inside that you can’t explain, so there’s that too 😂
> 
> Like you said:


I don't like that I judge others. Certainly not proud of it or anything, but rather something for me to work on.


----------



## maynard4130 (May 12, 2019)

SkiTalk'er said:


> I hope you are riding a fully rigid MTB the, 3x6 or 3x7...some nice friction thumb shifters, maybe toe clips.


Single speed actually. But truth be told, I do have a front fork and dropper.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

maynard4130 said:


> I don't like that I judge others. Certainly not proud of it or anything, but rather something for me to work on.


I’m sorry I posted what I did. That was a dick move on my part. I have since edited it. Thanks for the gentlemanly and totally civil response.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

bingemtbr said:


> If half of the actions posted in this thread are real, then we can only blame our fellow riders when we get banned.


DING DING DING...there is the problem. Like it or not eMTB's are not going away, period. If the division continues and access could be lost for _everyone_ and then where are we and do you know how hard it will be to get back? We have some basic rules on our site. ...
1. Don't be an asshole
1a. being overly sensitive is also being an asshole
2. As site owners, we decide who is being an ass.

So as far as trail etiquette ....
1. Don't be an e-hole
1a. If you are riding an analog MTB, don't be overly sensitive that someone is out having a good time when it doesn't effect you one bit.
2. All of these pinecone munching clubs have a ton of power, don't give them a reason to ban _all_ bikes by saying there is desention in the group and cannot agree and take away all bike access.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

nilswalk said:


> I have a theory where the hate comes from: it's threatened identity. We don't just ride mountain bikes, we like to think of ourselves as "mountain bikers". There's an identity attached to that. And for lots of people a big part of that is being fit, and strong, and skilled, and able to do this adventurous sport that lots of people can't do. That, and having big-ass mountain biker calves. Admit it, you're kinda proud of them.
> 
> Then along comes this group of people who (to the outside observer anyway) sort of look like you, wear the same clothes, ride a similar looking bike on the same trails but... man, they sure ain't you. They couldn't care less how tough and fit you are and they sure as hell don't care that your FTP is close to 400. In short, it's a bunch of people who (mostly) don't share all the same values that you do and how you see your sport. It's people from outside your in-group stepping on your toes in your territory and they don't value the things that you think are important about something that is probably a big part of your life and identity. That's going to annoy pretty much anybody.


I repeat my argument on literally every eBike thread or discussion (internet or IRL) that comes along.
*****
Oversimplification to the point of fallacy.
It was never about us vs them, trail damage, the risk of inexperience leading to injury, or the purity of effort. 
It's about the POTENTIAL FOR ABUSE, which hurts literally everyone.
It's not a "slippery slope". It's happening. People are modding the circuitry, de-restricting the assists, and adding throttles to what was SOLD as a pedal-assist bike.
I've made peace with Class 1 ebikes. I don't get it, but I also don't really "get" gravel grinding or commuting. XC racing seems awfully painful with little or no "thrill". 
What deeply concerns me is that people are taking legal ebikes and turning them into literal electric motorcycles with throttles and extra batteries. The youtube videos are real easy to find.
The rules aren't clear to most people, and it's being exploited. I'm 100% certain that the average hiker doesn't care if it's a 20 year old Specialized rockhopper, or a 1000 W FLX bike. It's got 2 wheels, a handlebar and pedals that appear to go 'round and 'round.
Here's a post I made 2 years ago about it.

This is the problem. You need to be Nino Schurter to scream UP the hill at 20 mph. Nothing short of years of hard work is gonna earn you that on an "analog bike". And those folks know not to close on another trail user at that speed.
But I've had an ebike absolutely BLAST BY me at ridiculous speeds uphill by a dude in Levi's, hiking boots and a walmart helmet. It's only going to get worse as prices come down, and battery tech gets better.

emotorcycles with vesitgial pedals masquerading as class1 ebikes is bad for us all because if everyone looks the same, then the easiest solution is to just ban anything with wheels.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

chazpat said:


> "It's just a little mechanical and I still have to move my legs to get it to go"


EXACTLY the same as a class 1. It 100% fits your definition.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Impetus said:


> I repeat my argument on literally every eBike thread or discussion (internet or IRL) that comes along.
> *****
> Oversimplification to the point of fallacy.
> It was never about us vs them, trail damage, the risk of inexperience leading to injury, or the purity of effort.
> ...


Of all the places class 1 has been legalized in the USA, there have been no ill effects. None. This sort of "refer madness" argument posted above and elsewhere is just absolute nonsense. In fact, the opposite is true. When class 1 is legalized, that's what people buy, and that's what people ride. When it's ALL illegal, people are just going to buy and ride whatever the hell they want. The lack of inclusion for lower powered bikes breeds the development of higher powered bikes, and ultimately jeopardizes access for all bikes.



.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

Impetus said:


> But I've had an ebike absolutely BLAST BY me at ridiculous speeds uphill by a dude in Levi's, hiking boots and a walmart helmet.


This guy must be one well traveled rider because on every forum someone complains about _the worst_ eMTB rider it is the same guy that is always described ... Levis ... hiking boots ... Walmart helmet! And everyone says BLASTS BY (_note the CAPITAL letters too_) ... and it is always uphill, so it must be the same guy. Does anyone know if he is on Strava? (I bet he is not using the eMTB setting either if he is this much of an ass) Seriously, I want to meet this guy and learn how he gets so many places. Please can someone get a photo of him?


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

_CJ said:


> Of all the places class 1 has been legalized in the USA, there have been no ill effects. None. This sort of "refer madness" argument posted above and elsewhere is just absolute nonsense. In fact, the opposite is true. When class 1 is legalized, that's what people buy, and that's what people ride. When it's ALL illegal, people are just going to buy and ride whatever the hell they want. The lack of inclusion for lower powered bikes breeds the development of higher powered bikes, and ultimately jeopardizes access for all bikes..


Gold.


----------



## Tickle (Dec 11, 2013)

eMTB's are just another evolution of MB's, same lame arguments when susp, disc brakes and dropper posts came out. If I'm riding longer harder than before and I still feel wrecked after a big ride it's not being lazy or cheating, especially for us old farts 👍


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Suns_PSD said:


> I don't even know what to say about that sort of trail, except that it's probably really tough to make that fun without a motor, that I get.
> 
> You have somewhat power sapping dirt, wide open spaces, you can safely see at least 40 yards down the trail, and it's basically one way if you want to catch the lips.
> 
> ...


I will fully admit I sometimes don't get sarcasm on the boards. Surely this has to be a joke?? That's a -10% grade to a variable height drop / hip to a literally 30' -15% landing pad and run up to a booter that literally has a 25 foot landing. The *ONLY* people that can't make that fun are people who can't let off their brakes ... but I even catered to them by making the high right a super small like 6" drop then a bypass on the right of the booter. If you have to pedal on this stretch, literally your brakes must be welded shut. Overall this stretch is -13% grade, there is PLENTY of gravity, you know stuff like this:









*PLEASE NOTE: *This is a grom on a standard bike.

Yes, you are correct about the visibility and DH only. The power sapping dirt is because it is freshly dug, but both lips are slap packed to concrete level hardness. The soil is almost 100% clay so as soon as it dries in 0.75 days, it too is hard as concrete aka fast AF! So you are right, areas are different and so are people's understand of how to ride bikes including not brake dragging an entire trail.

As for the creek gap, its a 100% approachable, in essence, no lip 10' gap with a 2' crash pad to a nice landing that is 18" below the take off lip built by design. It requires ZERO pop to clear. It requires zero pedaling on the approach if you don't panic brake. There is a bridge to the left, I also built, for those who aren't inclined. Once again, you have no idea what you are talking about.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Tickle said:


> eMTB's are just another evolution of MB's, same lame arguments when susp, disc brakes and dropper posts came out. If I'm riding longer harder than before and I still feel wrecked after a big ride it's not being lazy or cheating, especially for us old farts 👍


I did a solo the other day. I covered lots of ground and got three incredible sustained descents in, after hitting 3 summits. Triple Crown. I felt like hammered $hit after.

Anyone who says you cannot get a decent workout in riding an e-bike, is spreading misinformation. I hit all 5 zones that day. It wasn’t just a bunch of sleepy zone 2 stuff going on, which is being suggested by many. I seriously doubt some/most/all of these people have even thrown a leg over an e-bike, judging by some of things being said. It detracts from the credibility of any potentially legitimate positions being advanced. Another reason why anti e-bikers are shootings themselves in their collective foot.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Jayem said:


> And that's another thing, DH trails should be such that you can hit all the features without pedaling IMO. It gets old really fast when you have to pedal like a madman and still can't make the gaps (as an elite racer) because the damn grade has been flattened out too much.


My comment is tangential to this thread but I completely agree with the above. Some local trail builders have been adding nicely sculpted jumps onto FLAT sections of trail. They definitely put in a lot of work, which is cool, but it makes me wonder if any of them are jumpers. Pedal like hell to maybe get 4" off the ground. Phooey.

Edit: I'm okay with having to pedal into jumps but if it's on a downhill grade where you can get your speed up. If it's on a flat then it's just kind of silly.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

roughster said:


> EXACTLY the same as a class 1. It 100% fits your definition.


That was a joke, playing off on the "it's just a little motor, you still have to pedal" that SOME ebikers would always reply with, as if a little motor wasn't a motor at all.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Nat said:


> My comment is tangential to this thread but I completely agree with the above. Some local trail builders have been adding nicely sculpted jumps onto FLAT sections of trail. They definitely put in a lot of work, which is cool, but it makes me wonder if any of them are jumpers. Pedal like hell to maybe get 4" off the ground. Phooey.
> 
> Edit: I'm okay with having to pedal into jumps but if it's on a downhill grade where you can get your speed up. If it's on a flat then it's just kind of silly.


If the landing is as tall as the lip, you should generate speed off a flat gap. They probably are not aware.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

chazpat said:


> That was a joke, playing off on the "it's just a little motor, you still have to pedal" that SOME ebikers would always reply with, as if a little motor wasn't a motor at all.


Results may vary in your state ... but ... AB-1096 for CA at least:
*



SEC. 7.

Click to expand...

*


> Section 24016 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:
> 
> *24016.*
> (a) An electric bicycle described in subdivision (a) of Section 312.5 shall meet the following criteria:
> (b) A person operating an electric bicycle is not subject to the provisions of this code relating to financial responsibility, driver’s licenses, registration, and license plate requirements, *and an electric bicycle is not a motor vehicle*.


That ship has sailed! It's not a motor vehicle, it is an electrical bicycle by law. So in that context, regardless of what your personal answer would be from the previous hypothetical, they are exactly the same legal status-wise.


----------



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

_CJ said:


> pffft, human powered my ass. Suspension is "gravity assist" in the same way ebikes are "pedal assist".




Somehow that's nearly the exact response I expected. Thanks!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

roughster said:


> Results may vary in your state ... but ... AB-1096 for CA at least:
> 
> That ship has sailed! It's not a motor vehicle, it is an electrical bicycle by law. So in that context, regardless of what your personal answer would be from the previous hypothetical, they are exactly the same legal status-wise.


And where did I say an ebike is a motor vehicle?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

slapheadmofo said:


> All the newest posts show up in one big "Recommended for You" list when I open up this site, regardless of what subforum they're in.
> If e-bikers in the e-bike subforum stopped obsessing about what mountain bikers think of them and making threads about them and instead just talked about their e-bikes, they probably wouldn't pull so many non-e-bikers in. Sort of like if there were regular threads showing up made by DH riders bitching and complaining about non-DH riders in that subforum. But there aren't, because it seems that e-bikers and "hardcore" XC types are the ones most likely to *** about others around here.
> 
> Nothing personal, just stating the obvious.


This times 100.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

_CJ said:


> Of all the places class 1 has been legalized in the USA, there have been no ill effects. None. This sort of "refer madness" argument posted above and elsewhere is just absolute nonsense. In fact, the opposite is true. When class 1 is legalized, that's what people buy, and that's what people ride. When it's ALL illegal, people are just going to buy and ride whatever the hell they want. The lack of inclusion for lower powered bikes breeds the development of higher powered bikes, and ultimately jeopardizes access for all bikes.
> 
> 
> 
> .


Those are some big statements. Got any data to back up your claims?


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

SkiTalk'er said:


> This guy must be one well traveled rider because on every forum someone complains about _the worst_ eMTB rider it is the same guy that is always described ... levis ... hiking boots ... Walmart helmet! And everyone says BLASTS BY (_note the CAPITAL letters too_) ... and it is always uphill, so it must be the same guy. Does anyone know if he is on Strava? (I bet he is not using the eMTB setting either if he is this much of an ass) Seriously, I want to meet this guy and learn how he gets so many places. Please can someone get a photo of him?


Hyperbole all you want dude, but mine is a first-hand account. His pants might have been Carhartts, but that's pretty immaterial. You skew the conversation to trivialize it, but really it means that the issue of inexperienced, ill equipped riders are more prevalent than you might want to believe.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

Impetus said:


> Hyperbole all you want dude, but mine is a first-hand account. His pants might have been Carhartts, but that's pretty immaterial. You skew the conversation to trivialize it, but really it means that the issue of inexperienced, ill equipped riders are more prevalent than you might want to believe.


Don't dude me, dude with "hyperbole". you were the one that was exaggerating the whole "first hand account" Levi's, hiking boots, Walmart helmet, BLASTING BY (again, capitalized), rediculous speed ... c'mon, if you want to make a point and be taken seriously, make it from a rational point of view verses creating a stereo typical cartoon scenario.

The vast majority of eMTB riders on the trails that I see are not inexperienced, ill-equipped riders that you presume to see but riders that have have decades of riding under their belt and wearing actual cycling clothes, either flats or clipless and MIPS helmets.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

SkiTalk'er said:


> The vast majority of eMTB riders on the trails that I see are not inexperienced, ill-equipped riders that you presume to see but riders that have have decades of riding under their belt and wearing actual cycling clothes, either flats or clipless and MIPS helmets.


And do you really that will continue to be the case in the future? Think about that.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

SkiTalk'er said:


> Don't dude me, dude with "hyperbole". you were the one that was exaggerating the whole "first hand account" Levi's, hiking boots, Walmart helmet, BLASTING BY (again, capitalized), rediculous speed ... c'mon, if you want to make a point and be taken seriously (and not mocked), make it from a rational point of view verses creating a stereo typical cartoon scenario.
> 
> The vast majority of eMTB riders on the trails that I see are not inexperienced, ill-equipped riders that you presume to see but riders that have have decades of riding under their belt and wearing actual cycling clothes, either flats or clipless and MIPS helmets.


The only ebike riders i have seen on my local trails have been going very slowly. The rules are class 1 only for people with disabilities/ physical limitations (i forget the exact verbage) but so far things seem to be checking out. 

On the other hand a notoriously steep climb washed out really badly shortly after ebikes became allowed on this contingency, which is exactly what i was worried about with ebike access (this section hadn’t changed in at least 11 years prior). Then again, given the covid surge its impossible to place causation on ebikes alone, but im still wary knowing there is at least a correlation.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

chazpat said:


> And do you really that will continue to be the case in the future? Think about that.


Yes. the price of entry will always be up there for a _real_ eMTB, the same with buying a _real _regular MTB. I have yet to see any of the fears or warnings that all these inexperienced rides will be littering the trails getting in over their heads or running out of battery power and poor etiquette. Now that we are getting back from the shelter in place and people go back to their normal lives and not the free time they had over the past 2 years, the novelty of having a mountain bike (e or not) will get old and they will realize that couple of thousand dollars sitting in the garage or extra room in the apartment is a waste and they will be seilling them.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

SkiTalk'er said:


> Yes. the price of entry will always be up there for a _real_ eMTB, the same with buying a _real _regular MTB. I have yet to see any of the fears or warnings that all these inexperienced rides will be littering the trails getting in over their heads or running out of battery power and poor etiquette. Now that we are getting back from the shelter in place and people go back to their normal lives and not the free time they had over the past 2 years, the novelty of having a mountain bike (e or not) will get old and they will realize that couple of thousand dollars sitting in the garage or extra room in the apartment is a waste and they will be seilling them.


I've seen a mix, though not really any with decades of riding experience. One guy, I think it must have been his very first ride. But he was going VERY slow, seemed to be really jittery and timid. It wasn't a steep downhill or anything, just some very short rocky/rooty dips and that type of thing. Others have been young to maybe into their 40s. I guess one guy may have had decades of experience but he was riding with several teens, also on ebikes.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

chazpat said:


> I've seen a mix, though not really any with decades of riding experience. One guy, I think it must have been his very first ride. But he was going VERY slow, seemed to be really jittery and timid. It wasn't a steep downhill or anything, just some very short rocky/rooty dips and that type of thing. Others have been young to maybe into their 40s. I guess one guy may have had decades of experience but he was riding with several teens, also on ebikes.


Do you live in an area where there are a lot of rentals? I have heard it a little more prevalent in areas that there are a lot of people renting and some of those issues I place on the rental companies not doing enough explaining and educating. But where I ride, about 20-25% of the bikes are eMTBs and I am not sure I have seen one person over their head on Peavine in the past two years. The only cases where I have seen peopel out of their elements were families that were out and the weak links (usually a parent) were hiffing and puffing while the kids were ahead and they quite frankly looked at us with envy.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Results may vary in your state ... but ... AB-1096 for CA at least:
> 
> That ship has sailed! It's not a motor vehicle, it is an electrical bicycle by law. So in that context, regardless of what your personal answer would be from the previous hypothetical, they are exactly the same legal status-wise.


Vehicle Code does not apply to MTB trails. 
Obviously (well, it should be anyway).

Neither does the US CPSC, before anyone tries to pull out that other tired old canard.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Impetus said:


> Hyperbole all you want dude, but mine is a first-hand account. His pants might have been Carhartts, but that's pretty immaterial. You skew the conversation to trivialize it, but really it means that the issue of inexperienced, ill equipped riders are more prevalent than you might want to believe.


Levi’s, Carhartts, whatever. I don’t get the point.

Blatant seems like a seriously intense rider and he’s apparently rocking these, with armour underneath:
















Again with feeling … riding pants for the tall and thin


Looking for new current info. In the market for light-ish riding pants. My inseam is longer than my waist. Any tall skinny riders have any direct experience with pants that fit lengthwise without buying four waist sizes too big? Thanks.




www.mtbr.com





To be clear, not that Blatant will ever be mistaken for an e-biker but my point remains - not sure of the point of referring to attire when trying to drive one’s point home. It’s irrelevant. I could see just as much ridicule, if not more, being heaped on an e-biker dressed head to toe in brand new Fox attire.


SkiTalk'er said:


> Do you live in an area where there are a lot of rentals? I have heard it a little more prevalent in areas that there are a lot of people renting and some of those issues I place on the rental companies not doing enough explaining and educating. But where I ride, about 20-25% of the bikes are eMTBs and I am not sure I have seen one person over their head on Peavine in the past two years. The only cases where I have seen peopel out of their elements were families that were out and the weak links (usually a parent) were hiffing and puffing while the kids were ahead and they quite frankly looked at us with envy.


I have yet to see anyone over their head on a trail on an e-bike. Even if there were noobs out there, so what, as long as they are reasonably courteous? Sometimes I’m ecstatic to see people - any kind of people - especially in the more remote, bear ridden areas. Reading posts from others, sometimes I feel like I must be living on a different planet or something.

Just to clear a few things up, I have a lot of bikes. For 3 season riding, my Druid is my go-to, followed by my Honzo and my fully rigid Unit 😳😬 On pavement I have an originally bought 2004 Made in the USA C-Dale cross bike, and a fixed gear Kona Paddy Wagon. I have e-fatties for my daughter and me for winter riding (that I have been taking out the past few weeks for some shakedown rides, after upgrading the drivetrains). I used to be an e-hater myself. I still get a little pissed when I am struggling up a long technical climb with an e-bike on my a$$. At the top of the climb, I let them know exactly what I think about that, in no uncertain language. I pray that I will never not be able to ride my non-assist bikes with my daughter. The e-fatties fill a niche position in the lineup. But they are a blast, and compliment the rest of my bikes beautifully. I don’t see the need to pick a side here. I like them both. And there are a/e-holes out there everywhere. Regardless of what bike they are on, they are going to hear it from me (and others) if they are not being courteous on the trail.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Vehicle Code does not apply to MTB trails.
> Obviously (well, it should be anyway).
> 
> Neither does the US CPSC, before anyone tries to pull out that other tired old canard.


Haha I was just going to bring up Consumer Safety  The reason I replied the way I did was to head off the argument that an ebike is a motorcycle (by legal definition a motor vehicle), which is a common assertion that you can see throughout this and every other ebike discussion since their inception, and that the primary basis for excluding ebikes are typically motor / motorized vehicles ordinances. This leaves the "ebiker" to wonder, do people actually understand there is legal consequences to AB 1096 and if it is posted "No Motor/Motorized Vehicles" it doesn't apply (at least in CA). There is no such thing legally any more in California as a "Motorized Bicycle". In fact AB 1096 *specifically *removed this definition:



> This bill would delete the latter definition of a “motorized bicycle.” The bill would define an “electric bicycle” as a bicycle with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts, and would create 3 classes of electric bicycles, as specified.


So, any language on a sign that does not say "No Electric Bicycles", at least in California, and link to an ordinance can be purposefully and legally ignored. Period.

The OP is right, users putting up these stickers is actually further bolstering ebikers since it creates inappropriate signage, does not align to the clear and specific regulatory definitions (at least in CA), and is conflict with the general intent and purpose of the DOI policy.

I know every one knows, but PLEASE read this if nothing else comes from this thread:



> *Sec. 5 Implementation. *
> 
> I direct the Assistant Secretaries for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Land and Minerals Management, and Water and Science, as appropriate, to do the following:
> 
> ...




The bottom line is MOST jurisdictions have failed to provide the appropriate clarification and as a result, e-bikes are legally entitled to ride anywhere a traditional bicycle is allowed on public property within the scope of DOI.

This is legally the end of this argument (at least in California).


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

roughster said:


> I will fully admit I sometimes don't get sarcasm on the boards. Surely this has to be a joke?? That's a -10% grade to a variable height drop / hip to a literally 30' -15% landing pad and run up to a booter that literally has a 25 foot landing. The *ONLY* people that can't make that fun are people who can't let off their brakes ... but I even catered to them by making the high right a super small like 6" drop then a bypass on the right of the booter. If you have to pedal on this stretch, literally your brakes must be welded shut. Overall this stretch is -13% grade, there is PLENTY of gravity, you know stuff like this:
> 
> View attachment 1954998
> 
> ...


Good on you for giving back and building trails.

No jabs meant, and I acknowledge that all trails look way more tame in video/ photos.

That said, in particular the first photos you posted, would be considered pretty chill around here. But we all work with what we got right?

That said, due to good trail design it doesn't look like you need e-bikes at all to clear obstacles, just to go faster on the in-between bits I guess. But at least e-bikes appear to be safe on your trails where-as they are not on ours.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Haha I was just going to bring up Consumer Safety




Of course you were, even though it sounds like you know it's completely irrelevant. Same goes for anything contained in Vehicle Codes when it comes to any trails that even remotely resemble actual MTB trails. It's that type approach by many e-bikers (strident pretense of willful ignorance when it comes to access issues) that can tend to sour me on them as a user group. That and the 'my motor is not a motor' argument. 🤪

I have no idea of the specifics in CA, nor do I care much. 
Practically another planet in many ways.
It would be interesting if you posted the link to the ordinance you quoted, as per your own suggestion.
I can't count how many lawyer wannabes I've seen be completely wrong here (not saying you are, but as a former moderator of this sub-forum, I've seen a lot of self-professed 'experts' pretty much just make **** up.)


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Of course you were, even though it sounds like you know it's completely irrelevant. Same goes for anything contained in Vehicle Codes when it comes to any trails that even remotely resemble actual MTB trails. It's that type approach by many e-bikers (strident pretense of willful ignorance when it comes to access issues) that can tend to sour me on them as a user group. That and the 'my motor is not a motor' argument. 🤪
> 
> I have no idea of the specifics in CA, nor do I care much.
> Practically another planet in many ways.
> ...


Fair enough, from a NorCal perspective, this is currently the "classic example" (from a Facebook announcement):














__





Soquel







www.fire.ca.gov





Note: Their use of "motorized vehicles" is completely incorrect and a misuse in regards to ebikes ... *Period. *Calling ebikes "power driven" has no associated legal definition. The ordinance / regulation has nothing to do with ebikes but is more specific to use of restricted areas. Hence, this is a good "bad" example of this exact issue.

EDIT: Actually just found the specific reference so updated link from FB to CalFire directly. However, there is no link to a viable regulation aka technically, it's a legitimate defense to ask for clarification of what regulations prohibited ebikes.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Here is another one. From the BofRec website:

Why aren’t e-bikes considered to be traditional bikes and already allowed on Reclamation lands?

*



In accordance with 43 CFR 420.5(a), e-bikes are currently considered as Off-Road Vehicles as follows:

Click to expand...

*


> (a) Off-road vehicle means any motorized vehicle (including the standard automobile) designed for or capable of cross-country travel on or immediately over land, water, sand, snow, ice, marsh, swampland, or natural terrain. The term excludes: (1) Nonamphibious registered motorboats; (2) military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicles when used for emergency purpose; (3) self-propelled lawnmowers, snowblowers, garden or lawn tractors, and golf carts while being used for their designed purpose; (4) agricultural, timbering, construction, exploratory, and development equipment and vehicles while being used exclusively as authorized by permit, lease, license, agreement, or contract with the Bureau; (5) any combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense emergencies; and (6) “official use” vehicles. Off road vehicles are subject to closures in accordance with section 420.2, as follows: General closure. Reclamation lands are closed to off-road vehicle use, except for an area or trail specifically opened to use of off- road vehicles in accordance with Section 420.21.





https://www.usbr.gov/recreation/publications/ebikes.pdf



Let's not forget, straight from the DOI policy, which is over BofRec:



> v) ... *expressly exempt all e-bikes as defined in Sec. 4a from the definition of off-road vehicles or motorized vehicles; and*
> 
> vi) ...* expressly exempt all e-bikes as defined in Sec. 4a from the definition of off-road vehicles*


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

Impetus said:


> I've made peace with Class 1 ebikes. .....emotorcycles with vesitgial pedals masquerading as class1 ebikes.....But I've had an ebike absolutely BLAST BY me at ridiculous speeds uphill by a dude in Levi's, hiking boots and a walmart helmet


Question for those so hung up on the "Class 1" designation for mountain trails--do you understand a Class 1 and Class 3 bike will go up steep hills at exactly the same speed? And you all say they're slower going down hill...so, why the vehement hangup on "Class 1?"


Impetus said:


> What deeply concerns me is that people are taking legal ebikes and turning them into literal electric motorcycles with throttles and extra batteries.


So, does the throttle or the extra battery give the motor more power? Just curious....


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Jon A said:


> Question for those so hung up on the "Class 1" designation for mountain trails--do you understand a Class 1 and Class 3 bike will go up steep hills at exactly the same speed? And you all say they're slower going down hill...so, why the vehement hangup on "Class 1?"


You'll find most e-bike proponents here share the same 'hangup' when it comes to Class 3 e-bikes. 
Strange but true.
🤷‍♂️


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

roughster said:


> Fair enough, from a NorCal perspective, this is currently the "classic example" (from a Facebook announcement):
> 
> View attachment 1955091
> 
> ...


I'd like some more information on the "violation is a misdemeanor". So, basically the same as a minor traffic violation? Ticket issued, see you in court, or just pay the fine? Can they impound your "vehicle" for a misdemeanor violation?

