# Drawing a line



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

https://www.outsideonline.com/2281016/when-electric-mountain-bike-no-longer-bicycle

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Land Managers love theses articles, it makes it really easy to just exclude e-motorized conveyances altogether.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

life behind bars said:


> Land Managers love theses articles, it makes it really easy to just exclude e-motorized conveyances altogether.


Very very true

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

The line is drawn at the point where a bike cannot be pedalled. It then is a motorcycle or motor vehicle. If the motor output is more then the rider output, then you are on the motorcycle end of the spectrum but not on a motorcycle. If the rider output is more then then the motor, then you are on the human-powered end of the spectrum. The danger of banning human power is worse then the danger of allowing motorcycles.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

The future


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

To quote an old army buddy "necessity is not the mother of invention, laziness is".


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Travis Bickle said:


> To quote an old army buddy "necessity is not the mother of invention, laziness is".


Electric assist is a necessity in a lot of terrain


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktung said:


> Electric assist is a necessity in a lot of terrain


Pure unadulterated B.S.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

Riding a bicycle is not a necessity unless it's transporting your ass to work and it's too far to walk or run.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

life behind bars said:


> Pure unadulterated B.S.


Laziness is sitting around waiting for your buddy who was able to climb that sweet trail.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Travis Bickle said:


> Riding a bicycle is not a necessity unless it's transporting your ass to work and it's too far to walk or run.


Maybe for you but that is not my experience.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

Well, what is your experience?


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Travis Bickle said:


> Well, what is your experience?


Bicycling fills a psychological necessity. Giving up on a climb that could be conquered with an electric bump is a form of surrender.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

I am now officially sad.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktung said:


> Laziness is sitting around waiting for your buddy who was able to climb that sweet trail.


Seems the motorbike is the epitome of laziness to me.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Travis Bickle said:


> I am now officially sad.


😁😁😁😁


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

life behind bars said:


> Seems the motorbike is the epitome of laziness to me.


Ironically, you have made a lazy assumption, completed with lazy terminology.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktung said:


> Ironically, you have made a lazy assumption, completed with lazy terminology.


The real irony is that you brag of using a motorbike to "conquer" an otherwise makeable climb.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

life behind bars said:


> The real irony is that you brag of using a motorbike to "conquer" an otherwise makeable climb.


Prove it tough guy....you make it to the top and I will give you a laz-e-boy


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Linktung said:


> Electric assist is a necessity in a lot of terrain


I've yet to use e-assist and I haven't run into any trails I couldn't enjoy. I live and ride in mountainous terrain.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Silentfoe said:


> https://www.outsideonline.com/2281016/when-electric-mountain-bike-no-longer-bicycle
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Sweet e-bike. The future is here. :thumbsup:


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

vikb said:


> I've yet to use e-assist and I haven't run into any trails I couldn't enjoy. I live and ride in mountainous terrain.


Is there a point to this story that applies to me?


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Linktung said:


> Is there a point to this story that applies to me?


Just refuting your statement that I quoted.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

vikb said:


> Just refuting your statement that I quoted.


Not from my point of view. Try harder next time...put a motor on your replies....


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Linktung said:


> Not from my point of view. Try harder next time...put a motor on your replies....


Sorry I don't support motorized posting.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

vikb said:


> Sorry I don't support motorized posting.


As long as it's 50 percent you, I say fair game.


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

Silentfoe said:


> https://www.outsideonline.com/2281016/when-electric-mountain-bike-no-longer-bicycle
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Nice, I wonder if that guy up on Gooseberry Mesa will have this next. After all, "it's not an ebike, it's pedal assist". :madman:

Oh...and there is no line. If ebikes, even Class 1's, ever get officially approved, there will be people out there riding one of these things on the trails and justifying it any way they can.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

k2rider1964 said:


> Nice, I wonder if that guy up on Gooseberry Mesa will have this next. After all, "it's not an ebike, it's pedal assist". :madman:


*fist shaking.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

k2rider1964 said:


> Nice, I wonder if that guy up on Gooseberry Mesa will have this next. After all, "it's not an ebike, it's pedal assist". :madman:
> 
> Oh...and there is no line. If ebikes, even Class 1's, ever get officially approved, there will be people out there riding one of these things on the trails and justifying it any way they can.


That bike would suck at gooseberry. Motorcycles ride at slickrock, one of the most sought after rock feature trail in US. Why ya'll gotta be so sensitive?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Linktung said:


> That bike would suck at gooseberry. Motorcycles ride at slickrock, one of the most sought after rock feature trail in US. Why ya'll gotta be so sensitive?


All ebikes would suck at Gooseberry. Why ya gotta be so sensitive?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Silentfoe said:


> All ebikes would suck at Gooseberry. Why ya gotta be so sensitive?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


If they suck then you got nothing to give you nightmares.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Linktung said:


> If they suck then you got nothing to give you nightmares.