Asking for a friend.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Jon A said:


> Question for those so hung up on the "Class 1" designation for mountain trails--do you understand a Class 1 and Class 3 bike will go up steep hills at exactly the same speed? And you all say they're slower going down hill...so, why the vehement hangup on "Class 1?"
> 
> So, does the throttle or the extra battery give the motor more power? Just curious....


Yes and Yes (though its not the battery its a matter of how they are regulated by law).

I'll address Class II even though I see you did not mention them:


Class II throttle instantly delivers max torque with no required input from user other than thumb/wrist activation. It truly is a motor as opposed to Class I/III which is pedal-assist. Class I/III your legs don't turn, you go nowhere. In addition, by design, they usually have the same 750 watt maximum output as with Class III discussed below, but they do regulate at 20 mph unlike Class III.
Class III can and usually does by design go up to full 750 watts. It also isn't regulated from an output until 750Watt bike assisted and/or until 28 mph. (Yes, I recognize most bikes use torque sensors and other measures other than true Watts / Speed, but it's close enough). Class III are typically designed for road / commuting use. Class I typically cap at 250 watt output which is basically the same output a fit rider pushes. This is by design. 750 watts is ... 1 horsepower. You can guess why that is.
No Class I and Class III do not go uphill at the same rate. Class I are truly pedal assist in that they deliver variable power output up to maximum nominal wattage output depending on rider output. Certainly it is possible to go 100(assist)/100(maximum watts) on "turbo", but you will still need to provide any additional wattage above 250 watts and the good news is this type of riding typically drains a battery super fast. Class III can and usually do go insta-full output (750 watt bike assisted) and as discussed above has a higher speed cap. That's 3X more powerful than a Class I.

To be clear though, Class I never go uphill "screaming fast". When you are going 3-4 mph up a steep hill, someone going 6-8 is literally going twice as fast you are and it will see they are "blasting" up the hill when in reality 6-8 mph is actually laughable when it comes to a "real" motor vehicle. What you are seeing is 250 watts (pedal assisted) and most likely roughly 250 watts rider provided assuming they are fit. Sorry guys, anyone claiming ebikes are a danger from steep uphills (worst case for speed for ebikes) due to speed is simply giving in to hyperbole, that is the actual reality based fact. Many on this thread are guilty.

Class III being designed for road / commuting or utility (think Rad Bikes, Ones used for hunting to assist a dragging out elk for example) are usually much heavier and not designed for actual MTB trail use. On the contrary, almost all / if not all Class I are *specifically* designed for trail use and include current "regular" MTB components.

Since I am in this far, might as well go full monty! IF someone illegally modifies their ebike it is 100% a crime and is just like any other "law" for enforcement and punishment. What's the saying I am looking for as analogy, oh yeah, ... "Guns don't kill people, people kill people..."


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Jon A said:


> Question for those so hung up on the "Class 1" designation for mountain trails--do you understand a Class 1 and Class 3 bike will go up steep hills at exactly the same speed? And you all say they're slower going down hill...so, why the vehement hangup on "Class 1?"
> 
> So, does the throttle or the extra battery give the motor more power? Just curious....


I won't be at all surprised if the ebike manufacturers eventually push this and for class 2 ebikes to also be allowed on trails. Hard to argue that class 1 should be allowed but class 2 shouldn't. But don't class 3 have a higher cut-off speed of 28mph? Though granted, "the trail dictates the speed" could be applied there as well.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

roughster said:


> Yes and Yes (though its not the battery its a matter of how they are regulated by law).
> 
> I'll address Class II even though I see you did not mention them:
> 
> ...


I know one ebiker on here who posted that he could soft pedal his crank backwards to engage the motor. I don't think he had modified it and he was just being honest. I have no idea if that is commonly possible. But regardless, as long as class 2 don't tear up the trails, why should they not be allowed?


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> Yes and Yes (though its not the battery its a matter of how they are regulated by law)....


I agree with much of that, but there seems to be a misconception (not just by you, but by many here) that Class 1 bikes are 250 Watts. That is not true of many of them in the US, as Class 1, 2 and 3 all have the same 750W limit in the US. Details below:



roughster said:


> Class II throttle instantly delivers max torque with no required input from user other than thumb/wrist activation. It truly is a motor as opposed to Class I/III which is pedal-assist. Class I/III your legs don't turn, you go nowhere. In addition, by design, they usually have the same 750 watt maximum output as with Class III discussed below, but they do regulate at 20 mph unlike Class III.




I understand many have an emotional reaction to somebody not pedaling, I just don't see what measurable difference it makes in the real world that should matter to other users (I don't expect people to chose their bike based upon my emotional reaction to it). A Class 1 750W bike, cadence sensed or torque sensed (depending upon its tuning, of course, but many are tuned very agressively from the factory) is also capable of spiking the full power in a fraction of a second. Why would I care if somebody does it with his thumb or foot?



roughster said:


> Class III can and usually does by design go up to full 750 watts. It also isn't regulated from an output until 750Watt bike assisted and/or until 28 mph. (Yes, I recognize most bikes use torque sensors and other measures other than true Watts / Speed, but it's close enough). Class III are typically designed for road / commuting use. Class I typically cap at 250 watt output which is basically the same output a fit rider pushes. This is by design. 750 watts is ... 1 horsepower. You can guess why that is.




I understand some companies don't change their spec for the US and Europe, but many do. And the Class 1 limit is 750 everywhere I can think of in the US.



roughster said:


> No Class I and Class III do not go uphill at the same rate. Class I are truly pedal assist in that they deliver variable power output up to maximum nominal wattage output depending on rider output. Certainly it is possible to go 100(assist)/100(maximum watts) on "turbo", but you will still need to provide any additional wattage above 250 watts and the good news is this type of riding typically drains a battery super fast. Class III can and usually do go insta-full output (750 watt bike assisted) and as discussed above has a higher speed cap. That's 3X more powerful than a Class I.




But they do when they're both 750W, which is what the Class system allows. A throttle doesn't make a bike faster uphill (excepting terrain where obstacles may make pedaling difficult/impossible--which is one of the things that makes them most useful). The fastest way to the top is always pedaling vs. relying on the motor alone. And on any decent hill, it takes a *TON *more power than 750W to exceed (or even come close to) 20 MPH.

I understand there are a lot of Class 1 bikes with less than 750W...but that's not what the class system says. This is more a criticism of the Class system--if they did have different power levels allowed, some of this discussion about which to allow on mountain trails might make a little more sense.



roughster said:


> Class III being designed for road / commuting or utility (think Rad Bikes, Ones used for hunting to assist a dragging out elk for example) are usually much heavier and not designed for actual MTB trail use. On the contrary, almost all / if not all Class I are *specifically* designed for trail use and include current "regular" MTB components.


That's an over-generalization. Yes, the big names that cater to the European market typically don't make Class III, but there are plenty of Class III bikes designed for trail use available in the US.



roughster said:


> To be clear though, Class I never go uphill "screaming fast". When you are going 3-4 mph up a steep hill, someone going 6-8 is literally going twice as fast you are and it will see they are "blasting" up the hill when in reality 6-8 mph is actually laughable when it comes to a "real" motor vehicle. What you are seeing is 250 watts (pedal assisted) and most likely roughly 250 watts rider provided assuming they are fit. Sorry guys, anyone claiming ebikes are a danger from steep uphills (worst case for speed for ebikes) due to speed is simply giving in to hyperbole, that is the actual reality based fact. Many on this thread are guilty.


100% true. It really makes the claims of many here make them look very silly.

BTW, I have the highest respect for the time and effort you put into trailbuilding. This isn't an argument against you, just an argument that in the real world on real trails, the current US class system is rather meaningless.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

I understand your point (legally a Class I could be up to 750watts in the US) but actually contrary to the hypothetical Class I @ 750 watts, the vast reality is probably >90% any ebike you see on an actual MTB trail is a Class I 250 watt capped ebike. Would you agree to that? If not, we will go back to your emotional comment


----------



## crockej (Jun 4, 2019)

Quick question
Can you ride your ebike with the motor off in a no ebike area? What if it’s the only bike you own?


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

crockej said:


> Quick question
> Can you ride your ebike with the motor off in a no ebike area? What if it’s the only bike you own?


Most you would not want to because its like driving a truck with no power steering...or power any thing but a bike like the Trek E-Cailber rides as well w/o the drivetrain as it does with it.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

crockej said:


> Quick question
> Can you ride your ebike with the motor off in a no ebike area? What if it’s the only bike you own?


Take the battery out and it’s not motorized any more and much less of a bear. Pedaling a turbo lev Sworks around while off is not fun. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## D. Inoobinati (Aug 28, 2020)

I like this. It's a good start.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

D. Inoobinati said:


> I like this. It's a good start.


Yeah, well you are pissing up wind. It is not_ if_ but _when_ eMTB's are universally accepted as the same as mountain bikes. Seriously, follow the money. eMTB's are where the growth is for the industry so in anything the manufacturers will push for it and their pockets are deeper than yours.


----------



## D. Inoobinati (Aug 28, 2020)

SkiTalk'er said:


> Yeah, well you are pissing up wind. It is not_ if_ but _when_ eMTB's are universally accepted as the same as mountain bikes. Seriously, follow the money. eMTB's are where the growth is for the industry so in anything the manufacturers will push for it and their pockets are deeper than yours.


I get that, but this "industry" isn't smart enough to buy their way into policies like the ICE-recreation industry. As far as policy-makers are currently concerned, the eMtb vs. mtb issue is a civil war confined to public lands, and they can avoid it by maintaining the status quo.

There is a chance that policy makers smell a buck to be made in fees for (all) mtb trail access, levied at the trailhead....say $5 per bike per day?


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> I understand your point (legally a Class I could be up to 750watts in the US) but actually contrary to the hypothetical Class I @ 750 watts, the vast reality is probably >90% any ebike you see on an actual MTB trail is a Class I 250 watt capped ebike. Would you agree to that?


No, I don't think so, not in the context of this thread. I'm sure one can find many trails in which that is true (MTB _only_ trails, bike parks, etc) but this thread was broader in scope, speaking about trail access for all bikes being threatened or not expanded including on trails shared with hikers, horses, etc. I'd venture to guess one can find vast swaths of public land in the US where they are allowed where the trails are dominated by 750W bikes, especially this time of year--hunting season. Unlike Europe, hunting bikes are a pretty significant portion of the Ebike industry here, they're dominated by Bafang motors and can usually be set up Class 1, 2 or 3 by the dealer at time of purchase. There are also a great deal of lower cost "mountain bikes" that are more popular here using the same motors. While they may be frowned upon by the tea-sipping crowd, they sure sell like hotcakes. So I don't think it's a hypothetical at all.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

D. Inoobinati said:


> the eMtb vs. mtb issue is a civil war confined to public lands, and they can avoid it by maintaining the status quo.


this gets back to the title of this thread ... *Are anti-ebikers shooting themselves in the foot?* The anti eMTB'er are creating the fight and the noise where there should be none. I am not sure if that's you, if so, you are cutting off your nose to spite your face and if we all lose access, it is because of you.


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

Impetus said:


> I repeat my argument on literally every eBike thread or discussion (internet or IRL) that comes along.
> *****
> Oversimplification to the point of fallacy.
> It was never about us vs them, trail damage, the risk of inexperience leading to injury, or the purity of effort.
> ...


Just an update!! I now have a new $150 helmet I got at my local bike shop, and also picked up some new XTR 9100 clip-less pedals along with some cool neon yellow cycling shorts.....And you were riding so slow and appeared to be taking the girl scout route, so I thought...I need to pass this guy!!


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Jon A said:


> No, I don't think so, not in the context of this thread. I'm sure one can find many trails in which that is true (MTB _only_ trails, bike parks, etc) but this thread was broader in scope, speaking about trail access for all bikes being threatened or not expanded including on trails shared with hikers, horses, etc. I'd venture to guess one can find vast swaths of public land in the US where they are allowed where the trails are dominated by 750W bikes, especially this time of year--hunting season. Unlike Europe, hunting bikes are a pretty significant portion of the Ebike industry here, they're dominated by Bafang motors and can usually be set up Class 1, 2 or 3 by the dealer at time of purchase. There are also a great deal of lower cost "mountain bikes" that are more popular here using the same motors. While they may be frowned upon by the tea-sipping crowd, they sure sell like hotcakes. So I don't think it's a hypothetical at all.


You are on a MTB forum, not Sunset Magazine forums or Nextdoor talking about the local DCG bike path. At least own it.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

SkiTalk'er said:


> Yeah, well you are pissing up wind. It is not_ if_ but _when_ eMTB's are universally accepted as the same as mountain bikes. Seriously, follow the money. eMTB's are where the growth is for the industry so in anything the manufacturers will push for it and their pockets are deeper than yours.


No land managers in this part of the country care. Maybe it's different in CA (pretty much everything seems to be), but there is little to no industry involvement/influence when it comes to trails or access. If the ICE industry hasn't been able to get anything done as far as legal riding spots, I highly doubt a few e-bike shops are going to have better results. E-bikes are few and far between not only on the trails but also in shops; they're mostly being ignored by mountain bike riders and sellers.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> No land managers in this part of the country care. Maybe it's different in CA (pretty much everything seems to be), but there is little to no industry involvement/influence when it comes to trails or access. If the ICE industry hasn't been able to get anything done as far as legal riding spots, I highly doubt a few e-bike shops are going to have better results. E-bikes are few and far between not only on the trails but also in shops; they're mostly being ignored by mountain bike riders and sellers.


But see this is a great example of "why" e-bikes are different and should not be considered analogous to ICE. ICE motorized vehicles (notice term usage haha  ) cause more erosion (as proven now by multiple actual real studies), pollution (both environmental AND sound), have typical user speeds way in excess of other non-motorized forms of outdoor recreation (hiking, equestrian, (e)MTB). Those simply do not apply to eMTBs, and as a result, most, not all unfortunately, LMs recognize this and treat them differently once they can actually be bothered to look into the topic instead of knee jerk reacting, /cough I'm talking to you CalFire....

As for the NorthEastern US, they are coming. Trust us on this. Europe ... exploded with eMTBs. West Coast, which tends to be more progressive and has a higher concentration of bike manufacturers in close proximity ... exploded with eMTBs. The south has some of, if not the most, MTB specific built trails ... exploded with eMTBs. Sales of eMTBs are on a crash course to be the dominate MTB bike purchases (see link below for what I am sure will be depressing facts on eBikes as a whole for many people on this thread) within a few years.

Trust us, I am not doubting your assessment of the current state of the NE, but it will change and you will soon have eMTBs all over in less than a year or two. Just saying so you are prepared.



https://www.ebicycles.com/ebike-facts-statistics/


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

SkiTalk'er said:


> Yeah, well you are pissing up wind. It is not_ if_ but _when_ eMTB's are universally accepted as the same as mountain bikes. Seriously, follow the money. eMTB's are where the growth is for the industry so in anything the manufacturers will push for it and their pockets are deeper than yours.


This post is quite hilarious. 

“Follow the money” “deep pockets” 

You think specialized is spending their net profit to lobby directly for eBike access? They don’t even research the area to see whether they allow ebikes where they aggressively advertise and sell them. 

They are just selling bikes. And in many cases, it’s all they have in stock to buy. 

Just because something is a fast or fastest growing segment doesn’t make it a driver of change or a high percentage of overall sales. Vinyl records are the fastest growing segment of album sales. It isn’t changing the way people record music on a mass scale (digital vs tape).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



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

roughster said:


> ICE motorized vehicles... have typical user speeds way in excess of other non-motorized forms of outdoor recreation (hiking, equestrian, (e)MTB).





Not true, the trail dictates the speed. I learned that in the mtbr ebike forum


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Trust us, I am not doubting your assessment of the current state of the NE, but it will change and you will soon have eMTBs all over in less than a year or two. Just saying so you are prepared.


I've been hearing that for more than a year or two already.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Not true, the trail dictates the speed. I learned that in the mtbr ebike forum


Yes! I’ve said it many times 🍺


----------



## angelo (Sep 3, 2004)

Suns_PSD said:


> I would seriously disagree with your assessment about newbs not dropping real money on an e-bike.
> 
> First you need to realize that this group sees them for exactly what they are, low powered motorcycles. Therefore the expenditure makes way more sense that spending even half that on an actual bicycle.
> 
> ...


VERY general. Maybe in Texas, but there's a whole lot going on in that state that I don't understand.......


----------



## D. Inoobinati (Aug 28, 2020)

SkiTalk'er said:


> this gets back to the title of this thread ... *Are anti-ebikers shooting themselves in the foot?* The anti eMTB'er are creating the fight and the noise where there should be none. I am not sure if that's you, if so, you are cutting of f your nose to spite your face and if we all lose access, it is because of you.


As long as the status quo is maintained, mtb riders keep access and eMtbs can fuh-koff.

FWIW, I'll happily lobby to expand wilderness if it means keeping emtbs off trails.


----------



## EKram (Oct 30, 2020)

Just signed up for an urban trail ride that is touted as getting to know ebikes. Nashville, TN.
Gonna take my SS.


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> You are on a MTB forum, not Sunset Magazine forums or Nextdoor talking about the local DCG bike path. At least own it.


I'm in a thread talking about the type of trails that were the subject of the thread and that dominate much of the public discourse on the subject. I think you're a bit stuck in the relatively small bubble of bike park/bike only trails that are so elitist the only ebikes on them are the high-end Euro-spec underpowered bikes.  Or perhaps you really had no idea what Class I meant and you've been seeing more powerful bikes all along and just didn't know it.  

Regardless, I think you'd have to agree that making arguments for public policy based upon the very false assumption that 750W Class 1 bikes don't exist probably isn't the best strategy. For better or worse, the current class system is so baked into everything it's the one we'll be stuck with for a very long time, if not forever.



D. Inoobinati said:


> FWIW, I'll happily lobby to expand wilderness if it means keeping emtbs off trails.


Yeah, that's a great strategy. Which exact Wilderness Areas are allowing you to ride your manual bike? Or are you just doing it?

Ready, take aim at foot, fire!


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Jon A said:


> Ready, take aim at foot, fire!


😂


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Jon A said:


> I'm in a thread talking about the type of trails that were the subject of the thread and that dominate much of the public discourse on the subject. I think you're a bit stuck in the relatively small bubble of bike park/bike only trails that are so elitist the only ebikes on them are the high-end Euro-spec underpowered bikes.  Or perhaps you really had no idea what Class I meant and you've been seeing more powerful bikes all along and just didn't know it.
> 
> Regardless, I think you'd have to agree that making arguments for public policy based upon the very false assumption that 750W Class 1 bikes don't exist probably isn't the best strategy. For better or worse, the current class system is so baked into everything it's the one we'll be stuck with for a very long time, if not forever.
> 
> ...


Dude, you literally have no clue... and you are trying to branch this out to a scope of discussion including non-MTB ebikes on non-technical non-MTB trails completely outside of the interest of this forum. But please, keep insisting this is a broader issue and I don't understand ebikes, lol.

The class system is baked in, but honestly I am not as sold on Class I always being allowed to 750watts. I actually think this is one of the opportunities for improving the current discussion and allowing more broad access to Class I 250W max *actual* eMTBs on all trails bikes are allowed on all public lands, not just DOI scope.

Since it sounds like you are the expert on Rad Bike style bikes, I'll let you continue the Nextdoor type discussions if you want. I could give a **** about them.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Trust us, I am not doubting your assessment of the current state of the NE, but it will change and you will soon have eMTBs all over in less than a year or two. Just saying so you are prepared.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.ebicycles.com/ebike-facts-statistics/







__





Where Can Electric Mountain Bikes Be Ridden in New England







www.nemba.org





"The short answer is that all the major state and federal land management agencies in New England allow e-bikes only on trails which allow motorized recreation. E-bikes may also be ridden on private property and private trail systems with the permission of the landowner.

Many local trail systems are managed by town conservation commissions or land trusts that have not fully developed policies specific to electric, power-assist vehicles. However, those we’ve spoken to verify that regardless of the amount of power emitted by the electric motor, they are still by definition motorized and are managed as such.

How e-bikes are managed on paved public paths is unclear, and frequently state and local regulations have not yet caught up to the technology of e-bikes, and there is no definitive list of where e-bikes are allowed to ride on paved pathways.

NEMBA encourages eMTB riders to come forward and create a group to voice their desires for greater access. NEMBA looks forward to working with this group."

But to this day, there still is no e-bike group. 
The plan seems to be to expect mountain bikers to take up the fight for them, but around here, few mountain bikers are all that interested in e-bikes and those who are actually realize that they're a different animal and forcing motors into the equation will be terrible for access. New England is NOT California, nor is it Europe. Do I expect to see a lot more e-bikes being used on pavement? Yes. In the woods? Not so much.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

After reading NEMBAs stance, I would say they basically have opened it up as a free for all based upon,



> The short answer is that all the major state and federal land management agencies in New England allow e-bikes only on trails which allow motorized recreation.


That gives me the strong impression of a blanket statement that may not entirely be true. Why? "all the major". What's considered "not major"? Did NEMBA confirm the actual statutes to ensure they actually cover ebikes? Saying "motorized recreation" immediately makes me suspect they have not done due diligence and are probable falling into the exact examples of not actually having the right legal definitions and status in place to prohibit ebikes we talked about earlier in this thread.



> Many local trail systems are managed by town conservation commissions or land trusts that have not fully developed policies specific to electric, power-assist vehicles.


This is 100% a blank check for ebikes.

Up until last year, we (CA) were seeing increases in ebikes on trails, but they weren't even close to the majority. The difference between last year and this year is insane. I can tell you locally it is easily a 50/50 split, maybe even slightly more ebikes than standard bikes. Trust me, it's coming


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> After reading NEMBAs stance, I would say they basically have opened it up as a free for all based upon,
> 
> 
> That gives me the strong impression of a blanket statement that may not entirely be true. Why? "all the major". What's considered "not major"? Did NEMBA confirm the actual statutes to ensure they actually cover ebikes? Saying "motorized recreation" immediately makes me suspect they have not done due diligence and are probable falling into the exact examples of not actually having the right legal definitions and status in place to prohibit ebikes we talked about earlier in this thread.
> ...


Trust me, CA is NOT representative of anything New England. Never has been, never will be. 

You seem highly confused as to what NEMBA even is.
NEMBA does not make policy. They are not LMs of anything (aside from the single 49 acre parcel that they own.)
Some dude from thousands of miles away playing wanna-be lawyer with the wording of one of their informational posts means nothing to anyone who matters, in particular the actual LMs.
Ask anyone who is looking for a place to ride motos or ATVs around here; those guys have been bitching up a storm on the internet for decades. No one cares.
The only way anything is going to change is if e-bikers get organized and do things the way mountain bikers did.
Either there are almost no off-road e-bikers around here, or the ones who are simply aren't willing to organize and advocate for themselves and just expect to ride the MTB coat-tails when it comes to access. Again, while that may fly in some places, it won't around here.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Trust me, CA is NOT representative of anything New England. Never has been, never will be.
> 
> You seem highly confused as to what NEMBA even is.
> NEMBA does not make policy. They are not LMs of anything (aside from the single 49 acre parcel that they own.)
> ...


I am familiar with NEMBA. I've road Vietnam (Milford) and looked up info about them when I did.



















You are the one who put them up as some kind of legitimate read on access. My point is it doesn't look like they have done their homework.

Case in point, from the NEMBA website that you copy pasted from lists this statute for MA:

(Mass 302 CMR 12.12 & 12.14).

Go ahead click on the link... Regardless of the broken link, looked up the regs and they are completely silent on ebikes:




> *Current E-Bike Law in Massachusetts*
> Under Massachusetts state law, there is no designation with which to regulate e-bikes, however a “motorized bicycle” is defined as having a helper motor with a cylinder capacity not exceeding fifty cubic centimeters, an automatic transmission, and which is capable of a maximum speed of no more than thirty miles per hour. Motorized bicycle riders must be licensed, and are prohibited from off-street pathways.
> 
> *There is no similar designation for e-bike riders, leaving ambiguity in where electric bicycles should be ridden on paths, trails, and sidewalks.*


Exactly as I thought... We can revisit this thread in a year and see how things are going locally


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> You are the one who put them up as some kind of legitimate read on access.


So you're saying you have better information as far as what's going on here than they do?

Okay...if you say so... 🤪


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> So you're saying you have better information as far as what's going on here than they do?
> 
> Okay...if you say so... 🤪


See above, I edited in the info as you typed your response.

Evidentially in the case of MA current laws on ebikes, I do


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> See above, I edited in the info as you typed your response.
> 
> Evidentially in the case of MA current laws on ebikes, I do


So you added a broken link and then some unreferenced quote?

Okay...you're obviously right then.

🤪

Once again, you completely ignore that MV laws don't apply to MTB trails.
As we discussed earlier, you know this is the case, but apparently want to keep pretending you don't, and expect everyone else to play along.
This is type of ridiculousness is why no MTBer who knows anything about access and is in their right mind wants to associated with e-bike advocacy.
I don't have any problem sharing trails with e-bikes, but I'll be damned if I'm going to try to make the non-sense arguments so many of you make in order to help you out.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> So you added a broken link and then some unreferenced quote?
> 
> Okay...you're obviously right then.
> 
> 🤪


The broken links from NEMBAs website. Shows how current they are on the issue of ebikes … 

Here is the link to my quote:








Electric Bikes


MassBike is Massachusett's Statewide Bicycle Advocacy Group. Our Mission is to Improve Bicycling Across the State Through Legislation, Education & Outreach.




www.massbike.org





Here is the proper link to the actual law:


https://www.mass.gov/doc/302-cmr-12-parks-and-recreation/download



Feel free to find a reference to ebike or electrical or electric or pedal assist or pedal assisted bike. We will wait.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Oh and to address a previous comment about playing lawyer, you’re right I am not a lawyer, just a lowly biochemist who has multiple decades of experience sitting on a 501c3 non-profit board of directors who has successfully gained access to previously legally restricted areas for user groups.

I just happened to ride with my buddy this weekend who is an actual lawyer and worked with me on previous access issues. Of course a good chunk of our discussion was around liability and access.

So whip it out, what’s your pedigree and success story(s) where YOU personally were successful in getting access for a specifically excluded user group.

I’ll wait for that answer as well.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> The broken links from NEMBAs website. Shows how current they are on the issue of ebikes …
> 
> Here is the link to my quote:
> 
> ...



"Bicycle means a two wheel non-motorized vehicle designed to be used both on and off paved surfaces and over unimproved terrain."

Once again, you are back to telling people they have to pretend a motor isn't a motor.
People don't fall for that sort of silly **** around here. Sorry. 

NEMBA is a mountain bike advocacy organization, not an e-bike advocacy organization. That's why they don't waste a bunch of time on them.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Ahh so you recognize that it is exactly as I described, got it. If you’re affiliated with NEMBA you should ask them to update their links and logic to reflect actual law and not perpetuate misinformation? Just a thought.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Oh and to address a previous comment about playing lawyer, you’re right I am not a lawyer, just a lowly biochemist who has multiple decades of experience sitting on a 501c3 non-profit board of directors who has successfully gained access to previously legally restricted areas for user groups.
> 
> I just happened to ride with my buddy this weekend who is an actual lawyer and worked with me on previous access issues. Of course a good chunk of our discussion was around liability and access.
> 
> ...


LOL. Without getting into an e-dick measuring contest, yours isn't as impressive as you think it is.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> The plan seems to be to expect mountain bikers to take up the fight for them, but around here, few mountain bikers are all that interested in e-bikes and those who are actually realize that they're a different animal and forcing motors into the equation will be terrible for access. New England is NOT California, nor is it Europe. Do I expect to see a lot more e-bikes being used on pavement? Yes. In the woods? Not so much.



Unfortunately, this seems to be changing, at least around where I live (Southern Massachusetts). I'm seeing more and more ebikes at trail heads, and more and more talk from mountain bikers about their dalliances with ebikes. As ebikes get better and cheaper, I think it is inevitable that we will see them more and more. There also seems to be growing acceptance of class 1 ebikes on non-motorized trails. I don't like it, and would happily take all the E-MTBs in the world and toss them into a bottomless pit. But the reality is what it is.

At the end of the day, I don't think there is a "plan" among ebikers. I think those who buy them will just show up at trail heads and ride them until somebody makes them stop. And I'm not sure anyone will.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Ahh so you recognize that it is exactly as I described, got it. If you’re affiliated with NEMBA you should ask them to update their links and logic to reflect actual law and not perpetuate misinformation? Just a thought.


All 'misinformation' exists in your imagination.
You should start writing letters explaining how a motor isn't a motor to all the LMs in New England, maybe tell them you're going to sue about it.
That should work. 
LOL!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

kpdemello said:


> Unfortunately, this seems to be changing, at least around where I live (Southern Massachusetts). I'm seeing more and more ebikes at trail heads, and more and more talk from mountain bikers about their dalliances with ebikes. As ebikes get better and cheaper, I think it is inevitable that we will see them more and more. There also seems to be growing acceptance of class 1 ebikes on non-motorized trails. I don't like it, and would happily take all the E-MTBs in the world and toss them into a bottomless pit. But the reality is what it is.
> 
> At the end of the day, I don't think there is a "plan" among ebikers. I think those who buy them will just show up at trail heads and ride them until somebody makes them stop. And I'm not sure anyone will.


Which is basically fine with me, as long as everyone realizes that they aren't mountain bikes and if they own any issues that may arise from their use.
The main issue for me is that e-bikers don't seem willing to stand on their own and want to hide under MTB's skirt whenever it comes to access.
Just admit they're a different thing and everyone can move along.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is old information. There have been several virtual meetings among NEMBA, and interested parties. I attended a couple of them.

Long story short, there is a deep divide within NEMBA, with the president being very much in favor of taking up eMTB access under the NEMBA umbrella, but there are members of the board who are steadfastly against ebikes. My understanding is that meetings have continued with more regionally interested parties since then, but I have not been a part of them, so I can't speak as to where things stand now.

In my area, some local clubs were also spewing the same "let them advocate for themselves" line, so I took them up on their offer and formed both a national eMTB advocacy group, as well as a regional group. Things are slow with the ongoing pandemic, but I've spoken with various land managers, and let them know that we'd like to be involved in any discussions about access going forward.

The whole "let them advocate for themselves" thing was an easy way to brush the issue under the rug and hope that it would just go away, but I think most of these clubs and interested parties quickly realized that allowing that to happen meant they wouldn't have a voice in how the eMTB community conducts it's business, so many seem to stepping back from that idea, realizing that this issue isn't going away, and that advocating against eMTB access could ultimately impact them negatively.
.

.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> All 'misinformation' exists in your imagination.
> You should start writing letters explaining how a motor isn't a motor to all the LMs in New England, maybe tell them you're going to sue about it.
> That should work.
> LOL!


I don't need to, nor do local ebike riders to be honest. Until they get the definition squared away, there is certainly no state law that prohibits them, and the same would apply to local / regional land mangers unless they have defined them "officially". Honestly, the best thing for ebikers to do is to get involved in access as it sounds like CJ has done (props!). The next best thing is ride and be nice to other user groups. If/when people try to confront them, just smile and wave. You are under no obligation to talk to them unless they are the Owner or LM.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

_CJ said:


> This is old information. There have been several virtual meetings among NEMBA, and interested parties. I attended a couple of them.
> 
> Long story short, there is a deep divide within NEMBA, with the president being very much in favor of taking up eMTB access under the NEMBA umbrella, but there are members of the board who are steadfastly against ebikes. My understanding is that meetings have continued with more regionally interested parties since then, but I have not been a part of them, so I can't speak as to where things stand now.
> 
> ...


Letting them advocate for themselves is not remotely the same thing as advocating against them.
As many here seem to do, you are conflating the two.
Am I against e-bike access? No.
Do I want to spend my time and effort going out advocating for it? Also no.

I would assume you don't spend much time advocating for things you have no interest in. 
Should all e-bikers and mountain bikers also start fighting for improved moto access? 
Those guys make the same arguments as a made here with regard to strength in numbers, etc.
How about Frisbee golf? I'm not against it, but I sure as hell don't plan on spending my time trying to get courses made. Etc, etc...


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> LOL. Without getting into an e-dick measuring contest, yours isn't as impressive as you think it is.


Oh okay, Classic troll move. Try to call someone else out, when that person steps up and lays down their credentials, you simmer and whimper down all nice and quiet. It's what I expected. I know you work in the trail building arena. Just note, that means you suck the teat. What I do is 100% volunteer-based and I build more trail mileage than you in my spare time. So once again, step up or shut up. We both know which one it will be.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Oh okay, Classic troll move. Try to call someone else out, when that person steps up and lays down their credentials, you simmer and whimper down all nice and quiet. It's what I expected. I know you work in the trail building arena. Just note, that means you suck the teat. What I do is 100% volunteer-based and I build more trail mileage than you in my spare time. So once again, step up or shut up. We both know which one it will be.


If you're interested, go digging around. I probably talked in some detail about it at some point in the Trail Building forum over the years.
Maybe not. As I said, I tend to leave the e-dick-waving contests to the e-biking wanna-be lawyers from CA. You guys seem to love that crap.

I didn't say anything about your trail-building resume, btw, so simmer your jets.
You're not a lawyer, but you know a guy that knows a guy who is. Congrats.



FWIW, what I do is also 100% voluntary and I usually put in somewhere over 500 hours a year of trailwork, mainly locally on properties that expressly prohibited mountain bikes until I took on the entrenched and vehemently oppositional powers-that-be a few years back. And again, I would have no problem sharing those trails with e-bikes, but I'm not going to be the one to take on spearheading an effort to get the rules changed to allow them, as I don't have a dog in the fight. I have no idea why anyone should expect me to, and I have no problem with anyone else in the same boat. E-bikers want access, then they are responsible for their own issues. Why is that unreasonable?

Or is it?



roughster said:


> Honestly, the best thing for ebikers to do is to get involved in access as it sounds like CJ has done (props!).


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

EKram said:


> Just signed up for an urban trail ride that is touted as getting to know ebikes. Nashville, TN.
> Gonna take my SS.


Do it and Just make whooshing sounds up every climb. I do it as I pass everyone. 

I guess it’s better to be an ebiker than a Type A XC in spandex. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> you are trying to branch this out to a scope of discussion including non-MTB ebikes


Actually no, I was specifically talking about MTB ebikes. Just because they aren't featured on EMBN's youtube channel (because they're European based) doesn't mean they don't exist.



> non-technical non-MTB trails completely outside of the interest of this forum.


As a technical point, please refer to the subtitle of the forum in which you are posting. Secondly, there are numerous references to horses and hikers on the very first page of this thread--including by you. There are hundreds of thousands of miles of trails in the backcountry available to horses and hikers. Maybe you have no interest in being able to ride a bike on any of those trails, but that's you and not representative of the general biking public--thus the discussion on how bikes get along with other trail users on such trails.



> But please, keep insisting this is a broader issue and I don't understand ebikes, lol.


It is a much broader issue than MTB-only trails and you certainly didn't know what Class 1 meant, so....



> The class system is baked in, but honestly I am not as sold on Class I always being allowed to 750watts. I actually think this is one of the opportunities for improving the current discussion and allowing more broad access to Class I 250W max *actual* eMTBs on all trails bikes are allowed on all public lands, not just DOI scope.


Yeah, good luck with that. I'll be anxious to read about the new class system. I'll look for it when I see pigs flying outside my window.

But you're actually agreeing with the premise of my original post--the current class system is largely meaningless in the real world on offroad trails. Unfortunately as is clearly evident from many of the posters in this forum (Anti-E), you could invent a class that had a 25W limit instead of 250W, and they'd still call them "motorbikes" and wouldn't want them on the trails. Logic and reality rarely are the basis from which their opinions are formed.



> Since it sounds like you are the expert on Rad Bike style bikes, I'll let you continue the Nextdoor type discussions if you want. I could give a **** about them.


Amazing how one will want to jump to conclusions when told his bubble isn't all-encompassing. Naturally, the way you jumped is the opposite of the truth. When I decided I wanted an E-bike, I wanted one with *MORE* offroad capability than my full suspension 29er with 250W could provide. I'm satisfied I succeeded. But as much as you'd like it to be, this thread is not about me.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> If you're interested, go digging around. I probably talked in some detail about it at some point in the Trail Building forum over the years.
> Maybe not. As I said, I tend to leave the e-dick-waving contests to the e-biking wanna-be lawyers from CA. You guys seem to love that crap.
> 
> I didn't say anything about your trail-building resume, btw, so simmer your jets.
> ...


So, let me get this straight. I am not a lawyer, but I have extensive experience in non-profit access lobbying, with successes with state and federal governmental agencies. You seem to think only lawyers know how to look up local regulations and use their brains. That is probably true of most Americans unfortunately. However, you are also not a lawyer and from the sounds of it don't even have similar / equivalent experience that I do. Where does that put you in this argument? 

I actually do care about other peoples access. I maintain the hiker trails in the local system even though I never ride them, mostly because it keeps them off the MTB specific trails, but that's besides the point  I also continue to work with rock climbing related access though my climbing days are pretty much over. Through my experience, most user groups are in the fight for access together against the LMs. The second the LM knows there is a divide in the user groups, they will play that up and delay any access change and even limit other access to opportunistically reduce their work. Once again, the OP is correct, anti-eMTBers are shooting themselves in the foot. 

Oh, and I am not going to even touch the fact that another NE'er is confirming what we are telling you about increasing eMTBs. Don't worry, even if they are not in your little corner, they will be soon.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Jon A said:


> Actually no, I was specifically talking about MTB ebikes. Just because they aren't featured on EMBN's youtube channel (because they're European based) doesn't mean they don't exist.
> 
> 
> As a technical point, please refer to the subtitle of the forum in which you are posting. Secondly, there are numerous references to horses and hikers on the very first page of this thread--including by you. There are hundreds of thousands of miles of trails in the backcountry available to horses and hikers. Maybe you have no interest in being able to ride a bike on any of those trails, but that's you and not representative of the general biking public--thus the discussion on how bikes get along with other trail users on such trails.
> ...


Look if you want to call Rad Bikes and other hub-driven Walmart variety "eMTBs" in the context of MTB trail riding, by all means continue, I won't agree, but I also won't continue arguing about them. It's pointless. Certainly, if those user groups are pushing for trail access, which I haven't really seen even in progressive CA, more power to them. 

My arguments are actually pretty limited to the vast majority of eMTBs on the *MTB* trails which are Class 1 250W so I'll stick to them. Also, will not continue to argue about, "hundreds of thousands of miles of trails in the backcountry available to horses and hikers." because those also do not currently have standard MTB access, let alone eMTB access.

Looks at OP, looks at your arguments, honestly they are weird and I kind of feel like I am playing whack-a-mole with your posts.


----------



## D. Inoobinati (Aug 28, 2020)

Jon A said:


> Yeah, that's a great strategy. Which exact Wilderness Areas are allowing you to ride your manual bike? Or are you just doing it?
> 
> Ready, take aim at foot, fire!


I know damn well that Wilderness Areas specifically ban (all) mechanized transport.

Yeah. I'm happy to shoot myself in the foot. Happier still if I shoot the foot off every eMtb rider who thinks themselves so entitled as to redefine mountain biking as driving an electric moped wherever the road ends.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> So, let me get this straight. I am not a lawyer, but I have extensive experience in non-profit access lobbying, with successes with state and federal governmental agencies. You seem to think only lawyers know how to look up local regulations and use their brains. That is probably true of most Americans unfortunately. However, you are also not a lawyer and from the sounds of it don't even have similar / equivalent experience that I do. Where does that put you in this argument?
> 
> I actually do care about other peoples access. I maintain the hiker trails in the local system even though I never ride them, mostly because it keeps them off the MTB specific trails, but that's besides the point  I also continue to work with rock climbing related access though my climbing days are pretty much over. Through my experience, most user groups are in the fight for access together against the LMs. The second the LM knows there is a divide in the user groups, they will play that up and delay any access change and even limit other access to opportunistically reduce their work. Once again, the OP is correct, anti-eMTBers are shooting themselves in the foot.
> 
> Oh, and I am not going to even touch the fact that another NE'er is confirming what we are telling you about increasing eMTBs. Don't worry, even if they are not in your little corner, they will be soon.


The fact that you have repeatedly insisted on trying to cite completely unrelated things such as MV codes and CSPC guidelines in this discussion tells me that I'm well farther along than you are at looking things up and using my brains to interpret them. If I cared enough about trying to tear about the rest of your attempts at legal-ese, I'm sure it wouldn't be all that hard either.

In most of New England, mountain bikers are not fighting against LMs for access at all.
Quite the opposite, actually. The majority of LMs are fans, based on many years of working together and MTBers proving ourselves as a user group. 

I never said there aren't and wouldn't be more e-bikes, but your projections of them being a major presence sometime soon isn't realistic. 

And again, you can't seem to tell the difference between someone being against e-bikes and someone who can see that there is an obvious distinction between them and bicycles. 
It doesn't seem that complicated to me, but it really does seem to be something that many, many e-bikers aren't able to discern. Or at least pretend they can't.


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> Looks at OP, looks at your arguments, honestly they are weird and I kind of feel like I am playing whack-a-mole with your posts.


That's because you keep making things up.


roughster said:


> Look if you want to call Rad Bikes and other hub-driven Walmart variety "eMTBs" in the context of MTB trail riding,


I have never been speaking about hub-driven bikes. That should have been quite clear when I spoke about mountain trails and better offroad capability--not a place for hub-driven bikes. That you think they are the only 750W ebikes available shows your ignorance. The fact remains, pretending that Class 1 means 250W in this country is false and not very smart. Arguing for access anywhere based upon that, giving opposition an opening to call you a liar, is probably unwise.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Jon A said:


> That's because you keep making things up.
> 
> I have never been speaking about hub-driven bikes. That should have been quite clear when I spoke about mountain trails and better offroad capability--not a place for hub-driven bikes. That you think they are the only 750W ebikes available shows your ignorance. The fact remains, pretending that Class 1 means 250W in this country is false and not very smart. Arguing for access anywhere based upon that, giving opposition an opening to call you a liar, is probably unwise.


Okay, last one, I promise, I just couldn't help myself:









We are simply arguing about two completely different perspectives that are neither aligned nor against each other. That's why it feels weird.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Look if you want to call Rad Bikes and other hub-driven Walmart variety "eMTBs" in the context of MTB trail riding, by all means continue, I won't agree, but I also won't continue arguing about them. It's pointless. Certainly, if those user groups are pushing for trail access, which I haven't really seen even in progressive CA, more power to them.


So, you consider your e-bike a non-motorized bicycle, but other e-bikes don't even qualify as e-bikes?
And mountain bikers should get behind you, but you won't get behind other e-bikers?
When I say 'hey good luck to them' about e-bikes it's wrong, but when you do it, it's fiine?


Speaking of weird arguments. Irony is apparently dead LOL.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> So, you consider your e-bike a non-motorized bicycle, but other e-bikes don't even qualify as e-bikes?
> And mountain bikers should get behind you, but you won't get behind other e-bikers?
> When I say 'hey good luck to them' about e-bikes it's wrong, but when you do it, it's fiine?
> 
> ...


I'm starting to question the value in these arguments given the mental wrangling going on. The "irony" is the style of bikes JonA is discussing would "potentially" ride the coat tails of my argument, but I want to be clear that I feel that most people on these forums are using eMTB to describe Class 1 250 watt capped ebikes. I do not believe a throttle belongs on multi-use trails for reasons already discussed multiple times. I am not going to rehash them again. Please go backwards in the thread you will find them. 

I, along with the majority of others that I know, potentially on this thread, would actually fully agree to class 1 being split into class 1 pedal assist limited power (up to 250 watts) and class 1 pedal assist full power (up to 750 watts) as a way to broker peace between standard riders and eMTB'ers (Class 1 up to 250 watts). Laws as written already allow for that discretion at the local LM level, they just need to be willing to actually make policy changes / clarifications, which ironically enough is exactly the root cause of the problem we have right now, it simply, and legally, is not clear where ebikes are and are not allowed based upon the existing LM regulations, not internet forum hero interpretation.

The current US Class non-throttle ebikes 1 & 3 really boil down to eMTBs (from my perspective 250 watt / 20 mph) and Class III (the everything else under the sun ebike). In reality, this is also the vast majority of how sales are split as well. I am personally not advocating for anything other than Class 1 sub-250watt. I am also not actively advocating against class 1 750 watt or class 3 which is what you are doing *Slap* to Class 1.

That is the difference, if I was acting like you, I'd be actively seeking out Class III "threads" on forums to expound why they shouldn't be allowed and how they are ruining access for everyone.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> I am personally not advocating for anything other than Class 1 sub-250watt. I am also not actively advocating against class 1 750 watt or class 3 which is what you are doing *Slap* to Class 1.
> 
> That is the difference, if I was acting like you, I'd be actively seeking out Class III "threads" on forums to expound why they shouldn't be allowed and how they are ruining access for everyone.


Show me where I've argued against Class 1 (or any class), ever. You can't, because I don't. I say over and over and over that I have no issue with them, I simply feel that based on the fact that there is a motor present, they are not the exact same thing as a mountain bike and should remain a distinct user group. That is nothing but basic common sense.

If you were acting like me, you would be reading what I actually said and not putting words in my mouth based on whatever weird persecution complex you seem to have going on.

So, for the 1000th time (at least) and in big letters so maybe you stop missing it:

I have no problem with e-bikes gaining access to the vast majority of MTB trails. 

That goes in particular for Class 1, but I'm not like most of you supposed e-bike proponents in that I don't draw the line there. I also can think of a lot of trails where I wouldn't have a problem sharing with Class 2, 3 and beyond as well. If the trails around here looked like the trails you posted pictures of, I would think they'd be fit for not only e-bikes but lower-powered e-motos as well. When it comes being exclusionary, you've made it obvious that you are far moreso than I am. Anyone who has actually paid attention to anything I've said on the subject over the years here would already know that. Seems that there is approximately one e-bike proponent left here who can read and understand plain English. (Cheers Gutch! And let's pour one out for Fos'l while we're at it.)

Now try to go find anywhere in this or others where I've said anything different. Good luck.
Make sure you purposefully ignore the numerous posts that you find where I come out in support of e-biking or dress down people oppose it for silly reasons (my opening post in this thread even), because facts apparently don't matter to some of you guys. It's like you're your own worst enemy.


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> We are simply arguing about two completely different perspectives that are neither aligned nor against each other. That's why it feels weird.


Wow, a 2 second google gives you the license to make things up again. Admitting you might not know everything is the first step.... I've been speaking more about bikes along these lines:









X2 Enduro Mountain Ebike


One of the best fast electric bikes on the market for an incredible price. 2000 watt speed machine.




lunacycle.com







https://wattwagons.com/products/hydra





https://bakcou.com/products/falcon



I guess those are only OK for paved city bikepaths? Not quite up to your tea-sipping standards? Current options shown may be limited due to motor shortages, but those can be had in Class 1 trim, or at least could be recently. Some more:

Way too heavy for my tastes, but it has a cult-like following in your neck of the woods:









Rockstar







shop.sondors.com





More that aren't my cup of tea either, but I certainly won't declare those riding them "unworthy of being in my presence ...."





__





Freydom is Yours, to make, to take. | Frey Bikes


Best Electric Mountain Bike: High-end Specs | Great Benefit-cost Ratio | Co-creation. We advocate a positive and energetic FREY lifestyle: Free Ride Enjoy Yourself!



www.frey.bike







https://greenpowercycling.com/products/copy-of-1000-watt-bafang-ultra-mid-drive-fat-29er-stealth-beast-29x3-tires-1000w-mid-drive-160nm-torque-with-sensor-panasonic-48v17ah-hidden-battery-rockshox-front-and-rear-suspension-dropper-seatpost-11-speed-gears-water-bottle-holder-and-more





https://www.biktrix.com/pages/juggernaut-ultra-fs-pro











A-Trail Ultra Dual Suspension Volton Bicycles Best eMTB


Torque activated M620 Ultra motor, Rockshox suspension, a purpose built dual suspension frame. The A Trail is the best eMTB at a great price.




voltonbicycles.com







https://quietkat.com/products/jeep-e-bike





https://bakcou.com/products/storm



I could go on all day with more, but I have more important things to do. The above are only FS bikes, there are many times that many hard tails (unless you don't consider them "real" MTB's worthy of your trails?). You can argue they aren't your cup of tea and that's fine--they aren't mine either and I didn't buy any of them. But your insistence that there's some magical, invisible barrier that prevents these bikes from riding MTB trails makes you look really silly.


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> I do not believe a throttle belongs on multi-use trails for reasons already discussed multiple times. I am not going to rehash them again. Please go backwards in the thread you will find them.


It takes a whopping 10 seconds to remove a throttle if going to a trail that does not allow them. Can you not turn an allen wrench?


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

How is linking to 1000Watt+ outside of all "class" definition ebikes helping your argument or contradicting mine? Like I said, weird. If some of them come in 750Watt versions, uhh cool I guess?


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

kpdemello said:


> At the end of the day, I don't think there is a "plan" among ebikers. I think those who buy them will just show up at trail heads and ride them until somebody makes them stop. And I'm not sure anyone will.


I've been fighting, donating and advocating for mountain bike access for almost 2 decades. We still have almost no access to single track trails and no ability to build or maintain trails. I'm a criminal every time I ride. 

Now I do it faster and more times. It's a game of cat and mouse. Enforcement is and will always be limited.

Just like mountain bikes have overrun areas, so will ebikes whether we like it or not.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Show me where I've argued against Class 1 (or any class), ever. You can't, because I don't. I say over and over and over that I have no issue with them, I simply feel that based on the fact that there is a motor present, they are not the exact same thing as a mountain bike and should remain a distinct user group. That is nothing but basic common sense.
> 
> If you were acting like me, you would be reading what I actually said and not putting words in my mouth based on whatever weird persecution complex you seem to have going on.
> 
> ...


In retrospect, I would agree that you haven't been overtly against ebikes on this thread. But, if that is the case what's your point? Throwing out flat out incorrect NEMBA information? Claiming that ebikes are not growing in popularity in NE? Feeling the need to say they have a "motor" yet again? As if that point hasn't been brought up and shown over and over that laws define it, not what you think. 

I'll take some responsibility, I should've dropped the discussion and moved on once we moved into the , "Well you said that I said that she said that Bob saw.." phase of the ebike post lifecycle and the "professional" trolls showed up to just stir ****. Lesson learned!

Oh and as for putting words in people's mouth"



> The fact that you have repeatedly insisted on trying to cite completely unrelated things such as MV codes and CSPC guidelines in this discussion tells me that I'm well farther along than you are at looking things up and using my brains to interpret them.


First, you still don't seem to understand that MV codes define motor vehicles. Most anti-ebike discussion, because its never in the actual law, based their arguments on them or other completely unrelated laws (look at NEMBA case). Maybe you are not sure what MV stands for? 

And the coup de grace: YOU brought up CSPC guidelines.

Neither does the US CPSC, before anyone tries to pull out that other tired old canard.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> In retrospect, I would agree that you haven't been overtly against ebikes on this thread. But, if that is the case what's your point? Throwing out flat out incorrect NEMBA information? Claiming that ebikes are not growing in popularity in NE? Feeling the need to say they have a "motor" yet again? As if that point hasn't been brought up and shown over and over that laws define it, not what you think.
> 
> I'll take some responsibility, I should've dropped the discussion and moved on once we moved into the , "Well you said that I said that she said that Bob saw.." phase of the ebike post lifecycle and the "professional" trolls showed up to just stir ****. Lesson learned!
> 
> ...


Motor Vehicle Codes do not apply to what any actual mountain biker would consider a mountain bike trail (unless you're one of those poor folks who think rail trails are actually MTB trails).
Same goes for the CPSC. 
And yes, I did bring it up as it was obvious the type of argument you were building. As you feely admitted.
You're rehashing a lot of of long-debunked BS from the early days of this subforum. Like I mentioned, I was one of it's original moderators; the things you think you're 'discovering' are old news, and wildly predictable.



roughster said:


> Haha I was just going to bring up Consumer Safety



The link to the NEMBA site is about the most comprehensive page I've found that answers the question it is trying to answer :Where am I allowed to ride an e-bike in New England?
It was meant to be informational and gives a very good overview of the situation here, the overwhelming majority of the information there is accurate, and in no way does it say anything anti-e-bike. Your blanket statement to the opposite is ridiculous.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Me thinks you don’t understand what”haha” and  means. Nice try though! So now you’ve done twice what you said I was doing. There’s a word for that…

And you’ve clearly demonstrated you don’t understand how laws work with your insistence that MV laws don’t apply to trails. Most recreational statutes rely on the definition of motor or motorized vehicles from … wait for it … Motor Vehicle codes. It’s the last time I’ll bring it up since the relationship is clearly beyond your comprehension.


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> How is linking to 1000Watt+ outside of all "class" definition ebikes helping your argument or contradicting mine? Like I said, weird. If some of them come in 750Watt versions, uhh cool I guess?


If you had bothered to click on any of the links, you'd know that is indeed the case with most of them. And yes, it is cool. Many others can simply be set up to whatever class you want. From one site:


> *Motor:* This smart torque sensing motor, powered by Bafang, is capable of falling under all 3 Classifications of ebike laws.


My current understanding of California law is that there is no problem with modifying a bike as long as the user replaces the sticker with the correct one to designate the bike's class. Set the speed limit to 20 MPH and yank off the throttle (and reduce motor output if over 750W) and slap the sticker on it--you now have a Class 1 bike. That's how the manufacturers selling the bikes are reading it anyway.

What's clear from this conversation, is that you may have already seen thousands of the above bikes (particularly the higher end carbon fiber bikes) on your trails and simply had no idea they have more than 250 watts because you simply didn't know any better. You're welcome.

I agree with slaphead. This thread started out asking if the anti-E MTBers were shooting themselves in the foot by being so exclusionary (D. Inoobinati seems to be trying out for the poster child of that). It turns out you're even more exclusionary--you want Ebikes allowed everywhere...but only your specific narrow definition of a "worthy" ebike, for which there isn't even a classification in the US.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

I dont look at it as exclusionary, we need to get ebike regulation FORMALLY defined before any class / ebike has a real chance. Even in CA as the CalFite example shows, we still are facing LMs that don’t understand the term ebike versus motorcycle. 

IMO the easiest sell is class 1 sub-250watts especially given studies showing these bikes literally have the same impact as traditional MTBs. It also is the vast majority of riders on actual MTB trails. Once “we” the broader community get a foot in the door, it creates a little more bargaining power and actually data to support where the right balance is class 3 / class 2. 

Let me be clear though, to me the science should support the access. I am not interested in a slippery slope or flood gates leading to your linked “ebikes” above whether they are modifiable or not or ICE access that results in significant environmental damage.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> Which is basically fine with me, as long as everyone realizes that they aren't mountain bikes and if they own any issues that may arise from their use.
> The main issue for me is that e-bikers don't seem willing to stand on their own and want to hide under MTB's skirt whenever it comes to access.
> Just admit they're a different thing and everyone can move along.


Where I live and ride, most if not 99% of emtbrs are mtbrs. What then?


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

roughster said:


> Let me be clear though, to me the science should support the access. I am not interested in a slippery slope or flood gates leading to your linked “ebikes” above whether they are modifiable or not or ICE access that results in significant environmental damage.


This we agree on.

But once any form of ebike is allowed, how will non sanctioned ebike use be regulated? The premise from the OP is that better regulation will occur when class 1 ebikes are allowed, or the overpowered ebike poachers will conform to the class 1 rules. And if class 1 access is not allowed, all classes of ebikes will just go nuts and bring down mountain bike access with it so mountain bikers should accept class 1 ebikers in order to benefit by maintaining access to trails that they (mountain bikers) already have access to.

How will regulation improve if/ once class 1 ebikes are granted access? And/ or what data supports the claim that poachers who like overpowered bikes will stop poaching?

I also want to note that this thread made me realize that the regionality of these issues is even greater than i first realized which makes it difficult to communicate, so theres that. This has been a fairly contentious theead but I’ve learned a lot. Keep it up fellas.


----------



## blkdout (Oct 3, 2021)

In my mind, the only way people are going to understand different classes is when the actual definition between engine and motor becomes clear.

-Motors are electromagnets.
-Engines are air pumps. 

The problem is, in the public eye, a motor is no different than an engine. So how can we expect lawmakers (or whoever) to understand the difference between motor wattage and engine displacement? The popular solution is to lump them all together and call them motors.

My sarcasm dictates that “No Motor Vehicles” means combustion engines are still allowed lol.


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

Gutch said:


> Where I live and ride, most if not 99% of emtbrs are mtbrs. What then?


Easy, when they ride their bikes they are mountain bikers, when they ride their ebikes they are not.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> Which is basically fine with me, as long as everyone realizes that they aren't mountain bikes and if they own any issues that may arise from their use.
> The main issue for me is that e-bikers don't seem willing to stand on their own and want to hide under MTB's skirt whenever it comes to access.
> Just admit they're a different thing and everyone can move along.


I think it's pretty clear that most e-bikers consider themselves mountain bikers, and plan to ride the same trails mountain bikers use as if they were in the same category. In most cases that I've seen, e-bikers are just mountain bikers who upgraded their bike with a motor. Sure, there are a few who respect rules against non-motorized access but from what I've seen most just totally disregard those types of rules and simply consider their e-biking to be the same thing as mountain biking. 

I think it's going to be hard to delineate to land managers the difference between MTBs and E-MTBs as time goes on. Land managers will get a complaint that somebody on a bike did something stupid, was going too fast, skidding, etc. The land manager will have no way to know if it was an MTBer or an E-MTBer because the complainer probably won't be able to tell the difference. Nor is the land manager likely to care. This no doubt will create problems in some places.


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

kpdemello said:


> I think it's pretty clear that most e-bikers consider themselves mountain bikers, and plan to ride the same trails mountain bikers use as if they were in the same category. In most cases that I've seen, e-bikers are just mountain bikers who upgraded their bike with a motor. Sure, there are a few who respect rules against non-motorized access but from what I've seen most just totally disregard those types of rules and simply consider their e-biking to be the same thing as mountain biking.
> 
> I think it's going to be hard to delineate to land managers the difference between MTBs and E-MTBs as time goes on. Land managers will get a complaint that somebody on a bike did something stupid, was going too fast, skidding, etc. The land manager will have no way to know if it was an MTBer or an E-MTBer because the complainer probably won't be able to tell the difference. Nor is the land manager likely to care. This no doubt will create problems in some places.


That’s the problem right there! They consider themselves mountain bikers are they are not. If they were to change this idea and realize it is a new type of sport there would not be as many problems. Should not be even in this site, should have their own site. Called ebiker, it is like someone in escalator saying they climbed 10 staircases, everyone else would be like no you didn’t.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Arm&Hammer said:


> That’s the problem right there! They consider themselves mountain bikers are they are not. If they were to change this idea and realize it is a new type of sport there would not be as many problems. Should not be even in this site, should have their own site. Called ebiker, it is like someone in escalator saying they climbed 10 staircases, everyone else would be like no you didn’t.


Dude, WTFU. Unless you live under a rock, which you might, everything is going electric! What happens when the majority of Ex mtbrs that have paid dues for years and some have worked on the trail systems where they live, purchase an ebike? Are you going to deny them access?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Also, have you not noticed- Pink Bike and Vital also have ebike sections?


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

Gutch said:


> Also, have you not noticed- Pink Bike and Vital also have ebike sections?


It is a different sport, nice butt hurt you got going there. When I hike I don’t say I am mountain biking, I don’t care that they are on the trails, just a different sport. Are snowboards and skis the same sport?


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Dude, WTFU. Unless you live under a rock, which you might, everything is going electric! What happens when the majority of Ex mtbrs that have paid dues for years and some have worked on the trail systems where they live, purchase an ebike? Are you going to deny them access?


What if that same person purchased a dirt bike. Are you going to deny them access?

It's not about dues paid. It's about motorized vs non-motorized access. E-Bikes are motorized. It's not really subject to debate.


----------



## EKram (Oct 30, 2020)

Would you ride this? I cringe to possibly see one on a trail.😂


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> What if that same person purchased a dirt bike. Are you going to deny them access?
> 
> It's not about dues paid. It's about motorized vs non-motorized access. E-Bikes are motorized. It's not really subject to debate.


Apples to Apples. Dirt bike? C’mon.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Arm&Hammer said:


> It is a different sport, nice butt hurt you got going there. When I hike I don’t say I am mountain biking, I don’t care that they are on the trails, just a different sport. Are snowboards and skis the same sport?


If you’re an ebike enthusiast and come to the ebike forum to discuss ebikes, cool. But you my friend sound like you’re talking back in 2016 when they first hit the market mainstream. So, please answer my question above. Any of you haters give me an answer to the above question. I’ll be waiting.. Also, FYI I’ve always said they are different, but the same.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

kpdemello said:


> It's not about dues paid. It's about motorized vs non-motorized access. E-Bikes are motorized. It's not really subject to debate.


Right, but if you're a person with a brain, the immediate question you would ask is: "Why is anything with a motor banned". There are obvious answers to that, and the "no e-bikes" argument falls apart almost immediately with any rigorous questioning.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> Where I live and ride, most if not 99% of emtbrs are mtbrs. What then?


Most MTBRs are hikers as well around here. And beer drinkers. 
I know a lot of MTBRs that ride moto as well.

I have no idea what your point is.


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

Gutch said:


> If you’re an ebike enthusiast and come to the ebike forum to discuss ebikes, cool. But you my friend sound like you’re talking back in 2016 when they first hit the market mainstream. So, please answer my question above. Any of you haters give me an answer to the above question. I’ll be waiting.. Also, FYI I’ve always said they are different, but the same.


I am for ebikes, get with it. I against calling it mountain biking, different sport, they are fun as hell.

Why can’t you guys get that? Adding a motor makes it not a bike.


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

Arm&Hammer said:


> Are snowboards and skis the same sport?


I love the sunglasses "smart aleck" guy in this classic video. You guys are dinosaurs. These type of threads are comedy gold.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

kpdemello said:


> I think it's pretty clear that most e-bikers consider themselves mountain bikers, and plan to ride the same trails mountain bikers use as if they were in the same category. In most cases that I've seen, e-bikers are just mountain bikers who upgraded their bike with a motor. Sure, there are a few who respect rules against non-motorized access but from what I've seen most just totally disregard those types of rules and simply consider their e-biking to be the same thing as mountain biking.
> 
> I think it's going to be hard to delineate to land managers the difference between MTBs and E-MTBs as time goes on. Land managers will get a complaint that somebody on a bike did something stupid, was going too fast, skidding, etc. The land manager will have no way to know if it was an MTBer or an E-MTBer because the complainer probably won't be able to tell the difference. Nor is the land manager likely to care. This no doubt will create problems in some places.


What if I'm just an e-biker who upgraded to a less anemic motor and a throttle placement that actually makes sense?
If I'm following the "logic" some people are trying to sell here, as long as I still identify as an e-biker, I should be allowed to go anywhere any other e-bike goes.
Riding responsibly, I'm not going to do any more 'damage' to the trail than when people used to ride fad-bikes around the trails all year for whatever reason.

Cue up the hypocrisy...


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

Arm&Hammer said:


> Why can’t you guys get that? Adding a motor makes it not a bike.


I know. My Levo SL is an E-bike. I like to ride mountains on it. I call it mountain biking. Talking about others being butthurt. Lol...You're the upset pedantic one on here.

Talk about 1st world, privileged problems... jeez.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> Most MTBRs are hikers as well around here. And beer drinkers.
> I know a lot of MTBRs that ride moto as well.
> 
> I have no idea what your point is.


The point is, we are not hiding under mtbrs, we are mtbrs. This is a pointless thread. Will have zero effect on real life activity.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

mlx john said:


> I love the sunglasses "smart aleck" guy in this classic video. You guys are dinosaurs. These type of threads are comedy gold.


What many people here apparently can't comprehend through their weird persecution complex (seems that they hand them out for free with every e-bike purchase) is that many of the people your painting as 'anti e-bike' clearly aren't. 

There's nothing wrong with them, they're just different. Just like skiing and snowboarding are different. 
Yeah, you get the 'exercise champion' clowns who get all butthurt if they get passed, the gatekeeper wannabes who think no one should be allowed in the woods except themselves and others they deem 'worthy', and of course the sad sacks who identify with their bicycles so much that e-bikes are a threat to their entire identity, but the vast majority of mtbrs I know don't really care whether or not e-bikes are on the trails with them or not, and a number of them also either own or are considering buying e-bikes. Most of them also realize that there is a difference between strictly human powered recreation and motor-assisted recreation in practice and in the eyes of LMs. I don't know what the BFD is about simply accepting that an e-bike is an e-bike. It's amazing (and kind of messed up) that so few of you are able to actually do that.


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

nm


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> The point is, we are not hiding under mtbrs, we are mtbrs. This is a pointless thread. Will have zero effect on real life activity.


Hey, I didn't make the thread.
Of course it's pointless, the whole premise that anyone is going to lose out on anything by not waving e-bike pom-poms around everywhere they go is stupid on it's face. 

If every mountain biker in your region is also an e-biker and you guys want to combine your advocacy efforts to include both equally, that's up to you guys, and good luck.
It's a different story in other places where a minority of mountain bikers are also e-bikers, but the e-bikers seem to expect the mountain bikers to take up their fight for them, likely to the detriment of their own access (in New England, that's a certainty; motors of any sort are something that LMs are none too keen to have on their trails. 

As you say, coming to some forgotten corner of the internet to complain about it isn't going to get e-bikers anywhere. But that's the go-to apparently. 
Case in point, -CJ mentioned that he has been working to pull together both regional and national e-bike advocacy groups.
In all the posts and pages of bitching and whining since, not a single e-biker here even bothered to inquire about them, which speaks to the level of interest of actually doing anything besides complaining about how everyone is out to get them, and you'll all be sorry!!!


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Jesus over and over and over again. Let's just sum up this up quickly and leave the whack-a-mole death by a thousand cuts questions out of further discussion. Reminds me of *Brandolini's law**:*

Signs saying 'No eBikes' are most often placed by other users not LMs (OP's original assertion) which is creating apathy to even legal signage (which rarely exists). This is true.
The volume of ebikes on the trail is exploding everywhere, even if you want to bury your head in the sand and claim otherwise.
ebikes are bikes with a different component than standard bikes. This we can all agree on.
ebikes are pedal assist in the context of this advocacy. Trying to expand the scope to other forms of "motor"/"ized" transport is a strawman.
ebikes are not motorcycles nor motorized vehicles in many states and in the eyes of the Department of Interior which oversees a huge chunk of the federal public lands. Despite federal orders to clarify ebike regulations with a set timeframe, the vast majority of jurisdictions did not do this. See below.
Laws rarely make the appropriate distinction and definitions to allow someone to clearly understand the logic and applicability. If a law states ebikes are not motor/ized vehicles, any regulation saying "motorized vehicle" unless ebikes are defined within does not apply to ebikes on the road, on the trail, in the mall, at the doctor office, anywhere where that language is used when it relies on that defintion.
Land Managers clearly do not understand the difference between ebikes and standard bikes. Hell, they rarely even understand the impact MTBs and most user groups in general.
Pedal assist ebikes require you to move your body proportionally to make the bike move (aka exercise). As a result, comparisons to throttle-based transportations, ICE, or yes, as this thread highlights, escalators are not appropriate or accurate.
ALL studies to date show Class 1 ebikes have the same environmental imprint and other user group experience as standard MTBs. I will provide you a link if you need me to though you can search on this forum and find I have linked to it in pretty much every single ebike thread that devolves into this type of never ending sufferfest.
ALL studies to date actually show ebikes have the same health benefit and overall cardiovascular workout levels as regular bikes. Once again, link is easily retrievable in this forum. Maybe I just need to ask to have a sticky to the common reference to having to dig them up and link them in every thread.
In-fighting will continue to hurt the MTB community when it comes to ebikes. I don't care which side or not on a side you're on.

*LMs only care about ebikes because of other MTB'ers.* Is this even debatable any more?

*EDIT: *I will add a link to what is considered one of the most current and comprehensive study on ebikes from an actually informed and legitimately interested Land Manager. Lots of the topic discussed here on this thread are addressed in this study and it links also to supportive studies. I'll give you a clue to the outcome ... it supports ebike access to anywhere a bicycle is allowed. You're welcome 



https://assets.bouldercounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/e-bikes-recommendation-bocc-11-13-2019.pdf


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Jesus over and over and over again. Let's just sum up this up quickly and leave the whack-a-mole death by a thousand cuts questions out of further discussion.


You realize you're free to shut up and move on at any time, don't you? And that everyone else is free to carry on here with or without your permission?
If not, well, now you do. 
See ya!


----------



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

roughster said:


> ebikes are bikes with a different component than standard bikes. This we can all agree on.



Actually we don't all agree on that.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Pedal assist ebikes require you to move your body proportionally to make the bike move (aka exercise). As a result, comparisons to throttle-based transportations, ICE, or yes, as this thread highlights, escalators are not appropriate or accurate.


So now level of 'exercise' is a qualifier for access? Aside from that being the same elitist BS usually thrown out there by anti-e-bikers, you're also completely wrong in asserting that "throttle based transportations" provide no exercise. Look up some studies as to the level of effort and fitness involved in riding moto, you stand to learn something it seems.

In another newsflash- a pedal-actuated throttle is still a throttle, and a little electric motor is still a motor. If you're going to go parsing everything to death, at least be consistent.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> So now level of 'exercise' is a qualifier for access? Aside from that being the same elitist BS usually thrown out there by anti-e-bikers, you're also completely wrong in asserting that "throttle based transportations" provide no exercise. Look up some studies as to the level of effort and fitness involved in riding moto, you stand to learn something it seems.
> 
> In another newsflash- a pedal-actuated throttle is still a throttle, and a little electric motor is still a motor. If you're going to go parsing everything to death, at least be consistent.


Tsk tsk remember not putting words in people's mouth discussion you brought up earlier? I never said that it was an access qualifier, rather whether or not certain comparisons were appropriate. Definitely like to go down that hypocrisy route don't you?

I think from now on my standard response to you will be, read the below study, it addresses your concern:



https://assets.bouldercounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/e-bikes-recommendation-bocc-11-13-2019.pdf



Yes, I think I like this strategy


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Actually we don't all agree on that.


Okay I can see that. I guess I should've said, reasonable people can agree. lol.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> it addresses your concern:


What concern?

You're the own that is saying that you are against any e-bikes that aren't exactly like your underpowered and awkwardly activated version that you want everyone to pretend is the same thing as a bicycle. You're the one who is willing to deny others access based on a few watts while also leaning on 'it's not the machine, it's the rider' when it suits your purpose.

I'm the one who's fine with all of them, and you're the one trying to pretend that it's ME who's exclusionary.

Frigging Bizarro World up in here. LOL!


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Whatever weird ass not on a side concern you may think you have that you feel obligated to share to stir the pot?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Whatever weird ass not on a side concern you may think you have that you feel obligated to share to stir the pot?


Just calling BS when I see it.
Don't like it? Sling less BS.
And stop trying to pretend it has anything to do with me being against e-bikes. Just makes you look silly.
You're more anti-e-bike than I am. Same goes for vast majority of other e-bikers here.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

LOL, this is no joke, your concern is addressed in the below study:



https://assets.bouldercounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/e-bikes-recommendation-bocc-11-13-2019.pdf


----------



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

roughster said:


> Okay I can see that. I guess I should've said, reasonable people can agree. lol.




Statements like that make you part of the problem.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> Any of you haters give me an answer to the above question. I’ll be waiting.. Also, FYI I’ve always said they are different, but the same.


I think I did answer it. If your bike has a motor, and the rule is no motorized access, then yes that person gets denied access. It's a fairly simple rule. Ebikes have a motor, so you can't ride them on non-motorized trails. It doesn't matter who the person is that's riding that trail. That's the point that I guess went over your head with the dirtbike analogy.



Gemini2k05 said:


> Right, but if you're a person with a brain, the immediate question you would ask is: "Why is anything with a motor banned". There are obvious answers to that, and the "no e-bikes" argument falls apart almost immediately with any rigorous questioning.


Well I'm not sure that's entirely true. Someone on an ebike can go 20mph up a flow trail, creating major trail conflicts with non-motorized users coming down hill. Ebikes can sustain high speeds for far longer than non-motorized users, creating more trail conflicts everywhere else.

I'm not suggesting a blanket ban on class 1 ebikes anywhere regular MTBs are allowed. I think the answer is more nuanced - it depends on a lot of factors. E-MTBs are a different thing from non-motorized MTBs with different capabilities, risks, and issues. They should be evaluated as such, not just lumped into the MTB category.

Personally I hate eMTBs, but I recognize they have a right to some level of access where it makes sense. Similarly I hate dirt bikes but I think they should be allowed where they make sense, too. The same goes for non-motorized MTBs, by the way - I don't think they should be allowed everywhere either, and it depends on the circumstances.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Hi Guys,
First, a confession: I didn’t read all 19 pages. Sorry.
But I did read this page. Sorry again.

I’d just like to offer some observations based on being an avid cyclist for 50ish years, an avid off-road motorcyclist for about a dozen years (that was back in the 90s; still own a dirt bike but only ride it a couple times a year these days) plus having owned an ebike for about 8 months now. I got the ebike mostly out of curiosity since everyone that had one said it’s the most fun anyone can have on two wheels, or rather gave me the impression that this is their reality.

After riding the ebike a bunch, my definition of ebike is:
An underpowered, lightweight electric motorcycle with an awkward throttle.

I can ride 25 miles and gain 4000’ on my ebike without breaking a sweat. I don’t understand the pro-ebike arguments by riders who claim they get just as good a workout on their ebikes as they do on a mountain bike. Of course we have power settings and can set them on “Eco” (lowest assist level) and get a good workout but why would I do that? I’d effectively be riding a 50+ pound beast which, compared to a non-motorized mountain bike is well, not nearly as fun. (When I’m aboard my ebike, I’m in Turbo mode, baby!)

On the continuum where mountain bikes lie at one end and off-road motorcycles lie a the opposite end, personally I’d place the ebike a bit closer to the motorcycle end than to the mountain bike end. Sure, ebikes have pedals but for those who have not ridden an ebike, I’ll just mention this: all you have to do to make it go is turn the cranks. Not push the cranks — in Turbo mode you don’t have to expend energy, you just have to keep the cranks turning in order to engage the motor. The motor does the work.

Yes, ebikers can turn down their power assist levels and get all the workout they want to. But how many do? I don’t. Whenever I want to pedal, I ride my mountain bike. Why would I pedal a bike that weighs 20# more than it needs to. I can tell you that landing jumps and drops on a 54# bike (that’s what my ebike weighs) is like landing a tank. I much prefer jumping a mountain bike. Overall handling — same thing.

I get the impression that this discussion is more about access than it is about the mechanics of ebikes vs mountain bikes but I just thought I’d toss some experiential info into the mix in case anyone was interested.

Carry on.
=sParty


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

Slappy,
I wasn't referring to you or anything that you posted. I know you're not anti e-bike. There are some people here who clearly are.

These type of e-bike related threads are entertaining and sometimes quite funny.

I generally don't care what other people think about e-bikes. I'm fortunate to live in an area where this is a complete non-issue. _None_ of this is a "BFD" to me.

It's the internet for Christ's sake. None of this is real.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

kpdemello said:


> I think I did answer it. If your bike has a motor, and the rule is no motorized access, then yes that person gets denied access. It's a fairly simple rule. Ebikes have a motor, so you can't ride them on non-motorized trails. It doesn't matter who the person is that's riding that trail. That's the point that I guess went over your head with the dirtbike analogy.


I have zero issues with e-bikes, and particularly lame low powered PA versions, and would have no problems with them being allowed on many trails that have been historically 'non motorized', just as long as they are recognized as being distinct from human-powered bicycles and managed as their own unique user group.

For this, the kooks label me a 'hater'.
🤪


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Sparticus said:


> Hi Guys,
> First, a confession: I didn’t read all 19 pages. Sorry.
> But I did read this page. Sorry again.
> 
> ...


Not for everyone, thank god.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Hey, sorry newb here. I know it’s irrelevant to this thread, but I just spent 11k on my emtb and was wondering how to set up tubeless? Also, do I yield for hikers? Jk! What I have learned IME is the guys that have ridden bicycles forever, don’t really give a **** if they are on trails or not. It’s that simple.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

slapheadmofo said:


> I have zero issues with e-bikes, and particularly lame low powered PA versions, and would have no problems with them being allowed on many trails that have been historically 'non motorized', just as long as they are recognized as being distinct from human-powered bicycles and managed as their own unique user group.
> 
> For this, the kooks label me a 'hater'.
> 🤪


I’m with you on this point, Slap. The ebike is as different from the mountain bike as it is from the off-road motorcycle.
All three are unique and I can’t stand it whenever an ebiker calls their rig a mountain bike.
It’s not a mountain bike.
I spent years (’80s, ’90s) working hard for mountain bike access to traditional legacy hiking trails. Worked hard to develop solid relationships with LMs to prove that mountain bikers were good stewards of the backcountry.
Distinctions between these 2-wheeled vehicles need to be made for the sake of respect between these diverse groups.
Though I’m beginning to wonder if respect will ever happen.
If ebikers continue to claim they’re mountain bikers, I doubt it.
I hate that confusion in their heads.
Meanwhile I’ll just add this: I don’t believe the ebike causes more environmental impact than a mountain bike.
I enjoy riding mine.
=sParty


----------



## Tickle (Dec 11, 2013)

What I find comical are the Procore(TM) riders posing on the internet(you know who you are) getting all self righteous about ebikes....ON AN EBIKE FORUM!!


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

Sparticus said:


> I can ride 25 miles and gain 4000’ on my ebike without breaking a sweat. I don’t understand the pro-ebike arguments by riders who claim they get just as good a workout on their ebikes as they do on a mountain bike.


Just to illustrate another perspective. Levo SL 39 pounds ready to ride. I can do 35-40 miles (with a range extender) and 5000 ft of climbing. Definitely break a sweat. Guestimating about 20-35% less sweat depending on the power levels I'm using.

Same amount of fun.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

delete


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

If it was possible to enforce real limits on electric bikes/ electric motorcycles I'd be all for them having full access. Say if they were limited to a max combined 250w, or if they only provided mild assist while going up & never when going down or on flats, that would be reasonable.

However, they can be hacked/ modified easily & cheaply and it's completely impossible to regulate this. Lord knows I don't want speed limits on my local trails like they enforce in parts of CA as a result of motorized vehicles on the trails.

That's why on many trails, made for non-motorized activity, motorized or non-motorized is an obvious delineation point as it's easily tracked and enforced. If it has a motor, you can't ride it on a non-motorized trail for the safety of other trail users. This makes sense. The fact that some e-bikes with some riders would be safe doesn't change this. You could say the same about some motorcyclists too.

My friends that have ridden e-bikes have told me that they were stunned by the amount of power these things put out. Myself, I've avoided the test rides not out of a moral standing but because frankly I love going fast and would be a sucker for an e-bike.

I do support allowing motorized vehicle access for those with a true handicap anywhere a bike can legally go. But I've noticed many e-bikers like to claim a disability with no proof or indication of that being true and in 1 case I saw in person it was demonstrably untrue (buddy wanted an e-bike cause his 'leg is paralyzed' according to him, yet he outclimbed me on his enduro bike and I'm a darn strong climber).

BTW, I'd LOVE LOVE LOVE a Kenovo SL that shredded the gnar I love and made my big enduro bike climb like a XC bike as I prefer trails that are strictly 1 way loops with steep chunky downs and less fun climbs. That sounds amazing. But I don't think that bike should be legal on any of the many 2 way easier and heavily trafficked trails that are much more common. Hence the logical ban on 'motors' on most trails.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Gutch said:


> You HATE emtb and Dirt bikes? Why? Hate carries a pretty strong meaning.


Gutch, if you’ll employ the “Reply” function, then people will know who you’re talking to.
Just a suggestion to help the rest of us.
=sParty


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

all I care about is

if it says no motorized vehicles keep your ebike with it's electric motor off the trail
be it a MUP or any other signed path that says no motorized vehicles

all my trails I have around me, and mups are signed that way, *no motorized vehicles*
and [........] ebikers are seen riding dirty on them all the time, which grinds my gears

I sometimes ride moto but I go to places where motors are allowed to ride it

the whole rest of this ebike discussion is...janky. until you change these local laws (which ebikers won't be able to do in my area) stay on the allowed stuff plz


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

All my trails say not a trail and no bikes allowed. Good thing I'm not on a bike 
Seriously California sucks for access.

So strong is the hate for ALL bikes that cops on motorcycles tear up the trails just to hand out tickets. No ucks given if it's an Ebike.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> I think I did answer it. If your bike has a motor, and the rule is no motorized access, then yes that person gets denied access. It's a fairly simple rule. Ebikes have a motor, so you can't ride them on non-motorized trails. It doesn't matter who the person is that's riding that trail. That's the point that I guess went over your head with the dirtbike analogy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You HATE emtb and Dirt bikes? Why? Hate carries a pretty strong meaning.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

kpdemello said:


> Personally I hate eMTBs,


Have you considered therapy?



alexbn921 said:


> Seriously California sucks for access.


I mean...aside from maybe WA, CA has the most and best trails in the US. Probably the best year round trail access. Just cause they're not legal doesn't mean they're not there.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

slapheadmofo said:


> For this, the kooks label me a 'hater'.
> 🤪


Right because usually people who say those things provide no rational justification for why they think e-bikes should be treated significantly differently. "Because it has a motor" isn't a justification, just a rallying cry. It's like "Because her emails!"


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

mlx john said:


> I know. My Levo SL is an E-bike. I like to ride mountains on it. I call it mountain biking. Talking about others being butthurt. Lol...You're the upset pedantic one on here.
> 
> Talk about 1st world, privileged problems... jeez.


Plenty of road bikes on the mountains around here, doesn't make them mountain bikes. And I trail run on mtb trails, I'm still a mountain biker but I'm not mountain biking at that time. I will confess I'm a bit confused just what I am doing when I ride my CX on a mountain bike trail, though. I'm ok with "riding a CX on a mountain bike trail".

With your logic, I guess when I ride a mountain bike on a mountain bike trail, I can correctly claim that I am ebiking? I mean, they're one and the same, right?


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

I just finished riding my ebike with a buddy, it was fun after all this nonsense. . Oh and I waived to more than a few hikers who were hiking the trails I built. That was fun too . Super stoked I don’t live anywhere near a lot of you. You would probably ***** about my ebike while you rode the trails I dug lol.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

roughster said:


> I just finished riding my ebike with a buddy, it was fun after all this nonsense. . Oh and I waived to more than a few hikers who were hiking the trails I built. That was fun too . Super stoked I don’t live anywhere near a lot of you. You would probably *** about my ebike while you rode the trails I dug lol.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 1955563


Where are you located? Looks fun as crap


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Only skimmed most of the latest bickering, but for sure, I would not support a restructuring of the class system. Too many jurisdictions have opened up access based on those classifications (with zero issues as a result), and starting over would make no sense whatsoever. We're talking about ONE HORSEPOWER for Christ's sake. I used to ride a 15hp motorcycle on single-track, and even THAT left no trace.


.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

roughster said:


> I just finished riding my ebike with a buddy, it was fun after all this nonsense. . Oh and I waived to more than a few hikers who were hiking the trails I built. That was fun too . Super stoked I don’t live anywhere near a lot of you. You would probably *** about my ebike while you rode the trails I dug lol.


Right. Good on ya.
I’ve built, maintained &/or defended hundreds of miles of trail throughout the past 35 years.
Mountain biking is what started me so doing.
Mountain biking and ebiking are what keep me at it.
I intend to keep going until I can’t go any longer.
Enjoy the backcountry. Enjoy yourself. Enjoy others doing likewise. Be a good steward. Be friendly.
These are my credos*.
=sParty

*But I draw the line at front defailures. Ha ha


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

_CJ said:


> Only skimmed most of the latest bickering, but for sure, I would not support a restructuring of the class system. Too many jurisdictions have opened up access based on those classifications (with zero issues as a result), and starting over would make no sense whatsoever. We're talking about ONE HORSEPOWER for Christ's sake. I used to ride a 15hp motorcycle on single-track, and even THAT left no trace.


Yup.


roughster said:


> I dont look at it as exclusionary, we need to get ebike regulation FORMALLY defined before any class / ebike has a real chance.


It's extremely exclusionary and quite sad, actually, that one who has spent time fighting for access is now saying he thinks many Class 1 bikes should have no access. The Class system ship has sailed in this country. Nobody is interested in re-doing it because you have invented a new class in your own mind. As I've said before many times, the current class system is lousy but it is what it is and we are stuck with it. The sooner you accept that the more rational you can be with the rest of us here in the real world.


roughster said:


> I am not interested in a slippery slope or flood gates leading to your linked “ebikes” above


Well then, you are against ALL ebikes in this country, no different than some of the other clowns in this thread. If you "aren't interested" in access for 750W bikes, you are not interested in access for any ebike in this country. _There is no lower tier. *There never will be.*_

If you want access for _your_ bike but not access for 750W bikes, that's a *YOU* problem. It's laughably exclusionary and nobody else (on either side of the issue) cares about this new class you've invented in your own mind.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Jon A said:


> If you want access for _your_ bike but not access for 750W bikes, that's a *YOU* problem. It's laughably exclusionary and nobody else (on either side of the issue) cares about this new class you've invented in your own mind.


Maybe we should do a poll? How many reading this thread are riding class 1 ebike *750 watt *bikes on MTB trails? And I don't mean local dog walking paths, or paved city bike trails.

Of the 100+ riders I know locally:
250W Class 1: 100+
750W Class 1: 0


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gemini2k05 said:


> Right because usually people who say those things provide no rational justification for why they think e-bikes should be treated significantly differently. "Because it has a motor" isn't a justification, just a rallying cry. It's like "Because her emails!"


I get it.

You're the type who reacts to the voices in your head rather than what people actually say in real life and is apparently proud of it.

Way to be.

And if you're going to throw in some lame political virtue-signaling crap, maybe at least get your quote right. 
It's only 3 words FFS.


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> Maybe we should do a poll?


Yes, because a poll on this (very anti-E) board, where even many of those who aren't anti-E are living in their own small little bubble, would provide such useful information.  Be sure not to venture to more ebike friendly boards, where there are large threads or even entire sections devoted to many of the bikes above.


> Of the 100+ riders I know locally:
> 250W Class 1: 100+
> 750W Class 1: 0


And you think anybody will believe the accuracy of your book keeping documenting the number of something you didn't know existed until 5 minutes ago? Get real. By all means, keep spending your time on this and shooting yourself in the foot (if you actually do care about Ebike access).


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

It's ebike forum.
The only people who use it are extremists trying to out-virtue signal each other in an unironic ideological circle jerk.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> I just finished riding my ebike with a buddy, it was fun after all this nonsense. . Oh and I waived to more than a few hikers who were hiking the trails I built. That was fun too . Super stoked I don’t live anywhere near a lot of you. You would probably *** about my ebike while you rode the trails I dug lol.


LOL - too funny. 

From what you've said here, if I or anyone else showed up to ride that on a Class II e-bike, you would be ***** about it.
And you've already actually ridden trails I dug (as well as plenty of trails created by riders on actual motos).

🤪


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

_CJ said:


> Will ebikers with severely limited access in many areas stay off trails like these? Not likely.
> Will land managers close these trails to all bikes because they don't have the resources for enforcement, and have a hard time differentiating between E and analog, or navigating the laws surrounding use for disabled riders? Maybe.


I didn’t read all 300+ posts to date, so someone might have noticed this already. 

The OP lays out a scenario in which trails are closed to all bikes in response to ebikers using trails closed to them. That sounds much more like “are eMTBrs shooting themselves (and others) in the foot.”


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> You HATE emtb and Dirt bikes? Why? Hate carries a pretty strong meaning.


Hate means strong dislike. I strongly dislike e-MTBs and dirt bikes. So what? I also hate green beans. Is there nothing in this world you strongly dislike? The point is that I don't let my distaste for these things prevent others from enjoying them in the right contexts. To each their own, so long as everyone plays by the rules.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

kpdemello said:


> Hate means strong dislike. I strongly dislike e-MTBs and dirt bikes. So what? I also hate green beans. Is there nothing in this world you strongly dislike? The point is that I don't let my distaste for these things prevent others from enjoying them in the right contexts. To each their own, so long as everyone plays by the rules.


Fair enough


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

evasive said:


> I didn’t read all 300+ posts to date, so someone might have noticed this already.
> 
> The OP lays out a scenario in which trails are closed to all bikes in response to ebikers using trails closed to them. That sounds much more like “are eMTBrs shooting themselves (and others) in the foot.”


That's certainly one way to look at it, but human nature being what it is, ebikers aren't going to just quit riding their bikes, or drive hours to do so when they have trails out their back door, and the laws make no sense.

As many subscribe to; "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." 


.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> LOL - too funny.
> 
> From what you've said here, if I or anyone else showed up to ride that on a Class II e-bike, you would be *** about it.
> And you've already actually ridden trails I dug (as well as plenty of trails created by riders on actual motos).
> ...


Now think about this in the context of other discussions. I don’t know your corner of the world is what you said right? … Vietnam is not the only NEMBA area I have ridden. Have you ever ridden my trails? Highly doubtful. Have you ever ridden any CA area? Not sure, also sounds doubtful though. I ride Moto trails all the time Georgetown / Downieville. I’ve ridden around the world in the USA in every major region, Europe, Asia, Africa, Central America, and South America. Sometimes it gives you a perspective that those who like to try and be big fish in a little pond don’t have. Just saying …

As for class II, I wouldn’t bat an eye. If it comes down to accepting ebikes at a class 1 250watt or nothing for access to some areas, it is clear where I fall. I do feel when it comes to who should have access it should be based on science. Some of the studies do recommend Class 1 & 2. Some are less definitive, the jury may still be out on them due to the instant torque and acceleration, similar to true Motos.

IMO it always comes down to the rider and I even agree with motos on that. You can search my post history, I’ve said this multiple times, if motos could freaking control the throttle and not roost every turn, roller and berm and rip up the whole trail, I could give a **** less. The problem, they just can’t seem to do that lol!

Anyways,I’ve said all I have to say on this thread unless something more interesting or novel shows up. I’ll watch Slap and JohnA continue to pullout weird perspectives and argue points no one is arguing. It’s kind of like watching a car wreck. I know I should turn away, but there is a morbid gravity to it.


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

chazpat said:


> Plenty of road bikes on the mountains around here, doesn't make them mountain bikes. And I trail run on mtb trails, I'm still a mountain biker but I'm not mountain biking at that time. I will confess I'm a bit confused just what I am doing when I ride my CX on a mountain bike trail, though. I'm ok with "riding a CX on a mountain bike trail".
> 
> With your logic, I guess when I ride a mountain bike on a mountain bike trail, I can correctly claim that I am ebiking? I mean, they're one and the same, right?



I don't care. Call it whatever you want.


----------



## Jon A (Jan 4, 2021)

roughster said:


> accepting ebikes at a class 1 250watt or nothing....I’ll watch Slap and JohnA continue to pullout weird perspectives and argue points no one is arguing.


A guy arguing for something that does not exist and has never been argued for by anybody before because it does not exist, claims others are arguing points no one is arguing...... That take a impressive level of obtusity.


----------



## Shinkers (Feb 5, 2014)

_CJ said:


> That's certainly one way to look at it, but human nature being what it is, ebikers aren't going to just quit riding their bikes, or drive hours to do so when they have trails out their back door, and the laws make no sense.
> 
> As many subscribe to; "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."
> 
> ...


*un·just*

/ˌənˈjəst/
_adjective_

1. not based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair.

So laws disallowing ebikes on certain trails is morally wrong? And because of that, ebikers are obligated to ride in those areas that they are not allowed in?

Come on man.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Shinkers said:


> *un·just*
> 
> /ˌənˈjəst/
> _adjective_
> ...


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

_CJ said:


> That's certainly one way to look at it, but human nature being what it is, ebikers aren't going to just quit riding their bikes, or drive hours to do so when they have trails out their back door, and the laws make no sense.
> 
> As many subscribe to; "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."
> 
> ...


You do realize this is one of the fears of allowing class 1 ebikes, right? That it is then allowing ALL ebikes or anything that resembles one because "ebikers aren't going to just quit riding their bikes, or drive hours to do so when they have trails out their back door, and the laws make no sense." It is quite obvious if an ice bike is on the trails. a non-class 1 ebike, not so easily called out.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

slapheadmofo said:


> I get it.
> 
> You're the type who reacts to the voices in your head rather than what people actually say in real life and is apparently proud of it.
> 
> ...


Wow, my feelings, so hurt.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Bentonville is a perfect example of multi users blending with ebikes everywhere.


----------



## rod9301 (Oct 30, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> Hey, I didn't make the thread.
> Of course it's pointless, the whole premise that anyone is going to lose out on anything by not waving e-bike pom-poms around everywhere they go is stupid on it's face.
> 
> If every mountain biker in your region is also an e-biker and you guys want to combine your advocacy efforts to include both equally, that's up to you guys, and good luck.
> ...


Yeah, u should fight for e bikers too, because in a year or two you will have one

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk


----------



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

rod9301 said:


> Yeah, u should fight for e bikers too, because in a year or two you will have one


Why troll?


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Haha as you kept arguing, I went building


----------



## JumpinMacaque (Jan 26, 2010)

roughster said:


> Jesus over and over and over again. Let's just sum up this up quickly and leave the whack-a-mole death by a thousand cuts questions out of further discussion. Reminds me of *Brandolini's law**:*


I'm so glad you brought up Brandolini's Law.
-It's not that fast
-This is like the ski vs snowboard debate
-class 1/2/3 definitions
-Laws are unjust
-CPSC definition
-Any other definition about a vehicle that isn't recognized by major land agencies/managers
-Semantics about acoustic or moped
-You're going to be old someday
-Carbon footprint of commuting
-Internal combustion engines
-credentials
-We put in our time and effort advocating back in the day

These are all circle jerking, because what it comes down to is this: motor. The question of the thread is addressed to non e-bikers and supposing that they are shooting themselves in the foot. USFS has strict sidebars on motorized vehicles, both on a trail by trail basis as well as throughout their management documents. See Recreation Opportunity Spectrum: semi-primitive non-motorized. Then you want to talk Department of Interior. Yes, they updated their definitions and management, which is a simpler process. E-bikes are allowed on the same trails as mountain bikes now, provided there has been a management decision. Guess what one of the options is? Kicking BOTH out. Page 123, rationale for decision.
So are mountain bikers shooting themselves in the foot? In areas with contiguous BLM land and no USFS, maybe they are shooting themselves in the foot. In any location with USFS trails, no. E-bikes are an anchor on mountain bike advocacy in those places and the impetus is on e-bikers to fix it.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

To keep it simple, at least in CA, the forest service is trying to change the access for ebikes to having access same as MTBs. It’s the sierra club and environs who are fighting, but the winds are changing here and soon in a theatre near you.


----------



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

roughster said:


> Haha as you kept arguing, I went building
> 
> View attachment 1955622




Nice road! You going to pave it soon?


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

J.B. Weld said:


> Nice road! You going to pave it soon?


LOL, seriously though looks like a good ebike & maybe mountain bike trail (depending on overall grade. I think (?) everyone on this thread is in support of this. If local LMs decide ebikes are allowed on all trails mountain bikes are allowed, that is just fine. The point is ebikes are a separate user group than mountain bikes.

Edit: my biggest contention is ebikers trying to redefine and rename mountain bikes (analog etc…) and claim ebikes are in the same class as non motorized bikes. Its like my wife (a Virginia native) trying to tell me (a Massachusetts native) that Maine is not part of New England. Thats what the Virginia teachers told her. But guess what? Virginians don’t get to tell people from New England what states make up New England… just like ebikers dont get to rename mountain bikes (analog bikes) and at the same time claim they are the same thing (when it comes to access categories).

Chew on that! And lemme know what you think. And back up wacky claims with data please. 😛


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Nice road! You going to pave it soon?


If you can’t make this fun, once again, you need to learn to let go of your brakes. No pedaling involved! You have more speed here than you know what to do with and the urge to safety brake is high. Don’t give in and it all flows at trail speed 

The landing is a steep 20’ ramp as of tonight


----------



## rod9301 (Oct 30, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> Why troll?


Not trolling, it's what i think will happen

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk


----------



## tom tom (Mar 3, 2007)

Arm&Hammer said:


> I am for ebikes, get with it. I against calling it mountain biking, different sport, they are fun as hell.
> 
> Why can’t you guys get that? Adding a motor makes it not a bike.


Motor.....Bike?


----------



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

rod9301 said:


> Not trolling, it's what i think will happen
> 
> Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk




Do you know shmf and that's why you're making that prediction? Or are you trying to say every mountain biker have one in a few years? If it's the latter that's some trolling for sure.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Most of the trails close by me don't have a lot of mileage, this isn't the west. I don't need to be able to ride further, I already often have to repeat loops because I've ridden them all. I have no desire to get in more runs on these trails, I would just get tired of them quicker doing so. And I don't climb to "earn" the downhills, I like climbing, I often ride a rigid singlespeed because it makes it more of a challenge. I see some ebikes on these trails but they're not for me.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> Do you know shmf and that's why you're making that prediction? Or are you trying to say every mountain biker have one in a few years? If it's the latter that's some trolling for sure.


He knows ****.

It is wildly unlikely that I would ever waste that much money on a motorized toy that only puts out 1HP with the stupidest throttle configuration in history, sorry.
I've got real mountain bikes and real motos to play with already. Maybe an e-moto at some point.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Haha as you kept arguing, I went building
> 
> View attachment 1955622


Looks fun, but don't you guys ever get rain? Seems like you built a pretty sweet catch-basin there (unless it's just the angle).
And for someone with such an enormous trail-building e-dick, I'm sorely disappointed to see you using a bunch of old half-rotted sticks as a base. 
My image is blown.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Looks fun, but don't you guys ever get rain? Seems like you built a pretty sweet catch-basin there (unless it's just the angle).
> And for someone with such an enormous trail-building e-dick, I'm sorely disappointed to see you using a bunch of old half-rotted sticks as a base.
> My image is blown.


Haha the actual answer is no, we don't, and the image angle is obviously distorted a bit. Drainage is the last thing I worry about to be honest as it impacts the trails for maybe 3 times a year @ most for 2-3 days. The "sticks" are by design as it does help keep the cows off the features, but they still get on them even with the sticks. I personally love using half rotted wood. It breaks down and compacts great and I have to rebuild the features every year anyways due to the cow damage, so longevity isn't a concern. Now if we can ever negotiate not having cows out here and I don't have to rebuild the features every year, then I will immediately bring in an excavator and the trails are going to look a whole lot different!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

lol, I was going to comment that it looked like someone ran a bobcat through a cow pasture but I was afraid it wouldn't be appreciated.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

chazpat said:


> lol, I was going to comment that it looked like someone ran a bobcat through a cow pasture but I was afraid it wouldn't be appreciated.


Zero offence would be taken, and actually a compliment given that's hand dug by me. And you guys are right, there is no speed here and these jumps don't work at all


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Haha the actual answer is no, we don't, and the image angle is obviously distorted a bit. Drainage is the last thing I worry about to be honest as it impacts the trails for maybe 3 times a year @ most for 2-3 days. The "sticks" are by design as it does help keep the cows off the features, but they still get on them even with the sticks. I personally love using half rotted wood. It breaks down and compacts great and I have to rebuild the features every year anyways due to the cow damage, so longevity isn't a concern. Now if we can ever negotiate not having cows out here and I don't have to rebuild the features every year, then I will immediately bring in an excavator and the trails are going to look a whole lot different!


I try to avoid using wood as it always eventually falls to ****, but if you're only building temporary stuff, I suppose I'll give you a pass. 
A little jealous of the no rain; we've had the wettest year on record here. 11.5" just in July. WTF?

I built yesterday too. Little berm / 1/4 pipe feature that will be really sweet next season; it's got many, many hours love coming.
(You can only see part of it here.)

Should be able to lay into this one pretty hard. I'm sure the kiddies will be banging 3's and tailwhips up out of it too. 💪 
Might even throw in a section of log coping if I can figure out a way to anchor it solidly and make it replaceable.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> I try to avoid using wood as it always eventually falls to ****, but if you're only building temporary stuff, I suppose I'll give you a pass.
> A little jealous of the no rain; we've had the wettest year on record here. 11.5" just in July. WTF?
> 
> I built yesterday too. Little berm / 1/4 pipe feature that will be really sweet next season; it's got many, many hours love coming.
> ...


Looks great! For the logs, I started using 1/2" x 4' rebar to anchor. A small 5lbs sledge in the pack and they will sink in deep and be solid. Basically three on the down slope (end middle end) and two on the upslope (1/3 & 2/3) and they lock the logs in perfectly. Just make sure to hammer them below the surface of the log (obviously) to avoid impaling risks, lol.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

I wonder if this is a worldwide issue or limited to certain areas. I'm about 45 minutes outside Philadelphia. There's always that one idiot, whether they're on an ebike, horse, tricycle or whatever. Trail etiquette and sharing them have never been an issue. The hikers are all passive aggressive, the way they move over when there's enough room for a truck to fit through, but for the most part we all know how to share our toys. Amazing in some places (looking at you California) people act like children.

As far as e-bikes, not my cup of tea, but they could ride and enjoy the same trails we all do. I pay no more or less taxes than they do, and this whole trail erosion thing is utter nonsense. People just look for reasons to be upset. It's the same people that haven't volunteered a second of their time to maintain them. The people that do, just want to see people of all ages getting outside and having fun. If it means a trail gets beat up a little quicker, oh well.

Again, these are adults that act like children.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

2021Mach6 said:


> It's the same people that haven't volunteered a second of their time to maintain them. The people that do, just want to see people of all ages getting outside and having fun.


I wish this were true, but some of the most anti-E people in my area are also long time members of a local MTB advocacy group. They'll smile, and tell you they like ebikes, but then go on a rant with twenty reasons about what's wrong with them, and why access should be denied. It's all very passive aggressive. Part of the culture with IMBA, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, and other groups like that I think. They love to shake your hand and stab your back.


.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Looks great! For the logs, I started using 1/2" x 4' rebar to anchor. A small 5lbs sledge in the pack and they will sink in deep and be solid. Basically three on the down slope (end middle end) and two on the upslope (1/3 & 2/3) and they lock the logs in perfectly. Just make sure to hammer them below the surface of the log (obviously) to avoid impaling risks, lol.


Thought of rebar, but I'm looking to re-create something similar to the coping you'd see at a skatepark at the lip of bowls and ramps out of maybe 6" diameter oak, maybe 12-15' long. Needs to be stuck right up at the edge and solid enough for people to do stalls, disasters, etc on. Maybe even make it grindable.

Haven't quite figured it out yet, but hopefully can come up with something that works.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

_CJ said:


> I wish this were true, but some of the most anti-E people in my area are also long time members of a local MTB advocacy group. They'll smile, and tell you they like ebikes, but then go on a rant with twenty reasons about what's wrong with them, and why access should be denied. It's all very passive aggressive. Part of the culture with IMBA, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, and other groups like that I think. They love to shake your hand and stab your back.
> 
> 
> .


Glad that doesn't go on in my neck of the woods, and if it does, I'm even happier to be completely oblivious to it.

Grown ups fighting over bicycles and sharing. Pretty sad.


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

roughster said:


> Haha as you kept arguing, I went building
> 
> View attachment 1955622


Take a look to the left side of your photo, that beautiful single track in the distance is what analog bikers like.


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

"The point is ebikes are a separate user group than mountain bikes."

This is what the ebike crowd and the bike company's don't get.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Shane5001 said:


> "The point is ebikes are a separate user group than mountain bikes."
> 
> This is what the ebike crowd and the bike company's don't get.


You're painting with a broad brush there, my friend. I own an ebike and I get it. In fact, I've been shouting it from the rooftops since day one.

Different sports!

Failure to perceive the distinction by ebikers* is one of the key reasons that mountain bikers are resistant to accept the ebike, not to mention many mountain bikers' disrespect anyone who rides an ebike while claiming that doing so is equivalent to riding a human powered bike.

Really? Do ebikers really believe mountain bikes and ebikes are the same?

Having owned both, I can say with certainty that they're not the same. In fact, they're far from the same.

To anyone and everyone: please don't call an ebike a mountain bike.

BUT... my point is this: please don't refer to "the ebike crowd" like we're all a bunch of unperceptive clowns. Thanks.
=sParty

*Seems odd that mountain bikers have no trouble recognizing the difference -- seems it's only ebikers that don't grasp it, tho thankfully not all ebikers.


----------



## OneTrustMan (Nov 11, 2017)

Sparticus said:


> *But I draw the line at front defailures. Ha ha


Yeah, let's unite all e and non e bikers on that.  
No trail access for front derailleurs 😛


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

Sparticus said:


> You're painting with a broad brush there, my friend. I own an ebike and I get it. In fact, I've been shouting it from the rooftops since day one.
> 
> Different sports!
> 
> ...


Point taken, sorry to offend. I have 2 buddies with ebikes now, and no, I don't categorize them differently. For some reason I seamed to have gotten caught up in 2 ebike threads, and it seams a lot of the responses from "obvious" ebike owners are very defensive, flat out putting down responses, disrespectful. In fact, I was called a bootlicker in this thread for answering the o.p.'s original question. The o.p. was looking for answers, I gave him a perspective from someone who doesn't own an ebike, like it or not.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Shane5001 said:


> "The point is ebikes are a separate user group than mountain bikes."
> 
> This is what the ebike crowd and the bike company's don't get.


I own both, and I don't get it. Class 1 eMTB's are 95% mountain bike, have no more or less environmental impact, travel at virtually the same speed, and require the exact same skillset to operate. They're both mountain bikes, period.


.


----------



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)




----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

_CJ said:


> I own both, and I don't get it. Class 1 eMTB's are 95% mountain bike, have no more or less environmental impact, travel at virtually the same speed, and require the exact same skillset to operate. They're both mountain bikes, period.
> 
> 
> .


It's not that I completely disagree with you, most people wouldn't notice my buddies turbo levo as any different, nor does he ride it any differently. It's the idea of a "motor." A lot of people are never going to get over that. And I'm guessing a lot of people, as mentioned above, aren't using class-1 ebikes. These guys are where the class-1 ebike's fight is.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

_CJ said:


> I own both, and I don't get it. Class 1 eMTB's are 95% mountain bike, have no more or less environmental impact, travel at virtually the same speed, and require the exact same skillset to operate. They're both mountain bikes, period.
> 
> 
> .


Right.
If that's the case then why not sell the ebike and keep the mountain bike?
I mean, you know, since they're the same.

Tell the truth, _CJ -- you DO know they're different. So don't call them the same thing.

Women are people and men are people but I'll bet you don't call women 'men' nor the other way 'round.
=sParty


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

SkiTalk'er said:


>


I tried to like this twice.

...and then twice more.
=sParty


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Sparticus said:


> You're painting with a broad brush there, my friend. I own an ebike and I get it. In fact, I've been shouting it from the rooftops since day one.
> 
> Different sports!
> 
> ...


I too own many bikes, one of which is an e-fattie. I don’t have an issue calling them different things.

What I do think is that the non e-bike crowd could do a better job toning down the way they express themselves, and maybe get some counselling for the hatred some of them admittedly harbour for e-bikers.

We have gone round and round in this thread as to why this is the case - jealousy/financial, pissed to be passed by someone who didn’t spend a decade earning their turns, and on and on.

In the end, I DO think they are shooting themselves in the foot as a result of a seriously unbecoming tone/approach (by some), and citing reasons without foundation to support their position.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

mtnbkrmike said:


> I too own many bikes, one of which is an e-fattie. I don’t have an issue calling them different things.
> 
> What I do think is that the non e-bike crowd could do a better job toning down the way they express themselves, and maybe get some counselling for the hatred some of them admittedly harbour for e-bikers.
> 
> ...


I don't disagree with anything you've said above, mtnbkrmike.

That said, semantics are important.

When someone tells me they won a gold medal in The Olympics, I assume they won a gold medal in the actual Olympics. But if I ask to see it and they produce a gold colored, spray painted tuna can lid that says, "Whitaker Neighborhood Olympics" scrawled on it with a Sharpie, I feel deceived.

Wait -- you said the Olympics.

I admit I'm a champion of the cause of accuracy in semantics but in the case of ebikers -- I'm talking about those of us whose bikes have pedal-assist motors -- calling themselves mountain bikers, well, this just doesn't fly with me. It might not bother me if mountain bikes hadn't been around for such a long time or if I hadn't been a mountain biker for such a long time but here's the deal. A mountain bike is an established thing. It's simply not right to put a motor on it and say it's still a mountain bike.

I don't care if it's legal everywhere that a mountain bike is legal. Actually, as an ebike rider, I think that's great -- presto, I can take my motorized vehicle in places I wouldn't otherwise be able to go with a motor. But that's another argument. The problem so many mountain bikers have with ebikers (yeah, the people, not the machines) is that the ebikers believe they're masquerading as mountain bikers.

Who do they think they're fooling?

By not embracing the fundamental difference between these to two-wheeled vehicles, they're fooling themselves. Those of us who clearly see the difference are offended because we feel like those who've fooled themselves want us to be fooled, too.

Sorry, not falling for that. Please ebikers -- PLEASE -- don't ask me to be fooled by such ridiculous arguments as, "it's 95% a mountain bike, therefore it's a mountain bike."

Sorry again but by that logic a woman is 95% a man since she's got arms and legs and a head, etc. -- the penis makes up, sadly, far less than 5% of the man.

Just call it what it is -- an ebike. Why is this so offensive to so many ebikers? I don't get it.
=sParty


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Sparticus said:


> I don't disagree with anything you've said above, mtnbkrmike.
> 
> That said, semantics are important.
> 
> ...


Again, I agree with you, but I do think the non e-bike crowd may be their own worst enemy (the subject of this thread). Their loudest advocates may in the end be their biggest detractors. A regulator reading this stuff would rip some of it apart.

Crap arguments and hate detract from the credibility of other, possibly legitimate positions.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Shane5001 said:


> "The point is ebikes are a separate user group than mountain bikes."
> 
> This is what the ebike crowd and the bike company's don't get.


“Some” ebikers don’t get. The bike companies and the end users don’t care whether you think we “get it” or not. Keep in mind it’s very complex as some still ride mtbs, some are former mtbrs, and some are just starting.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

IME, I believe the “majority” of mtbrs don’t care if a class1 emtb is on the trail. I have seen a change from 2016 to present with more acceptance of the 1hp motor!


----------



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

mtnbkrmike said:


> Crap arguments and hate detract from the credibility of other, possibly legitimate positions.



You could say the exact same about a very small minority of pro ebike proponents. From what I see the "hate" oozes from both sides, but the majority are just voicing legitimate concerns.


----------



## OneTrustMan (Nov 11, 2017)

@Sparticus
I have my e-mtb since march this year and I agree on pretty much anything you said.
The Emtb and my mtbs are not the same.
The heavy bike makes it overall less fun to ride on trails, than my normal bikes.
And putting it into turbo mode really means you mostly just have to keep the cranks spinning to let the motor do the rest.
I will admid that there is a big difference depending on which motor brand you have.
Bosch = just move dat cranks a little
Giant ( reprogrammed Yamaha ) = forces you to do use some strengh even in turbo mode. Still very powerful.

I always piss of some buddies who ride ebikes, or people on the german ebike forum by calling my Emtb a moped 🤣
A normal bike and an E-bike are not the same, period!

I mean like C'mon.
Calling an ebike which can make even the oldest granny, or the fattest unfit bastard faster than you on the climbs a normal bike is utterly ridiculous.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

A class 1 eMTB is as much the same as a standard dual suspension MTB, as a standard unsuspended single speed MTB is the same as a standard dual suspension MTB. It's a spectrum, but they're all MTB's.


.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

_CJ said:


> A class 1 eMTB is as much the same as a standard dual suspension MTB, as a standard unsuspended single speed MTB is the same as a standard dual suspension MTB. It's a spectrum, but they're all MTB's.


Now you're just be obstinate and you know it. Go sit in the corner.
=sParty


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Sometimes I build trails and hit them on my Strive, and other times my Levo. There is no difference.


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

_CJ said:


> I own both, and I don't get it. Class 1 eMTB's are 95% mountain bike, have no more or less environmental impact, travel at virtually the same speed, and require the exact same skillset to operate. They're both mountain bikes, period.
> 
> 
> .


Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Does not require the same skill set at all VS a climb on a bike then one with a motor.


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

roughster said:


> Sometimes I build trails and hit them on my Strive, and other times my Levo. There is no difference.


Wxcept
One has a motor, cmon guys, you cannot be all this stupid?


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

roughster said:


> Sometimes I build trails and hit them on my Strive, and other times my Levo. There is no difference.


Turn the Levo's motor off.
Leave the battery in place.
Now go ride it.
I guarantee you'll notice a difference. 
=sParty


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Arm&Hammer said:


> Wxcept
> One has a motor, cmon guys, you cannot be all this stupid?


I would say the stupidity is on those biting the hand that feeds. Those speaking from ignorance and predetermined dislike. 

There is no difference as someone who understand the effort it takes to design to build and to maintain an entire system. It comes from someone who routinely rides miles of green XC to double black DH on both standard and ebike.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Sparticus said:


> Turn the Levo's motor off.
> Leave the battery in place.
> Now go ride it.
> I guarantee you'll notice a difference.
> =sParty


I’ve rode the entire EDT (50 miles) and ended with over half battery left. I am someone who down tunes my settings. You’re barking up the wrong tree. I pedal on a 15/25 eco most of the time.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

roughster said:


> I would say the stupidity is on those biting the hand that feeds. Those speaking from ignorance and predetermined dislike.
> 
> There is no difference as someone who understand the effort it takes to design to build and to maintain an entire system. It comes from someone who routinely rides miles of green XC to double black DH on both standard and ebike.


Lots of us build trails, roughster. No need to wave your flag and pound your chest.
I've designed & built dozens of miles of trail in my life and maintained hundreds of miles of it.
Who knows, perhaps more than you. Perhaps not. Who cares. This isn't about that.
Doesn't mean you can call a pig a beauty queen, nor the other way 'round.
You know there's a difference between a mountain bike and an ebike.
You're just being obstinate, too.
=sParty


----------



## JumpinMacaque (Jan 26, 2010)

roughster said:


> I would say the stupidity is on those biting the hand that feeds. Those speaking from ignorance and predetermined dislike.


Oh please. You might be a builder, but 99% of e-bike advocates, CJ included, just want to ride in on mountain bike coattails. As I proved in post #417, you owe us 10+ miles of trail so IDK where this hand that feeds is. You could put your money where your mouth is, but P4B and other e-bike groups only care about what will be the easiest to sell e-bikes and they don't work with MTB groups. They don't care if there are trail, easement, or grant opportunity losses along the way, they know that their product won't sell if they have to share with dirt bikes.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Sparticus said:


> Lots of us build trails, roughster. No need to wave your flag and pound your chest.
> I've designed & built dozens of miles of trail in my life and maintained hundreds of miles of it.
> Who knows, perhaps more than you. Perhaps not. Who cares. This isn't about that.
> Doesn't mean you can call a pig a beauty queen, nor the other way 'round.
> ...


But isn’t there (aka waive the builder flag)? Do you think I am so unique? I don’t feel that way at all. I know most of the local builders out there slinging the dirt to create _new_ mileage and they are 90%+ ebikers. 

I routinely get locals asking me to take a break from my local system and work on other local areas that are “traditional” areas that have been left to die a slow eroding death. Ain’t nobody stepping up that I see…

In addition, my point is there is no difference in HOW they ride the trail (std vs ebike). It certainly is easier on the up on the ebike, but I ride the exact same lines it just takes me a bit more effort and longer on standard. On the down, my strive beats my levo every time and that’s on the trails I build being a primary ebike rider. Why is that? Because I build MTB trails. Let that sink in.

Honestly, the attitudes on this thread makes me start to wonder why some of us ebikers aren’t building eMTB trails and not MTB trails…. I could do it easily and make it hard on standard bikers, but why would I when we can design and build trails that work for both?

Perhaps I should just take the advice of another local, “**** the intertards. They don’t know ****.” I’m starting to understand the wisdom there.


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

roughster said:


> But isn’t there (aka waive the builder flag)? Do you think I am so unique? I don’t feel that way at all. I know most of the local builders out there slinging the dirt to create _new_ mileage and they are 90%+ ebikers.
> 
> I routinely get locals asking me to take a break from my local system and work on other local areas that are “traditional” areas that have been left to die a slow eroding death. Ain’t nobody stepping up that I see…
> 
> ...


Please do, great! And would be nice if you can figure out what the term bike means too. Not analog or acoustic or standard, the word is bike. It does not need any clarification.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Arm&Hammer said:


> Please do, great! And would be nice if you can figure out what the term bike means too. Not analog or acoustic or standard, the word is bike. It does not need any clarification.


Agreed, one different component or not!


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

roughster said:


> Perhaps I should just take the advice of another local, “*** the intertards. They don’t know ***.” I’m starting to understand the wisdom there.











Spread the Word: Inclusion


We think the world would be better if everyone were included. Around the world, exclusion and discrimination continue to divide people with and without intellectual and developmental disabilities. We are changing that with grassroots action for inclusion. That’s Spread the Word.




www.spreadtheword.global


----------



## JumpinMacaque (Jan 26, 2010)

Know the story of the Little Red Hen? There's a difference in being included in the trails vs showing up with the legal, financial, and political solutions. Why not include dirt bikes? Don't you like to share with them, after all, they share most of the same components and they will all be electric soon anyway.


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

Sparticus said:


> Right.
> If that's the case then why not sell the ebike and keep the mountain bike?
> I mean, you know, since they're the same.
> 
> ...


Actually in California we do


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Arm&Hammer said:


> Wxcept
> One has a motor, cmon guys, you cannot be all this stupid?





roughster said:


> I would say the stupidity is on those biting the hand that feeds. Those speaking from ignorance and predetermined dislike.
> 
> There is no difference as someone who understand the effort it takes to design to build and to maintain an entire system. It comes from someone who routinely rides miles of green XC to double black DH on both standard and ebike.


So now we're back to "ebikes don't really have motors"? Now who is speaking from ignorance?

No one cares what you do, doesn't make you an expert obviously if you can't understand a vehicle with a motor is not the same as a vehicle without a motor. Yeah, it is a motor that assists with the pedaling. Go back and read through this whole thread, all 469+ posts and you'll see very little actual "predetermined dislike". Some of you ebikers just REALLY want to be the victim.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)




----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

I was digging tonight and thinking about this thread. Reflecting on my involvement and what it means. I started thinking about the people I dig with, the people I know who are active in the local area access and realized something.

None of them are on here. All of them are a lot younger than me. They could be my kids.

And that made me think, your voice only matters if you have an audience. It only matters if your perspective actually hits ears that DONT agree with you AND have an open mind. Otherwise it’s a circle jerk.

Most of you are dinosaurs and irrelevant. Old men shaking fists at the sky as you run around naked beating your … single speed. I’m literally done. As in, leaving the site. Thanks for helping me see this site is an ode to the legacy of MTB and regurgitation of the echoes of past generations. Good luck, I’m out.


----------



## matt4x4 (Dec 21, 2013)

Wow, people get really emotional at complete strangers online. Perhaps it was a momentary thing and Roughster will be back.


----------



## OneTrustMan (Nov 11, 2017)

matt4x4 said:


> Wow, people get really emotional at complete strangers online. Perhaps it was a momentary thing and Roughster will be back.


Well cognitive dissonance is a *****. 
He is rather leaving this forum instead of simply accepting that ebikes and bikes are different. 

Neither Sparty, nor me and even most of the people posting on this thread are against ebikes being on the trails, or against ebikes in general. 

But we are not pretending that ebikes are bikes either. 
If owing an ebike myself has showed me anything, than that that ebikes and bikes are definitely not the same. 

Heck on YouTube you will find a good amount of people riding their Sur Ron's ( e-dirt bike) on mountain bike trails and defending it by saying it's a normal mountain bike bro, it's not a dirt bike bro, you can put pedals on it bro. 

This way of thinking is insane. 
I have ridden mx bikes and a Sur Ron. The Sur Ron is clearly not even an ebike.


----------



## matt4x4 (Dec 21, 2013)

Yeah well sur rons are different
what does the legislation say, any words like bicycle in them?


----------



## Arm&Hammer (Dec 19, 2020)

aoliver said:


> Know the story of the Little Red Hen? There's a difference in being included in the trails vs showing up with the legal, financial, and political solutions. Why not include dirt bikes? Don't you like to share with them, after all, they share most of the same components and they will all be electric soon anyway.
> [/QUOTE





matt4x4 said:


> Yeah well sur rons are different
> what does the legislation say, any words like bicycle in them?


All ebikes are different, let’s make this easy. Were there any ebikes in the XCO or Tour de France this year? Why not if they are the same?


----------



## EKram (Oct 30, 2020)

Anyone know of eBikes being stolen?


----------



## Jack7782 (Jan 1, 2009)

No, but if an eBike can be stolen, it proves it is a bike.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

roughster said:


> Honestly, the attitudes on this thread makes me start to wonder why some of us ebikers aren’t building eMTB trails and not MTB trails…. I could do it easily and make it hard on standard bikers,


But wait - I thought there was no difference between them. Why would trails built for e-bikes make things hard for those on mountain bikes? 
Unless...well there is that extra thing they have that no one is allowed to mention unless they want the e-bike crybaby club to get all upset.

You know...that...thing...

🤡 




roughster said:


> Good luck, I’m out.


🐓


----------



## Dirtrider127 (Sep 17, 2010)

Another thread with 24 pages of wasted debate. I'm going to go ride my bike


----------



## turbolscivic94 (Nov 8, 2021)

J.B. Weld said:


> I don't think so, I know for many hikers the motor-no motor thing is a pretty big deal. People drive away from cities to escape that noise and imo it's important for such places to exist.


nope, plenty of studies show, most people don't even know the difference.


----------



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

turbolscivic94 said:


> nope, plenty of studies show, most people don't even know the difference.



Studies funded by Rad bike?


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Dirtrider127 said:


> I'm going to go ride my bike


Me, too.
For clarification: my mountain bike.
Mentioned, you know, for those who can tell the difference.
=sParty


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

roughster said:


> I was digging tonight and thinking about this thread. Reflecting on my involvement and what it means. I started thinking about the people I dig with, the people I know who are active in the local area access and realized something.
> 
> None of them are on here. All of them are a lot younger than me. They could be my kids.
> 
> ...


You should go check out the disk brake threads on weight weenies. Rim guys will cut you.


----------



## turbolscivic94 (Nov 8, 2021)

J.B. Weld said:


> Studies funded by Rad bike?


IMBA, but your mind is made up, so a real discussion is a waste with you.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Pretty sure I saw a non-class 1 e-mtb at our local trails last week. How's that going to play out?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

d365 said:


> Pretty sure I saw a non-class 1 e-mtb at our local trails last week. How's that going to play out?


Sounds like it already has!


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

OneTrustMan said:


> you will find a good amount of people riding their Sur Ron's ( e-dirt bike) on mountain bike trails and defending it by saying it's a normal mountain bike bro,


False equivalence fallacy if we're talking about class 1 e-bikes.

Let's argue about dropper posts now! 

I think we're all on the same page with front derailleurs.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

d365 said:


> Pretty sure I saw a non-class 1 e-mtb at our local trails last week. How's that going to play out?


How it will play out is that people will continue to buy and ride whatever the hell they feel like, because they're ALL illegal. Legalize class 1, and a significant portion of the people who would have bought a Sur-Ron or something similar will buy a class 1.

Again, failure to get on board with class 1 will cost legal access to ALL bikes.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

_CJ said:


> How it will play out is that people will continue to buy and ride whatever the hell they feel like, because they're ALL illegal. Legalize class 1, and a significant portion of the people who would have bought a Sur-Ron or something similar will buy a class 1.
> 
> Again, failure to get on board with class 1 will cost legal access to ALL bikes.


So the sur ron riders are going to go buy class 1 once its legal? If they are already not following the rules, then the rules change but still dont include them, why would they be any more motivated to change what they are doing? I’m not anti ebike on all trails, this argument for class 1 just doesn’t sound realistic.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

_CJ said:


> How it will play out is that people will continue to buy and ride whatever the hell they feel like, because they're ALL illegal. Legalize class 1, and a significant portion of the people who would have bought a Sur-Ron or something similar will buy a class 1.
> 
> Again, failure to get on board with class 1 will cost legal access to ALL bikes.


That's not going to happen.

Rule breakers will continue to want the extra boost and think the rules don't apply to them.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

_CJ said:


> How it will play out is that people will continue to buy and ride whatever the hell they feel like, because they're ALL illegal. Legalize class 1, and a significant portion of the people who would have bought a Sur-Ron or something similar will buy a class 1.
> 
> Again, failure to get on board with class 1 will cost legal access to ALL bikes.


Pretty sure e-mtbs are already allowed on these trails, or at least not forbidden. These are county owned, multi use trails, with separate bike/horse trails. We have 4 shops that will sell you a class1. This was only the 4th or 5th e-mtb I've come across so far. Seems that not everyone is satisfied sticking with class1.

I doubt they'll throw the baby out with the bathwater though, as you suggest.... at least we hope not.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Analogy time: When weed was illegal everywhere, the top argument against legalizing it was that it was a "gateway drug". The theory was that people would start with weed, and then start looking for something stronger. Yeah, that didn't happen. In fact, use of stronger drugs dropped, because people decided to use weed legally, instead of heroin, etc. illegally.

The psychology is universal.


----------



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

_CJ said:


> Analogy time: When weed was illegal everywhere, the top argument against legalizing it was that it was a "gateway drug". The theory was that people would start with weed, and then start looking for something stronger. Yeah, that didn't happen. In fact, use of stronger drugs dropped, because people decided to use weed legally, instead of heroin, etc. illegally.
> 
> The psychology is universal.




So ebikes are like weed? I'm in!


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> So ebikes are like weed? I'm in!


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

At least here in Colorado, I have noticed one thing. When e-bikers poach trails, it annoys people (especially mountain bikers) enough to where they start to line up against them and complain to the forest service or the local rangers. I have seen this happen near Lyons where rangers wait for the e-bikers to come back and ticket them. I have seen them verbally harassed on the Colorado Trail. E-bikers may be shooting themselves in the foot by poaching trails. Most trails here on the Front Range are legal for e-bikes, so it isn't like they don't have anywhere to ride. They have a majority of the trails to legally ride but poaching may not help the cause at all.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Extrapolating _CJ’s logic…
First assumption: that ebikes are the same as mountain bikes. 
Second assumption: that pre-legal weed smokers are therefore hypocrites. 
Extrapolated assumption: tobacco cigarettes and marijuana joints are the same thing. (Cuz 95%)

Therefore _CJ’s second assumption above is wrong — those folks were simply unable to tell the difference between tobacco and marijuana. 

And yet _CJ convicted them. Calls them hypocrites. 

Hey _CJ, how about doing likewise for those who can’t tell the difference between a bike with a motor and a bike without one.

_CJ’s case dismissed! Next case!
=sParty


----------



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

_CJ said:


> View attachment 1956086




You might notice that none of my posts voiced any complaints about people riding ebikes on trails illegally.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Flyer said:


> At least here in Colorado, I have noticed one thing. When e-bikers poach trails, it annoys people (especially mountain bikers) enough to where they start to line up against them and complain to the forest service or the local rangers. I have seen this happen near Lyons where rangers wait for the e-bikers to come back and ticket them. I have seen them verbally harassed on the Colorado Trail. E-bikers may be shooting themselves in the foot by poaching trails. Most trails here on the Front Range are legal for e-bikes, so it isn't like they don't have anywhere to ride. They have a majority of the trails to legally ride but poaching may not help the cause at all.


Correction, all of Jefferson County, which has allowed the use of eMTB's for two? three? years now with none of the apocalyptical predictions coming to fruition. Colorado Springs/El Paso County (population one million) has hundreds of miles of MTB trails, but only 18 miles of motorcycle trails, half of which are almost unridable, and one eMTB accessable state park within an hour of it.

More broadly, Colorado has no eMTB access on USFS land, except those trails that allow motorcycles, ATV's and Jeeps. With the exception of a couple state parks that are worth riding, and Jefferson County, there is very little single-track available to eMTB's in Colorado. Yes, motorcycle trails, but after a year of trying to ride those on my eMTB, most just aren't suited to mountain bikes. People shouldn't have to drive hours away from their home to ride their eMTB. Mountain bike trails are where these bikes belong.


.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Based on my e-bike observations.... 1 out of every 5 weed smokers will choose heroin.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

_CJ said:


> ... after a year of trying to ride those on my eMTB, most just aren't suited to mountain bikes.


Do you walk to school or carry your lunch?

If those trails you refer to aren't suited to mountain bikes, then simply keep riding them on your ebike.

_CJ, as you contemplate your reply to my comment above, please remember that I'm an ebike owner. I'm pro-ebike. But you're rapidly making me anti-ebiker -- at least anti-YOU -- through your stubborn obstinance in denying obvious reality. You continue to pledge allegiance to your inability (let's be honest -- your unwillingness) to recognize the difference between a strictly human powered 2-wheeled vehicle and a 2-wheeled vehicle that has an electric motor.

Your argument is utterly lame. In the face of obvious reality and overwhelming evidence, you plug your ears, close your eyes and shake your head in resistance. Like a child would. What you're saying is so obviously wrong that if anyone else made a similar argument about two so dispirate things, you'll wrinkle your brow, shake your head and say, "What's wrong with this person?!" YOU are the very epitome of the biggest problem with ebikers -- not ebikes, EBIKERS -- unwillingness to embrace their vehicle for what it is. An unwillingness to stand up proudly and say, "Yeah, I'm an ebiker. I own an ebike. I love ebikes! They're awesome."

Is the ebike so bad? Are you ashamed of it? You make ebikers look like they have everything to hide. Your attitude is, "No, no! Let's call it a mountain bike. Let's try to convince the planet that the motor isn't there." You -- your lying personality -- gives me cause to be concerned that our sport -- ebiking -- has a long way to go in order to gain respect among other trail users. I thought we were closer. You're absolutely the problem.

If you don't like me calling you the problem, then try to find comfort by telling yourself this: "Being the problem and not being the problem are the same thing."

Now cling to that logic. Simply deny any facts that contradict your misguided rejection of reality.

Oops, never mind. You already do.
=sParty

P.S. To the Mods: NOW how many pre-ban points do I have? Whatever. It was worth it.

P.P.S. I'm heading out for the day to do trail maintenance. I'll be aboard my ebike, which allows me to carry my e-chainsaw, Terra Hoe, Pulaski, lunch, hydration, rain gear, etc many miles into the backcountry. If I find myself banned from MTBR when I return this evening, I'm cool with that. I could use a time out from this place anyway.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

_CJ said:


> Correction, all of Jefferson County, which has allowed the use of eMTB's for two? three? years now with none of the apocalyptical predictions coming to fruition. Colorado Springs/El Paso County (population one million) has hundreds of miles of MTB trails, but only 18 miles of motorcycle trails, half of which are almost unridable, and one eMTB accessable state park within an hour of it.
> 
> More broadly, Colorado has no eMTB access on USFS land, except those trails that allow motorcycles, ATV's and Jeeps. With the exception of a couple state parks that are worth riding, and Jefferson County, there is very little single-track available to eMTB's in Colorado. Yes, motorcycle trails, but after a year of trying to ride those on my eMTB, most just aren't suited to mountain bikes. People shouldn't have to drive hours away from their home to ride their eMTB. Mountain bike trails are where these bikes belong.
> 
> ...


Not aware of any apocalyptic predictions. There are plenty of trails for the to ride in the Denver area...definitely Jeffco is 100% open it seems. Again, the poaching simply hurts their cause. For example, poachers have been spotted several times in Summit and the towns are getting more aggressive about keeping e-bikes off the single track. I certainly don't think that helps them at all. I do have an e-bike, though I do not poach.


----------



## EpicTC (Jun 28, 2009)

Nosdeho said:


> What causing issue in my neck of the woods is e-bikers with zero trail etiquette. Also some of the guys are hacking the e-bikes and getting 25-30 mph thru trails built for pedal bikes. If you actually care about riding your e-bike on trails you are representing a group so remember that when you blast past some old geezer on a mtb.


I find it unfortunate that you're experiencing zero trail etiquette. IMHO that's not poor etiquette from e-bikers but poor etiquette from a person who has no etiquette. 

Example from my recent experience. 
I was riding at a mt bike park near my house, a place where I ride a lot. Due to the variety of features and trail networking there are a lot of families especially on the weekend. 
There are a few sections of this with features that are one way, but the flowy trail is not designated one way. 

On Sunday me and the friends I was riding with encountered three different families riding, two of which had incredible etiquette.
On a section where I and my friends were midst a mellow climb there was a dad and son (maybe 12)coming down(on analog bikes). They had a better opportunity to get off to the side than we did and we technically had the right of way. 
The kid started to get off to the side and the dad said, "Keep going. They're on E-Bikes, make them get off"

IMHO that's a dad teaching his son poor etiquette and bashing a bike, not the rider. Meanwhile I and my friends yielded even though we had the right of way. 

I would also like to note that I was riding with two friends. One was seasoned and the other is her husband, a relatively new rider. We stopped several times during the ride to share bike etiquette tips with him. 
Where to stop, when to stop, etc.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

_CJ said:


> Correction, all of Jefferson County, which has allowed the use of eMTB's for two? three? years now with none of the apocalyptical predictions coming to fruition. Colorado Springs/El Paso County (population one million) has hundreds of miles of MTB trails, but only 18 miles of motorcycle trails, half of which are almost unridable, and one eMTB accessable state park within an hour of it.
> 
> More broadly, Colorado has no eMTB access on USFS land, except those trails that allow motorcycles, ATV's and Jeeps. With the exception of a couple state parks that are worth riding, and Jefferson County, there is very little single-track available to eMTB's in Colorado. Yes, motorcycle trails, but after a year of trying to ride those on my eMTB, most just aren't suited to mountain bikes. People shouldn't have to drive hours away from their home to ride their eMTB. Mountain bike trails are where these bikes belong.
> 
> ...


Ebikes mold very nicely in Bentonville. Just an example. Also, isn’t my license on the bumper man?!


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

_CJ said:


> Correction, all of Jefferson County, which has allowed the use of eMTB's for two? three? years now with none of the apocalyptical predictions coming to fruition. Colorado Springs/El Paso County (population one million) has hundreds of miles of MTB trails, but only 18 miles of motorcycle trails, half of which are almost unridable, and one eMTB accessable state park within an hour of it.
> 
> More broadly, Colorado has no eMTB access on USFS land, except those trails that allow motorcycles, ATV's and Jeeps. With the exception of a couple state parks that are worth riding, and Jefferson County, there is very little single-track available to eMTB's in Colorado. Yes, motorcycle trails, but after a year of trying to ride those on my eMTB, most just aren't suited to mountain bikes. People shouldn't have to drive hours away from their home to ride their eMTB. Mountain bike trails are where these bikes belong.
> 
> ...


Sounds like you and other ebikers have a lot of advocacy to do for your sport. By now it should be pretty obvious that you aren’t going to convince anyone new on this thread to support this cause on the premise that it will “help” mtn bikers by not hurting mtn bikers by losing access due to actions of ebikers.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Flyer said:


> Not aware of any apocalyptic predictions. There are plenty of trails for the to ride in the Denver area...definitely Jeffco is 100% open it seems. Again, the poaching simply hurts their cause. For example, poachers have been spotted several times in Summit and the towns are getting more aggressive about keeping e-bikes off the single track. I certainly don't think that helps them at all. I do have an e-bike, though I do not poach.


See, that's the problem. There's a whole state outside of the Denver metro area. Of course people are poaching trails where they live, because any trail they ride is "poaching", despite the fact they're riding bikes that move at identical speeds, look exactly the same, sound exactly the same, and have the same environmental impact. If it looks like a duck...

This isn't a trail user problem, this is a management problem. It's clear as day to anyone who rides one of these bikes that they should be legal on the same trails as standard MTB's, so guess what? People are going to do what's right, and not what the law tells them is right. As I said in the first post, there is no budget for enforcement, especially with USFS. Their options are to ignore the issue, or close the trail, and which do you think they'll do with a bunch of elitist whiners crying to them about being passed on the climbs?


.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

They don't ride at the same speed uphill or on flats but they certainly are not like dirt bikes either. I caught several on the DH at Kenosha but that was it. I doubt anyone lives there since all of them drove there. I am not sure where else they poach since they are allowed where I live. I'm quite happy with both bikes so the e-bike is not my only bike. I have been mtn biking for a long time and it is my primary (I assume till I'm 70). Poachers may or may not have to pay the price. Some will. Not my problem though I will not be one of them. My regular bike works great too. I don't care to support e-bikers specifically, and certainly will not support poaching. If a trail specifically says "No e-bikes allowed" then e-bikers are poaching. I'm not reporting them but I'm not supporting them either.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Flyer said:


> I'm not reporting them but I'm not supporting them either.


And that's all anyone needs to do. Unfortunately, we have a significant number of non-E riders taking it a step further, and those are the ones who are shooting themselves in the foot.

As for poaching, I don't condone or condemn it, but I understand it, and choose to view it as more of a "peaceful protest" against unjust laws and regulations.


.


----------



## D. Inoobinati (Aug 28, 2020)

_CJ said:


> As for poaching, I don't condone or condemn it, but I understand it, and choose to view it as more of a "peaceful protest" against unjust laws and regulations.


Poor you....so oppressed. So persecuted. So maltreated by a despotic government that limits where you can ride your $10,000 moped.

LOL.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

D. Inoobinati said:


> Poor you....so oppressed. So persecuted. So maltreated by a despotic government that limits where you can ride your $10,000 moped.
> 
> LOL.


Wow, just wow. You are like Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now. Totally lost your mind. Please keep in mind we are talking about bicycles, which no one on here gets paid to ride btw. Also, I have 2 10k mopeds in my shop, Am I twice maltreated?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Or, would you feel better if I was cranking my singlespeed driving a **** box VW and scratching my ass off? If you can’t share the “ cool man, idc what you ride” attitude, then shame on you for calling yourself a cyclist. Let’s not judge people, not cool.


----------



## D. Inoobinati (Aug 28, 2020)

Gutch said:


> If you can’t share the “ cool man, idc what you ride” attitude, then shame on you for calling yourself a cyclist.


WTF are you talking about... I AM a cyclist! You're the jacka55 with the motor.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

D. Inoobinati said:


> WTF are you talking about... I AM a cyclist! You're the jacka55 with the motor.


You can lie to yourself, just not to me.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

_CJ said:


> See, that's the problem. There's a whole state outside of the Denver metro area. Of course people are poaching trails where they live, because any trail they ride is "poaching", despite the fact they're riding bikes that move at identical speeds, look exactly the same, sound exactly the same, and have the same environmental impact. If it looks like a duck...
> 
> This isn't a trail user problem, this is a management problem. It's clear as day to anyone who rides one of these bikes that they should be legal on the same trails as standard MTB's, so guess what? People are going to do what's right, and not what the law tells them is right. As I said in the first post, there is no budget for enforcement, especially with USFS. Their options are to ignore the issue, or close the trail, and which do you think they'll do with a bunch of elitist whiners crying to them about being passed on the climbs?
> 
> ...


Why are you addressing this problem by arguing with a bunch of anonymous people on the internet? I am enjoying following this thread (banter, further articulating my own point of view, learning about the points of view of others) so thanks for creating it and keeping it going. But why not get involved in some pro ebike advocacy? Or maybe you are already?


----------



## CRM6 (Apr 7, 2021)

roughster said:


> .
> Most of you are dinosaurs and irrelevant. Old men shaking fists at the sky as you run around naked beating your … single speed. I’m literally done. As in, leaving the site. Thanks for helping me see this site is an ode to the legacy of MTB and regurgitation of the echoes of past generations. Good luck, I’m out.


Im sure this dude is going to need some physical therapy for his shoulder and back? He patted himself on the back on nearly every response....Geez! Not at all shocked he took his shovel and went home! lol


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

Gutch said:


> Keep in mind it’s very complex


What's so complex about it? We're talking about bikes and sharing, things we all learned in kindergarten. Not my cup of tea, but anyone that cares is just going out of their way, looking to be offended.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Monty219 said:


> Why are you addressing this problem by arguing with a bunch of anonymous people on the internet? I am enjoying following this thread (banter, further articulating my own point of view, learning about the points of view of others) so thanks for creating it and keeping it going. But why not get involved in some pro ebike advocacy? Or maybe you are already?


I'm already involved, detailed a few pages ago. One prevalent road block seems to be that land managers are accustomed to dealing with established MTB clubs, and don't really want another point of contact, or another seat at the table, but in my experience, most MTB clubs are divided on their position at the least, and not representing eMTB fairly or honestly. My group's positions are clear. We advocate for class 1 eMTBs to have access to all the trails that traditional MTB's have access to. There is simply no justifiable reason to exclude them, and in the places they have been allowed, there have been ZERO issues. The only people who fight against eMTBs are anti-bike wildernuts, and elitist mountain bikers. It's odd to see those two groups join forces, but they have a long history of working together against common sense legislation.....most recently exemplified by IMBA stabbing the STC in the back in the halls of congress.

Why post here? These posts are just thought experiments. A way to explore ideas with people familiar with the subject matter. Some people lose their minds, or have difficulty grasping the concepts, and lash out emotionally, and that's fine, off to the "ignore list" they go. Debating the subject matter is one thing, personal attacks are another. It's a shame the moderators let so much of that stuff slide. It's the reason forums in general are dead.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

ebikers making ebikers look bad, this thread here
*
STAHP plz*


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

MTB clubs generally do not want e-bikers at the table. I see why. Our Trail Club is pretty huge and we do allow e-bikes on our trails, but they will not lend support for e-bikes on trails where they are currently not allowed. We will not get involved with the FS or any other land managers in support of e-bikes in those areas. I think e-bikers may have generally overestimated the support regular MTB folks would give them. In my club of maybe 200 -250 riders, the main blocks are poaching and also riders coming in on throttle-only and other powerful e-bikes, besides Class I. So overall, they would prefer to keep e-bikes off land where they are currently not permitted.


----------



## Dirtrider127 (Sep 17, 2010)

UPDATED: Another thread with 26 pages of wasted debate. I'm going to go ride my E bike 
I wish Rodney King was hear to lend his wisdom... "People, I just want to say, can't we all get along? Can't we all get along?"


----------



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

Remember when Yosemite Sam used to accidentally shoot himself in the foot? That was great "I'm the rootinest tootinest cowboy!"


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

_CJ said:


> I'm already involved, detailed a few pages ago. One prevalent road block seems to be that land managers are accustomed to dealing with established MTB clubs, and don't really want another point of contact, or another seat at the table, but in my experience, most MTB clubs are divided on their position at the least, and not representing eMTB fairly or honestly. My group's positions are clear. We advocate for class 1 eMTBs to have access to all the trails that traditional MTB's have access to. There is simply no justifiable reason to exclude them, and in the places they have been allowed, there have been ZERO issues. The only people who fight against eMTBs are anti-bike wildernuts, and elitist mountain bikers. It's odd to see those two groups join forces, but they have a long history of working together against common sense legislation.....most recently exemplified by IMBA stabbing the STC in the back in the halls of congress.
> 
> Why post here? These posts are just thought exercises. A way to explore ideas with people familiar with the subject matter. Some people lose their minds, or have difficulty grasping the concepts, and lash out emotionally, and that's fine, off to the "ignore list" they go. Debating the subject matter is one thing, personal attacks are another. It's a shame the moderators let so much of that stuff slide. It's the reason forums in general are dead.


I couldn’t really gauge your tone and your Red Foreman avatar seemed to convey some grumpyness. I enjoy the debate too, didnt intend a personal attack, just wanted to know where you are coming from. I appreciate your reply.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Flyer said:


> MTB clubs generally do not want e-bikers at the table. I see why. Our Trail Club is pretty huge and we do allow e-bikes on our trails, but they will not lend support for e-bikes on trails where they are currently not allowed. We will not get involved with the FS or any other land managers in support of e-bikes in those areas. I think e-bikers may have generally overestimated the support regular MTB folks would give them. In my club of maybe 200 -250 riders, the main blocks are poaching and also riders coming in on throttle-only and other powerful e-bikes, besides Class I. So overall, they would prefer to keep e-bikes off land where they are currently not permitted.


Not supporting, and actively working against are two different things. Unfortunately, many see the latter as their responsibility, and it's going to come back to haunt them. Not only in the possibility of trails being closed to ALL bikes (which is really what the wilder-nuts IMBA clubs are holding hands with want), but actively working against E access is going to impact their membership numbers going forward. People aren't going to forget who was standing in the way five years from now, when most trails are open to eMTBs.

These bikes aren't going anywhere. People are going to continue to buy them, and continue to ride them where their use is appropriate. Eventually, land managers are going to have to bend, and it's going to have to be on traditional MTB trails. Higher powered bikes are coming down the pike too, but if we give people an option of being legal with a lower powered bike, or illegal with a higher powered bike, many/most are going to choose the lower powered option. Of course, the longer this drags on, and the longer we wait to include class1, the more people will invest in higher powered bikes, and they're likely to hang on to those bikes for a while, so the problem will get much worse (more trails closed) before it gets better.



.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

_CJ said:


> Not supporting, and actively working against are two different things. Unfortunately, many see the latter as their responsibility, and it's going to come back to haunt them. Not only in the possibility of trails being closed to ALL bikes (which is really what the wilder-nuts IMBA clubs are holding hands with want), but actively working against E access is going to impact their membership numbers going forward. People aren't going to forget who was standing in the way five years from now, when most trails are open to eMTBs.
> 
> These bikes aren't going anywhere. People are going to continue to buy them, and continue to ride them where their use is appropriate. Eventually, land managers are going to have to bend, and it's going to have to be on traditional MTB trails. Higher powered bikes are coming down the pike too, but if we give people an option of being legal with a lower powered bike, or illegal with a higher powered bike, many/most are going to choose the lower powered option. Of course, the longer this drags on, and the longer we wait to include class1, the more people will invest in higher powered bikes, and they're likely to hang on to those bikes for a while, so the problem will get much worse (more trails closed) before it gets better.
> 
> ...


I agree. We are not riding on coat tail ****, btw we ride mtbs also or have in the past. Yes, they have motors, 1hp. Look at Bentonville Arkansas. Businesses flourishing, destination spot etc. Ebike friendly. The majority of mtbrs feel this way, so, let it go Phil?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

_CJ said:


> Not supporting, and actively working against are two different things. .


Hooray for another rare voice of reason.

I've always said I'm cool with e-bikes, I just don't want to be forced to take the job of spearheading the fight for them.

Seems that to a large percentage of e-bike riders, that makes me a 'hater' and a 'dinosaur', or stupidest of all an 'acoustic biker'. 🤡 
That sort of idiocy tends to breed negativity, with good reason. Just look at this thread - you'll see e-bikers shooting themselves in the foot all over the place.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

slapheadmofo said:


> Hooray for another rare voice of reason.
> 
> I've always said I'm cool with e-bikes, I just don't want to be forced to take the job of spearheading the fight for them.
> 
> ...


I agree, not that it matters in the field! All ebikers please start by mtb - emtb. That’s what they are. Acoustic or whatever drives me nutz!


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I agree, not that it matters in the field! All ebikers please start by mtb - emtb. That’s what they are. Acoustic or whatever drives me nutz!


HATER!!!!

 🍻


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

slapheadmofo said:


> Hooray for another rare voice of reason.
> 
> I've always said I'm cool with e-bikes, I just don't want to be forced to take the job of spearheading the fight for them.
> 
> ...


Likewise.

In the '80s & '90s I struggled locally to help the sport of mountain biking grow responsibly. Started a mountain bike club in '87 which eventually became as much a trail stewardship organization as a riding group. (Link in my sig.) That club still goes strong.

I'm all for ebikes but ebikes are relatively new. The sport of ebiking is young. Since it seems that not all ebikers are familiar with things like trail etiquette and trail building / maintenance obligations (ie: dig to ride), I say let the ebike segment grow under its own power. Let the ebikers prove their sport deserves a place on shared trails just like mountain bikers did. If they (okay, we) get it, then we ought to be respected by having earned our backcountry rights -- same as any other responsible new trail user group.

And I hope ebikers do just that.

But obviously (based on what I've stated previously in this thread) if ebikers just show up at the door claiming, "We're mountain bikers -- let us in!", I'm going to say, "No, you're not mountain bikers. You've got motors and until you show up at a dig day or twelve, I don't know whether or not your intentions include giving back to the trails."

This is part of the reason I differentiate between the sports of mountain biking and ebiking. (The other part, obviously, is that the machines are fundamentally different due to the motor.) Anyway ebikes don't damage trails any more than mountain bikers do. But what about ebikers (the riders themselves)? As a group, do they get it? Do they contribute? Do they dig? What does their demographic look like? Responsible? Givers or takers? Reasonable or unreasonable?

The last distinction is the first indicator to me. If they don't see themselves as ebikers (riding a 2-wheeled vehicle that includes a motor), then I consider them unreasonable. I don't trust unreasonable people -- regardless of what they ride.
=sParty


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Sparticus said:


> Likewise.
> 
> In the '80s & '90s I struggled locally to help the sport of mountain biking grow responsibly. Started a mountain bike club in '87 which eventually became as much a trail stewardship organization as a riding group. (Link in my sig.) That club still goes strong.
> 
> ...


I’ve never dug. But I do allow riders to ride on my property up north, mtbs, dirt bikes, quads, sleds, whatever. I also “used to” donate to IMBA. Now it’s my local chapter. I’m guessing 99% of riders don’t do shovel work.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Gutch said:


> I’ve never dug. But I do allow riders to ride on my property up north, mtbs, dirt bikes, quads, sleds, whatever. I also “used to” donate to IMBA. Now it’s my local chapter. I’m guessing 99% of riders don’t do shovel work.


I believe the percentage is better where I live, Gutch, but that’s not really all that important IRL. In my book, all that has to happen for a group to gain respect is this: if a large enough number (not percentage) of participants of a particular sport show up to help maintain trails, then they’re good to go.

It doesn’t take a big percentage for a group, as a whole, to carry their weight.

This is one of the main reasons I oppose equestrians on our local trails — as a group they don’t give back. I’ve worked side by side with individual equestrians — exactly 2 equestrians during my 35+ years of mountain biking and trailworking — enough to know that not ALL equestrians are overweight, lazy takers. But as a group, in my opinion that’s what the vast majority of equestrians are. Lazy takers.

What about ebikers — as a group? I believe many of the rest of us are watching. And waiting.

Those of us with open minds are watching and waiting, anyway. Initially many mountain bikers just said, “Ebikes? Hard no!” from the get go. But even though I started out in that group, as soon as I threw a leg over an ebike and discovered that it’s not a roosting, trail shredding machine, I changed my tune.

There’s nothing wrong with ebikes themselves. Now let’s consider the people who ride them — as a group.

Givers? Takers? Accountable?

The jury is out.
=sParty


----------



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

Sparticus said:


> This is one of the main reasons I oppose equestrians on our local trails — as a group they don’t give back. I’ve worked side by side with individual equestrians — exactly 2 equestrians during my 35+ years of mountain biking and trailworking — enough to know that not ALL equestrians are overweight, lazy takers. But as a group, in my opinion that’s what the vast majority of equestrians are. Lazy takers.




It's the exact opposite where I'm at. On any given trail maintenance day equestrians outnumber mountain bikers 10/1. Making us look bad.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

J.B. Weld said:


> It's the exact opposite where I'm at. On any given trail maintenance day equestrians outnumber mountain bikers 10/1. Making us look bad.


Good for them — that’s terrific.
No doubt this varies regionally.
Meanwhile around here the trail destroyers don’t seem to want to lift a finger to mitigate the destruction that they & their beasts of burden bring.
I wish they did — I’d enjoy working with them.*
=sParty

*As I would anyone who wants to build or maintain trails, including my fellow ebikers.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

Sparticus said:


> the trail destroyers


Another point… i find the “only 1 horse power” argument - which is intended to imply the impact of ebikes to be minimal - to be weak. The power of 1 horse sure does a heck of a lot more trail damage than 1 (or many) bikes. I am not drawing conclusions about the impact of 1 horsepower ebikes, just saying lets drop the weak arguments so we can get to the truth. My biggest concern always came from the unknown (to me). Will ebikes tear the **** out of the trails? I hope not, have no problem with them if not, and thankfully that sounds like the case according to both sides of the argument on this thread.


----------



## CRM6 (Apr 7, 2021)

Monty219 said:


> Another point… i find the “only 1 horse power” argument - which is intended to imply the impact of ebikes to be minimal - to be weak. The power of 1 horse sure does a heck of a lot more trail damage than 1 (or many) bikes. I am not drawing conclusions about the impact of 1 horsepower ebikes, just saying lets drop the weak arguments so we can get to the truth. My biggest concern always came from the unknown (to me). Will ebikes tear the **** out of the trails? I hope not, have no problem with them if not, and thankfully that sounds like the case according to both sides of the argument on this thread.


Class1 Ebikes don't harm the trail.....


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

CRM6 said:


> Class ! Ebikes don't harm the trail.....


I’m not saying they do… or dont. I dont have an ebike or ride trails with lots of ebikers so i am saying my best info (they do not) comes from this thread. Just pointing out the “only 1 horsepower” argument is flawed. The power of 1 horse can do significant trail damage. A class 1 ebike, i guess not according to folks on this thread.


----------



## CRM6 (Apr 7, 2021)

.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

If I understand correctly, 1HP does not equal the power of 1 horse.
Or at doesn't do the damage of 1 horse.
=sParty


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

😉


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Sparticus said:


> I say let the ebike segment grow under its own power.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

Sparticus said:


> If I understand correctly, 1HP does not equal the power of 1 horse.
> Or at doesn't do the damage of 1 horse.
> =sParty


Agreed, just saying “only 1 HP” isn’t a great argument. Consider it constructive feedback for the pro ebike crowd..?


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Monty219 said:


> I’m not saying they do… or dont. I dont have an ebike or ride trails with lots of ebikers so i am saying my best info (they do not) comes from this thread. Just pointing out the “only 1 horsepower” argument is flawed. The power of 1 horse can do significant trail damage. A class 1 ebike, i guess not according to folks on this thread.


My 1hp comment is not an argument, rather a statistic. Sigan, Cavendish etc.. can all do it!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

One horsepower isn't much at all for a motor. But it is the equivalent of the power or 10 people. This is over a long period, a horse can briefly output way more than one horsepower and a very strong rider can briefly output a little more than one horsepower.

It is the amount of torque that would or would not damage the trail.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I believe most emtb’s are glued to the trail. Less spinning and better braking. That has been my experience after owning a few.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

From where I sit, on our trails, erosion is a non issue. 
It's the fear of a head in collision, particularly for my wife & kid that is the real danger. We have very poor sight distances very often. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Suns_PSD said:


> From where I sit, on our trails, erosion is a non issue.
> It's the fear of a head in collision, particularly for my wife & kid that is the real danger. We have very poor sight distances very often.


That's all about the rider and zero about the vehicle.
Take this from a dirt biker that rides multi-directional trails.
=sParty


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Suns_PSD said:


> From where I sit, on our trails, erosion is a non issue.
> It's the fear of a head in collision, particularly for my wife & kid that is the real danger. We have very poor sight distances very often.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


I hear ya. I’ve ridden mtb at some places that I wouldn’t allow them at all. Way to many other trail users, especially tourists, they are the worst


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Worst case: a tourist riding a horse


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Sparticus said:


> If I understand correctly, 1HP does not equal the power of 1 horse.
> Or at doesn't do the damage of 1 horse.
> =sParty


You understand correctly.

1 horsepower + 746 watts.

I doesn't have any meaningful relevance to an actual horse.
Mountain bikers might put out a couple hundred watts (ish).




chazpat said:


> One horsepower isn't much at all for a motor. But it is the equivalent of the power or 10 people. This is over a long period, a horse can briefly output way more than one horsepower and a very strong rider can briefly output a little more than one horsepower.


Not really.









Does one horsepower really equal the power of one horse? - Car Keys


Your car's power output can be measured in a variety of ways, with horsepower being the most common. But does one horsepower really equal the power of one horse?




www.carkeys.co.uk


----------



## mtbbiker (Apr 8, 2004)

Sorry guys, I've only looked at the last few comments. What I usually notice is most people who have not tried an ebike focuses on the 20mph and 1hp=750watts. I reality hitting 20mph only occurs on the road to the trails, flat fire road trails, or roads with slight grades, or wide open down hill style trails. All other places, we are only a few MPH faster, we just don't get as tired. 

The most I've seen my Levo put out is just over 550watts, so not even 1hp and that was not very long as just like anything else, it takes alot of the rider's energy to keep it at that level. Remember these ebikes are pedal assist and only add a little power if you pedal and will only add more power only as the rider exerts more power. There is only so much a rider can put out before you have to back off. The same rules that apply to any rider when it comes to max power and speed applies to ebike riders. Just a thought.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)




----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Gutch said:


> View attachment 1956511


I hope Kittel doesn’t ride an emtb, he’d be slowed up!


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Sparticus said:


> That's all about the rider and zero about the vehicle.
> Take this from a dirt biker that rides multi-directional trails.
> =sParty


Most riders are going to pedal at that 60% exertion level when cruising along the trails, I think that's pretty normal. That will naturally lead to much higher speeds on an e-bike. It would be super boring if you say used 20% exertion on those same trails to match a bicycles typical speed. It really looks like you aren't going too fast, right up until at the exact wrong moment someone is coming the wrong way. Furthermore, less experienced people can go much faster than their legs would ever carry them.

I mentioned a story sometime back where my daughter and I encountered a high end Santa Cruz e-bike head on while riding very green XC trails where at times you can't see but 15' in front of you right next to my home (SATN for those that know it), he was scooting along, locked up only his rear brake, and skidded past my daughter and I at least 20' while we were dead stopped pulled to the right. He was a 200+ # man on a 55# bike and my daughter was 45#s on a 24" bike very low to the ground. My daughter could have easily received a TBI or any number of severe injuries if this impact had been head on, that's just physics. The guy wasn't a jerk intentionally and he yelled a heartfelt 'sorry!' but what good would that do my daughter or wife if he plowed in to them going 15 mph?

It's worth mentioning again that in my bike travels in the mountains I've experienced places where the bike trails are 1 way, usually a boring road climb that takes way too long, followed by a fun downhill only trail. E-bikes make great sense in places like this, no harm caused. I support you fully. Also Roughster's trails look very open with huge sight distances and from what I've seen, no harm caused there. We have some private ranches also with boring tough climbs & 1 way descents. But the vast majority of our trails are 2 ways, limited sight distances, some of them are becoming very crowded, etc. These e-bikes are just NOT safe to other trail users in most of CTX. They make it too easy to go too fast, often with little experience or fitness.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Suns_PSD said:


> Most riders are going to pedal at that 60% exertion level when cruising along the trails, I think that's pretty normal. That will naturally lead to much higher speeds on an e-bike. It would be super boring if you say used 20% exertion on those same trails to match a bicycles typical speed. It really looks like you aren't going too fast, right up until at the exact wrong moment someone is coming the wrong way. Furthermore, less experienced people can go much faster than their legs would ever carry them.
> 
> I mentioned a story sometime back where my daughter and I encountered a high end Santa Cruz e-bike head on while riding very green XC trails where at times you can't see but 15' in front of you right next to my home (SATN for those that know it), he was scooting along, locked up only his rear brake, and skidded past my daughter and I at least 20' while we were dead stopped pulled to the right. He was a 200+ # man on a 55# bike and my daughter was 45#s on a 24" bike very low to the ground. My daughter could have easily received a TBI or any number of severe injuries if this impact had been head on, that's just physics. The guy wasn't a jerk intentionally and he yelled a heartfelt 'sorry!' but what good would that do my daughter or wife if he plowed in to them going 15 mph?
> 
> It's worth mentioning again that in my bike travels in the mountains I've experienced places where the bike trails are 1 way, usually a boring road climb that takes way too long, followed by a fun downhill only trail. E-bikes make great sense in places like this, no harm caused. I support you fully. Also Roughster's trails look very open with huge sight distances and from what I've seen, no harm caused there. We have some private ranches also with boring tough climbs & 1 way descents. But the vast majority of our trails are 2 ways, limited sight distances, some of them are becoming very crowded, etc. These e-bikes are just NOT safe to other trail users in most of CTX. They make it too easy to go too fast, often with little experience or fitness.


Nothing you say here contradicts what I said in my reply that you quoted.
=sParty


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Well except you just ignore the reality that the average ebike user is going to be traveling a lot faster than the average bicyclist.
Frankly if people didn't go faster on an e-bike, they wouldn't even buy them, obviously. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

mtbbiker said:


> Sorry guys, I've only looked at the last few comments. What I usually notice is most people who have not tried an ebike focuses on the 20mph and 1hp=750watts. I reality hitting 20mph only occurs on the road to the trails, flat fire road trails, or roads with slight grades, or wide open down hill style trails. All other places, we are only a few MPH faster, we just don't get as tired.
> 
> The most I've seen my Levo put out is just over 550watts, so not even 1hp and that was not very long as just like anything else, it takes alot of the rider's energy to keep it at that level. Remember these ebikes are pedal assist and only add a little power if you pedal and will only add more power only as the rider exerts more power. There is only so much a rider can put out before you have to back off. The same rules that apply to any rider when it comes to max power and speed applies to ebike riders. Just a thought.


What will 750 watts on a class 1 accomplish? With the current class 1 bikes at 250W (I think) already hitting the max allowed 20mph, since the 750 would have the same cut-off and I guess they are all torque limited (right? don't electric motors have very high torque if unrestricted?), are there any advantages to 750W over the current bikes?

Also, my understanding of the 20mph max is based on a 170lb rider. What does a 85lb kid top out at? Just curious.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

If it had been left up to me, and I don't know why it wasn't, emtbs would have only assisted on climbs, that's it. That would make them much more of a mountain bike experience and less of a motorized experience while offering some assist to those that need it. Sorry, Gutch!


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Suns_PSD said:


> Well except you just ignore the reality that the average ebike user is going to be traveling a lot faster than the average bicyclist.
> Frankly if people didn't go faster on an e-bike, they wouldn't even buy them, obviously.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


A lot faster? Negative. On the ups, for sure but they gotta yield to down anyways. I ride with guys on mtbs all the time.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> What will 750 watts on a class 1 accomplish? With the current class 1 bikes at 250W (I think) already hitting the max allowed 20mph, since the 750 would have the same cut-off and I guess they are all torque limited (right? don't electric motors have very high torque if unrestricted?), are there any advantages to 750W over the current bikes?
> 
> Also, my understanding of the 20mph max is based on a 170lb rider. What does a 85lb kid top out at? Just curious.


20mph. The engine shuts off and it’s very hard to pedal beyond that. Sometimes it slows you down over a mtb on some long downhills


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Suns_PSD said:


> Well except you just ignore the reality that the average ebike user is going to be traveling a lot faster than the average bicyclist.
> Frankly if people didn't go faster on an e-bike, they wouldn't even buy them, obviously.


I don't mean to be argumentative.
I have a 74 y/o riding buddy who rides both mountain bike and ebike. Whenever he's astride his ebike, he rides at the back of the pack. He doesn't go any faster than the human powered bikers he's riding with.
I'm saying it's a rider thing, not a machine thing.
I agree with you that an ebike can go faster than a mountain bike (up to 20mph, when the motor cuts out).
But nobody has to. Doing so is a human decision.
My car can go well over 100mph.
It hasn't.
And it's a 2013 model. Eight years of not doing that.
People are in control... or they choose not to be.
Whatever happens is not the machine's fault, regardless how tempting it is to abuse a situation.
That's all I'm saying.
=sParty


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I think a lot of people don’t understand that when you ride a mtb, your pushing trying to go as fast and hard as you can. When you’re riding an Ebike you don’t have to. The extra power is there when you want it. Most ebike riders don’t get on and hit turbo until there ride is complete. I’m guessing 75% ride in Eco-trail, mostly.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

chazpat said:


> If it had been left up to me, and I don't know why it wasn't, emtbs would have only assisted on climbs, that's it. That would make them much more of a mountain bike experience and less of a motorized experience while offering some assist to those that need it. Sorry, Gutch!


Hahahaha, I’m always riding full gas🤣btw, that bike would suck!


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Monty219 said:


> Agreed, just saying “only 1 HP” isn’t a great argument. Consider it constructive feedback for the pro ebike crowd..?


FYI: the maximum output of a horse can be up to *15 horsepower*, and the maximum output of a human is a bit more than a single horsepower.

The point of saying "only 1 HP" is that it's no more than a human, and is in no way comparable to a motorcycle as many claim, as most off road motorcycles have 30-45hp. Mine old dirt bike had 15hp, and it was still in a different universe than the power supplied by my class 1 eMTB.


----------



## mtbbiker (Apr 8, 2004)

chazpat said:


> What will 750 watts on a class 1 accomplish? With the current class 1 bikes at 250W (I think) already hitting the max allowed 20mph, since the 750 would have the same cut-off and I guess they are all torque limited (right? don't electric motors have very high torque if unrestricted?), are there any advantages to 750W over the current bikes?
> 
> Also, my understanding of the 20mph max is based on a 170lb rider. What does a 85lb kid top out at? Just curious.


Rider weight doesn’t matter, ebike control unit stops motor power at 20mph. 

Ebike motors do not have a torque limit, but all do limit torque so the motors do not blow up. Shimano EP8 = 85nm, Bosch 85nm, Brose 90 nm and Rocky Mountain 105. The more toque = faster battery drain. Again to see these max torque values, a rider is putting out a lot of their own energy, so they won’t be able to stay at these max figures for long. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



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

[QUOTE="_CJ, p
The point of saying "only 1 HP" is that it's no more than a human, and is in no way comparable to a motorcycle as many claim, as most off road motorcycles have 30-45hp.
[/QUOTE]



That's not exactly true. The average cyclist can hold 700w for maybe 5-10 seconds whereas a 1 hp motor can do that until it runs out of fuel.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Suns_PSD said:


> Well except you just ignore the reality that the average ebike user is going to be traveling a lot faster than the average bicyclist.
> Frankly if people didn't go faster on an e-bike, they wouldn't even buy them, obviously.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


"a lot faster"....depends how you define that I guess. It's not uncommon that I go up climbs "twice as fast" on my E as I do on my analog, but in absolute terms, it's a difference of 3-5mph. Not even close to being enough to make any difference at all to any other trail user, and still not as fast as the pro riders in my area on their analog bikes when they're trying to set a new Strava record. At some point, the trail becomes the limiting factor for speed, not the bike, or the person riding it.

I posted this elsewhere, but it got locked down, so I'll repost here for your review. Same route, same rider, same "fast recreational" pace on each bike. Average power for the E was only 55 watts higher, average speed was only 2.8 mph faster.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> That's not exactly true. The average cyclist can hold 700w for maybe 5-10 seconds whereas a 1 hp motor can do that until it runs out of fuel.


Doesn't matter. It's 1/15th of even the weakest motorcycle. They aren't comparable, at all. Compared to a human, again it doesn't matter, because nobody rides at max output on the trail for more than 5-10 seconds because the technical nature of the trail won't allow it. You'll run out of skills before you run out of power.

Also, no class 1 bikes actually make 750 watts, even the most powerful is 560watts PEAK, which means it can only do it for a limited time. 250 watts is the max power than can generate for a sustained period of time, kind of like an average cyclist. Note that pro level cyclists routinely average 300+ watts over an entire race, with peaks of over 1500 watts.

At the end of the day, NONE of this matters. It's all semantics. Average speeds are nearly identical, noise is virtually identical, environmental impact is identical. There is no legitimate or justifiable reason to exclude class 1 eMTB's from traditional MTB trails.


----------



## mtbbiker (Apr 8, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> [QUOTE="_CJ, p
> The point of saying "only 1 HP" is that it's no more than a human, and is in no way comparable to a motorcycle as many claim, as most off road motorcycles have 30-45hp.




That's not exactly true. The average cyclist can hold 700w for maybe 5-10 seconds whereas a 1 hp motor can do that until it runs out of fuel.[/QUOTE]

I can tell you don’t quite understand a class 1 pedal assist ebike. You can’t get 1hp=750watts plus all class 1 that I can think of are at 550watts peak meaning the motor is only there for a moment plus the rider will also need to be at their peak output to reach the motor’s peak output. Once the rider can’t hold their own peak power, the ebike goes back to much lower watts. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

You don't understand class 1 bikes, but you're an E moderator? How's that work? Do you even own an Ebike?


.


----------



## RBoardman (Dec 27, 2014)

chazpat said:


> If it had been left up to me, and I don't know why it wasn't, emtbs would have only assisted on climbs, that's it. That would make them much more of a mountain bike experience and less of a motorized experience while offering some assist to those that need it. Sorry, Gutch!


90% of that trails I ride are steep enough where I’m not putting in a single pedal stroke on the way down. So the only difference I notice is a 55lbs bike vs a 35lbs one. And for me, I don’t have a problem with that.


----------



## RBoardman (Dec 27, 2014)

Suns_PSD said:


> Well except you just ignore the reality that the average ebike user is going to be traveling a lot faster than the average bicyclist.
> Frankly if people didn't go faster on an e-bike, they wouldn't even buy them, obviously.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


On over half my ebike rides I travel at the same rate of speed as a normal bike. But I choose to ride my ebike because it take far less fitness to do so, which allows me to enjoy the riding more.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

_CJ said:


> "a lot faster"....depends how you define that I guess. It's not uncommon that I go up climbs "twice as fast" on my E as I do on my analog, but in absolute terms, it's a difference of 3-5mph. Not even close to being enough to make any difference at all to any other trail user, and still not as fast as the pro riders in my area on their analog bikes when they're trying to set a new Strava record. At some point, the trail becomes the limiting factor for speed, not the bike, or the person riding it.
> 
> I posted this elsewhere, but it got locked down, so I'll repost here for your review. Same route, same rider, same "fast recreational" pace on each bike. Average power for the E was only 55 watts higher, average speed was only 2.8 mph faster.
> 
> View attachment 1956522


Once again, 90% of our trails are not like that. We usually don't have a steady climb followed by a steady descent.

Our trails mostly undulate up and down constantly, and it's quite rough. Most good riders have a hard time maintaining more than about a 6-8 mph average. Going 2x as fast on the ups creates a significant difference in speeds. An unskilled/ unfit rider would likely go from walking a lot of it to now going 6 mph. It's a HUGE difference for an unskilled rider and for other trail users.

E-bikes sound appropriate for your trails, but not CTX trails.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Suns_PSD said:


> Once again, 90% of our trails are not like that. We usually don't have a steady climb followed by a steady descent.
> 
> Our trails mostly undulate up and down constantly, and it's quite rough. Most good riders have a hard time maintaining more than about a 6-8 mph average. Going 2x as fast on the ups creates a significant difference in speeds. An unskilled/ unfit rider would likely go from walking a lot of it to now going 6 mph. It's a HUGE difference for an unskilled rider and for other trail users.
> 
> E-bikes sound appropriate for your trails, but not CTX trails.


Sorry, 6mph is not "too fast", it's not even beyond running pace, it's only 3mph faster than walking pace for Christ's sake, and poses zero risk to the average trail user. And why the assumption any rider is "unskilled" based on their use of an eMTB? The vast majority are seasoned veterans of the sport.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

_CJ said:


> Sorry, 6mph is not "too fast", it's not even beyond running pace, it's only 3mph faster than walking pace for Christ's sake, and poses zero risk to the average trail user. And why the assumption any rider is "unskilled" based on their use of an eMTB? The vast majority are seasoned veterans of the sport.


You're not paying attention, _CJ. He said ebikers go twice that fast on the ups. Which they do.
As for your conclusion about which demographic comprises the sport of ebiking, how do you know?


_CJ said:


> At the end of the day, NONE of this matters. It's all semantics.


No it's not. I ride an ebike too, remember? And I DO go a lot faster on it than I do on my mountain bike. Particularly uphill. But on level ground, too. Downhill, I'm faster on the human powered mountain bike because, well, the additional 20ish pounds of the ebike make it handle poorly by comparison. The ebike's weight also makes it less fun to fly, land, etc. The mountain bike is much more flickable, maneuverable, responsive -- making it easier to pilot down local narrow, feature-laden singletrack.
I'm not saying your statement above is entirely wrong, rather that it's not all semantics as you said. There are differences beyond semantics. And as was pointed out a few posts back, if a rider -- the human part of the ebike -- wants to abuse that power, there most certainly are ways to do so. Overriding sight lines and/or abilities is indeed tempting aboard any machine that magnifies human power. Someone who comes to ebiking without going through mountain biking along the way might not understand multi-user singletrack etiquette as it relates to safety & speed. They may get caught up in the pure fun of going as fast as they can through the forest, Jedi-speeder-like.


_CJ said:


> Average speeds are nearly identical


Could be but not for most of the ebikers I know. Those that ride in groups tend to ride with a similar attitude that mountain bikers ride with, this being: if I'm at the front, I'm going to try to get away from you. If you're at the front, I'm going to try not to let you get away. This testosterone-fueled game is fun to play regardless of which 2-wheeled contraption riders choose to play it aboard. But when this game is played aboard ebikes, speeds definitely go up compared to mountain bikes.


_CJ said:


> noise is virtually identical, environmental impact is identical


Not identical and you know it. But close enough to not matter. I'm just saying there's a difference, maybe a slight difference but you lose credibility when you say something is identical and it's not. Don't exaggerate. Calls everything you say into question.


_CJ said:


> There is no legitimate or justifiable reason to exclude class 1 eMTB's from traditional MTB trails.


No disagreement here. I just wish you hadn't blown your cred before you expressed this conclusion. I suggest you try sticking strictly to the truth; you'll find more people willing to listen to you.
=sParty


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> I think a lot of people don’t understand that when you ride a mtb, your pushing trying to go as fast and hard as you can. When you’re riding an Ebike you don’t have to. The extra power is there when you want it. Most ebike riders don’t get on and hit turbo until there ride is complete. I’m guessing 75% ride in Eco-trail, mostly.


This is the polar opposite of my philosophy.

I cruise on my MTB, but make it easier to go fast and I'm taking advantage of every bit of motor assist I can get.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

mtbbiker said:


> Remember these ebikes are pedal assist and only add a little power if you pedal and will only add more power only as the rider exerts more power. There is only so much a rider can put out before you have to back off. The same rules that apply to any rider when it comes to max power and speed applies to ebike riders. Just a thought.


So you're saying there's no adjustment as far as how much assist they provide beyond whatever 'a little' is, and no such thing as cadence sensing anymore?

The rules as far as max power appear to be that a class 1 e-bike doubles it, roughly, and that while max speed isn't affected, overall average speeds are higher.

So, not really the same rules, right?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

_CJ said:


> While riding my eMTB yesterday, I passed by a trail that had a new "no e-bikes" sign attached to the trail marker that's been there for decades. It looked to have been installed by a private party, not the forest service, and it got me wondering what the end game will be in this struggle for access.
> 
> Will funding for enforcement suddenly materialize, causing ebikers to avoid these trails? Not likely.
> Will ebikers with severely limited access in many areas stay off trails like these? Not likely.
> ...


I have no desire to read 574 posts. I read the first one and the irony is amazing. Do you not realize this is EXACTLY why mountain bikers wanted absolutely nothing to do with ebikes? As you said Land Managers have neither the time, resources, money or knowledge to enforce ebike rules. So, the easiest way out is to ban all bikers. Hence, the hate. As you pointed out, here we are. Unfortunately for you, there's still an easy answer. The banning of ALL motorized access, of any type. But, people are generally assholes and will poach the trails anyway. 

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


----------



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

mtbbiker said:


> That's not exactly true. The average cyclist can hold 700w for maybe 5-10 seconds whereas a 1 hp motor can do that until it runs out of fuel.


I can tell you don’t quite understand a class 1 pedal assist ebike. You can’t get 1hp=750watts plus all class 1 that I can think of are at 550watts peak meaning the motor is only there for a moment plus the rider will also need to be at their peak output to reach the motor’s peak output. Once the rider can’t hold their own peak power, the ebike goes back to much lower watts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[/QUOTE]





That's not true and all class 1 ebikes are created equally. There are some really steep hills nearby me that require about 300w to do maybe 7mph and on many class 1 ebikes I can cruise up those same hills @15 mph while barely pedaling, pushing less than 100w for sure. Probably even less than 50.

Not saying that most class 1's are terribly different on the trail but the disingenuousness of some arguments bothers me some I guess.


----------



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

slapheadmofo said:


> So you're saying there's no adjustment as far as how much assist they provide beyond whatever 'a little' is, and no such thing as cadence sensing anymore?
> 
> The rules as far as max power appear to be that a class 1 e-bike doubles it, roughly, and that while max speed isn't affected, overall average speeds are higher.
> 
> So, not really the same rules, right?



Exactly. There are no rules about how the assist is delivered and some require you to only turn the crank forward to get full assist.

Again, if that's your bag I got no problem with it at all. Just saying.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

slapheadmofo said:


> This is the polar opposite of my philosophy.
> 
> I cruise on my MTB, but make it easier to go fast and I'm taking advantage of every bit of motor assist I can get.


Same here. I have mountain bikes for when I want to pedal.

When I’m astride my ebike, it’s TURBO TIME! I’m looking for a whole different ride.

That said, I find my mountain bike far more rewarding to ride. More enjoyable, too. No motor whine, just me and the forest. No feeling like I’m not getting the lung busting, leg searing workout that I traditionally get while visiting my local singletracks with a human-only powered thing.

Aboard the ebike, I’m flying up the hills, thinking about the next trail junction. The future rather than the present. But when I’m on my mountain bike, I’m enjoying the forest, the ambiance, the friends I’m riding with (assuming I’m not riding solo) — the universe just feels more ’in balance” when I’m riding my trusty ol’ human powered mountain bike.

Not saying I don’t like my ebike — I do. It’s just… not quite as rewarding an experience. Feels like something’s missing.

But when I ride it I don’t wreck anything for anybody else and I don’t damage the trails. In fact I use my ebike for hauling my trail tool laden BOB trailer to do trailwork as much as I do for straight up fun riding. For those who feel ebiking is the end all — superior to mountain biking — that’s cool too.
=sParty


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> the disingenuousness of some arguments bothers me some I guess.


This is and has been my entire issue with e-bikers since day one.

Take a lesson from guys like Sparty and Gutch, stop trying to push a bunch of made up and/or convoluted BS and just own the fact that an e-bike is an e-bike, which makes it different than a mountain bike. Not so hard.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

_CJ said:


> There is no legitimate or justifiable reason to exclude class 1 eMTB's from traditional MTB trails.


Of course there is. We have an entire country at each other's throats, mostly due to what the other camp believes in, not because of what they have. I KNOW that your ebike is a motorized vehicle and believe it shouldn't be on non-motorized trails. So do A LOT of people. The concept of Non-motorized trail/land designation is an ethos that is really important to many, many people. Ebikes, on an ethical level, represent a pandora's box. I don't care if ebikes are proven to have LESS trail impact than a normal mtb. They're still motorized, and people justifiably do not want motorized travel in places that are supposed to be devoid of motorized recreation. IF ebikes were somehow shown to be the cure for cancer, brought about world peace, and prevented any further baby seals from being clubbed (for sport no less), people still won't want ebikes in non-motorized areas. It really is that f'n simple.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Who the heck renamed mountain bikes "Analog" bikes?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

RS VR6 said:


> Who the heck renamed mountain bikes "Analog" bikes?


Elementary school dropouts

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> This is and has been my entire issue with e-bikers since day one.
> 
> Take a lesson from guys like Sparty and Gutch, stop trying to push a bunch of made up and/or convoluted BS and just own the fact that an e-bike is an e-bike, which makes it different than a mountain bike. Not so hard.


Without question, eMTBs are different than MTBs, by less than 5%. From a 30,000 foot view, or really even 50 yard view, they're identical, and should be treated as such. Asking land managers to distinguish between two user groups that are at best, 5% different, is ridiculous, and will ultimately lead to them treating both eMTBs and MTBs the same, by banning them both...because they can't be tasked with trying to tell them apart, and they're tired of hearing the constant whining from a small minority of elitist ANALOG bikers.


.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

_CJ said:


> ....will ultimately lead to (land managers) treating both eMTBs and MTBs the same, by banning them both...


Well $h!t, I'm sold. That's a great point. Bring on the ebikes!


----------



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

_CJ said:


> Without question, eMTBs are different than MTBs, by less than 5%.



That's a completely arbitrary number and easily debatable.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> That's a completely arbitrary number and easily debatable.


well....yeah.

.


----------



## OneTrustMan (Nov 11, 2017)

_CJ said:


> Without question, eMTBs are different than MTBs, by less than 5%.


5% ?
Me looking at a 90 years old granny, or an overweight fat guy blasting up a steep climb while the pedals spin at very slow speed.
It's just 5 % bro 🤣

Lol, ass pulling numbers must be a nice skill to have.


----------



## D. Inoobinati (Aug 28, 2020)

E-mtbs are the meeting place of two different 2-wheeled communities:
The 1st community, represented in this forum, comes from the low-power end mountain biking culture. They (kind of) understand trail etiquette, and user issues.
The 2nd community comes from the high-power motocross culture. They've been progressively locked out of places to ride their 250 and 450cc YZ and KX MX bikes and are chomping at the bit to tweak their Class 2 and 3 e-mtbs to literally rip up the backcountry. All they need to hear is that a trail is e-mtb legal before they rooster-tail their way up your local switchbacks.

Cruise their forums and see for yourself.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

D. Inoobinati said:


> E-mtbs are the meeting place of two different 2-wheeled communities:
> The 1st community, represented in this forum, comes from the low-power end mountain biking culture. They (kind of) understand trail etiquette, and user issues.
> The 2nd community comes from the high-power motocross culture. They've been progressively locked out of places to ride their 250 and 450cc YZ and KX MX bikes and are chomping at the bit to tweak their Class 2 and 3 e-mtbs to literally rip up the backcountry. All they need to hear is that a trail is e-mtb legal before they rooster-tail their way up your local switchbacks.
> 
> Cruise their forums and see for yourself.


Got a link?


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

D. Inoobinati said:


> The 2nd community comes from the high-power motocross culture. They've been progressively locked out of places to ride their 250 and 450cc YZ and KX MX bikes and are chomping at the bit to tweak their Class 2 and 3 e-mtbs to literally rip up the backcountry. All they need to hear is that a trail is e-mtb legal before they rooster-tail their way up your local switchbacks.


This is pure conjecture, and total fantasy imho. Nice try though. Did you steal that from a Sierra Club post or something?

I was deeply involved with the motorcycle trail riding community in Colorado, and with the local and state advocacy groups associated with the sport. Without exception, they all scoff at my eMTB, would NEVER lower themselves to riding such an underpowered machine, and have a similar disinterest in anything with less than 30 horsepower, or anything with pedals.

Are they interested in electric motorcycles? Sure, some of them, but relatively few. The smart ones see the opportunity for them to open up new riding areas because of the reduced noise. Most aren't impressed with the power, or the lack of range, and have no interest in something that can only go 30 miles between charges, which is as good as it's going to get at those power levels in our lifetime.

Is there a ton of online bravado being thrown around on forums about what they'll do if/and/when? of course. Will any of it come to fruition? Not a chance.


.


----------



## D. Inoobinati (Aug 28, 2020)

Quotes pulled from this motocross forum. Feel free to copy these quotes and paste them into search bar.

_"...yes the e bike will open up a lot more places to ride, including backyard tracks and places that don't require a fee (river beds/fields/places we rode in the old days but noise shut em etc "_
_"We have some great trails and downhills here in Western PA. A little help with an e-bike could be a better way to enjoy the trails and get more downhill for the buck. "
"An e bike will definitely be more fun if your trying to get your moto fix. Faster, won't get as tired as quickly, you can do **** like manual over objects with less effort, and if you ride for long enough it'll still be a good exercise."
"I have a Sur-Ron for my fun little e-bike when I can't take my KTM out. I can't believe how fun the little thing is. It's silent and looks like a mountain bike. I ride out on our local park trails and only get curious questions and people thinking it's really cool. I specifically go when it's low or zero traffic out there. "
"I just got an ebike (my first MTB really) and holy crap are they fun. I just laugh at some of the dorks on the trail that give stink eye or snarky comments."
"Ebikes are so much fun, and are a great tool to train for the pro-moto guys. You can now achieve the same results of road cycling but you can do it in the dirt, and not worry about cars."
"I do think it would be sick to rip mtb trail on an e-bike ..."
"...literally I would probably be dicking around on mtb trails and other such areas with the bike I'm looking forward to the electric motocross bike, because i will be motoing in stealth ...."_
_"I think you will see A LOT of people going electric once the price comes down- that will lead to new riding areas."
"I have more fun on the E bike... Faster, cover way more miles, and hill climb like you're on a dirt bike! It's now just as fun uphill as downhill. "
"I love the sound of a perfectly tuned combustion engine just as much as the next guy, but I would trade all that in a heartbeat if it meant more riding areas. "
"Definitely geared toward the moto community than MTB. But it's a cool foot in the door to the MTB scene. "
"I'd love one for singletrack. Sure I'd miss working on my 2T but just hearing an electric bike's components operate would make me feel closer to my surroundings. I want to hear a knobby rip up some dirt! "
"the bike is for the moto market, it looks cool, rowdy and fun. I can be a great foot in the door to get new riders hooked on the eMTB scene. "
"I'd get 100x more use out of an e-bike. "
"And anyone that thinks ebikes are lame hasn't ridden a good ebike. The new higher end mountain ebikes are mind blowing. And, you can get a way better full body workout than you can on a regular mountain bike. Incredible for cross training moto. "_


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I agree with almost every one of those comments 👍🏻


----------



## D. Inoobinati (Aug 28, 2020)

_CJ said:


> This is pure conjecture, and total fantasy imho. Nice try though. Did you steal that from a Sierra Club post or something?
> 
> Is there a ton of online bravado being thrown around on forums about what they'll do if/and/when? of course. Will any of it come to fruition? Not a chance.


LOL. Either you are woefully misinformed or willfully ignorant, because I won't believe anyone can be so gigantically stupid. 



Gutch said:


> I agree with almost every one of those comments 👍🏻


Thanks for proving the point that you moped riders really don't give a sh!t about mountain biking.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

D. Inoobinati said:


> LOL. Either you are woefully misinformed or willfully ignorant, because I won't believe anyone can be so gigantically stupid.
> 
> 
> Thanks for proving the point that you moped riders really don't give a sh!t about mountain biking.


You nailed it bro- congrats!


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

_CJ said:


> This is pure conjecture, and total fantasy imho. Nice try though. Did you steal that from a Sierra Club post or something?
> 
> I was deeply involved with the motorcycle trail riding community in Colorado, and with the local and state advocacy groups associated with the sport. Without exception, they all scoff at my eMTB, would NEVER lower themselves to riding such an underpowered machine, and have a similar disinterest in anything with less than 30 horsepower, or anything with pedals.
> 
> ...



Repeat: We have bike trails that have allowed e-bikes, but so far, _my observation_ has been that 1in 5 will be riding non-class1 e-bikes. I'm only stating what I have seen in small sample size. Is it just an anomaly? I don't know.

This was definitely a guy riding for a moto experience. Saw it. Is it a problem on these county trails? Is it going to be a problem? I don't know, but... it sure does go against a lot of the preaching.

Admittedly, I only expect to get sarcasm, and false equivalencies, or to just have the data point ignored all together, but still, just sayin.... again.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I’m sorry but those comments sound like pro ebike marketing campaign and since I ride one and am on an ebike forum, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say “yes” totally agree with the comments.

(in regards to the moto comments above)


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

D. Inoobinati said:


> Thanks for proving the point that you moped riders really don't give a sh!t about mountain biking.


Any chance you'd consider alienating just the bad guys without alienating the good guys too, D.I.?

Not everyone that owns an ebike fits your defiantly spewed picture of a drooling machete wielding trail shredding psycho.

Many of us care for the greater good. Many of us have worked -- and continue to work -- hard to benefit of the sport of mountain biking (and in the process, ebiking.) Some of us build & maintain singletrack. Some of us have done so for decades. I don't know if you're as young and clueless as your immaturity on these forums implies you are, but judging from your polarizing comments and defiant attitude, I'd guess some of us have been building trails (as well as building solid relationships with land managers) since before you were in diapers.

Don't thank us.
=sParty


----------



## angelo (Sep 3, 2004)

watermonkey said:


> Of course there is. We have an entire country at each other's throats, mostly due to what the other camp believes in, not because of what they have. I KNOW that your ebike is a motorized vehicle and believe it shouldn't be on non-motorized trails. So do A LOT of people. The concept of Non-motorized trail/land designation is an ethos that is really important to many, many people. Ebikes, on an ethical level, represent a pandora's box. I don't care if ebikes are proven to have LESS trail impact than a normal mtb. They're still motorized, and people justifiably do not want motorized travel in places that are supposed to be devoid of motorized recreation. IF ebikes were somehow shown to be the cure for cancer, brought about world peace, and prevented any further baby seals from being clubbed (for sport no less), people still won't want ebikes in non-motorized areas. It really is that f'n simple.


Which people are those???


----------



## ZX11 (Dec 24, 2020)

D. Inoobinati said:


> E-mtbs are the meeting place of two different 2-wheeled communities:
> 
> Cruise their forums and see for yourself.


"Cruise their forums and see for yourself." That brings up a point,...

E-mtbs are actually the meeting place of three different 2-wheeled communities. You forgot to include those people who don't have an ebike and never want an ebike. They are all over ebikes, and the two communities you mentioned, like white on rice. They even cruise the internet looking for ebike forums, oddly enough.


----------



## OneTrustMan (Nov 11, 2017)

Gutch said:


> I agree with almost every one of those comments 👍🏻


Yeah, they understand that an ebike is an ebike and not 5% lol


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

D. Inoobinati said:


> LOL. Either you are woefully misinformed or willfully ignorant, because I won't believe anyone can be so gigantically stupid.
> 
> 
> Thanks for proving the point that you moped riders really don't give a sh!t about mountain biking.


Do you talk to people like that IRL? Or just another keyboard warrior...


----------



## mtbbiker (Apr 8, 2004)

As entertaining of a thread as this is, it’s unfortunately time to lock down. Way too many misinformation from the anti ebike side. 

From my experience, it is pointless to try and convince a person against Ebikes to change their mind. They will be against Ebikes, until they are not. I also believe these people against Ebikes must be closet ebikers as they magical are in the ebike forums so often

I’ve seen many people like them, suddenly change and now own an ebike with their tails between their legs. And they know it, maybe that’s why their trying so hard to be against ebikes. They all have people in their groups who have converted to ebikes. 

If you are against ebikes, no problem as they are not for everyone. Just stop spewing the hate and misinformation! 

Majority of ebikers ride in Eco/trail. Stop focusing on max speed and max 1hp. Ebikes are rarely at those max settings. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