The are banned and yet still poach. This article and it's subject are the reason land managers will never allow legal access.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

The problem with "drawing a line" between this and say a pedal assist bike is one could easily modify a pedal assist bike to have similar power. There will be a point in the not to distant future where electric motorcycles are more powerful than their combustion engine counterparts.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Careful what logic you use to hate... easily modify...





- Pretty sure there was another video where this guy actually takes the motor off and puts it into his pack, but probably not this specific kit.

You can easily modify a hiker by stuffing booby traps, sharp objects, and objects that go boom into their packs, for 1% of the cost of that bike featured in the Outside mag. Instant murderer that likely would get a nice kill count before being caught. Some of them seem hateful and militant enough... ban hikers? Hikers can say the same thing about bikers.

Don't shoot yourself in the foot. MTBers do not stand on high ground.

If you're worried about the slippery slope about ebikes becoming more powerful, why aren't you also be worried about the slippery slope about one ban leading to another, using the same logic you're using here? There are already ebikes that look just like regular bikes, and those with hidden motors. Would be sad and ironic if mtbers brought this on themselves.

Who the heck calls for a ban based mainly on the desire to preserve an existing group's privileges? It sounds as ridiculous as supporting a ban on bicycles from roadways, based on the fear that they don't want to risk their driving privilege if they accidentally hit a cyclist with their car. Or maybe they don't want their experience affected, if more cyclists demanded a lane for themselves, or speed limits went from 40 to 25 mph for safety reasons.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

WHALENARD said:


> The problem with "drawing a line" between this and say a pedal assist bike is one could easily modify a pedal assist bike to have similar power. There will be a point in the not to distant future where electric motorcycles are more powerful than their combustion engine counterparts.


Yes. If I was a land manager I'd draw the line at motors. It would make identifying compliant bikes easier. No motor = no problem.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

vikb said:


> Yes. If I was a land manager I'd draw the line at motors. It would make identifying compliant bikes easier. No motor = no problem.


And this is the way they do it.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Silentfoe said:


> And this is the way they do it.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Lets hope it stays that way.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Bicycling fills a psychological necessity. Giving up on a climb that could be conquered with an electric bump is a form of surrender.


and using an "electric bump" isn't?

ut:


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

chazpat said:


> and using an "electric bump" isn't?
> 
> ut:


Work smarter not harder


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Well, can see that this thread has gone to bigotry and fear-mongering. Land manager can keep their job if it's "democracy" deciding for them, rather than bigotry.

Apparently the bigots want to establish political correctness on this board. Instead of "ebike", bigots deem them to be referred to as moped, motor-something, e-something, but not bike. Their battlecry: "Things with motors are not bikes. Motors not allowed"

Of course, the land managers, park rangers, and other law enforcement agents will reserve the right to use them themselves regardless of the rules. Bigots using motors anywhere else in their life is totally acceptable as not being lazy. Their trails were totally built without any motors assisting too, nor was the equipment they use and apparel they wear. Oh, but they weren't bike motors! It's totally different when it comes to touching the sacred ribbons of dirt.

Ah privileged politically correct bigots, thinking they have authority to decide where to draw a line from which they can safely behave like an asshole and show discrimination and hate without guilt...


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

Varaxis said:


> Well, can see that this thread has gone to bigotry and fear-mongering. Land manager can keep their job if it's "democracy" deciding for them, rather than bigotry.
> 
> Apparently the bigots want to establish political correctness on this board. Instead of "ebike", bigots deem them to be referred to as moped, motor-something, e-something, but not bike. Their battlecry: "Things with motors are not bikes. Motors not allowed"
> 
> ...


You by far take the cake with the least relevant or cogent replies to this thread.

My congratulations in claiming that victory whilst pointing a finger at everyone else.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

I've stayed out of this stupid forum because of the trolling nature of e-bikers and their lack of ability to recognise the very real problems, but I had to chime in on this. 
I've known and ridden with a guy who visits our island every year for the last 5 years, he's now 63 years old, never was fast, but he did alright. This year he's come down and told me while I was helping him with one of his bikes that he doesn't ride his sweet carbon FS he bought a few years ago much because he bought a FSR Levo TURBO, he said he got it to ride with a group of younger guys and he beats them up all the climbs and makes some climbs that even the fittest can't make. When I asked him about that, without hesitation or any sort of remorse, he went on to tell me that as soon as he got it he hacked it to open it up to whatever power he wanted, this from a 63 year old guy, totally throws the "class" argument out the window.

If it has a MOTOR, electric or gas, it does not matter, it is not a bicycle, it is is a engine assisted 2 wheeled vehicle and should not be included in regulations for normal human powered machines like bicycles.



k2rider1964 said:


> Nice, I wonder if that guy up on Gooseberry Mesa will have this next. After all, "it's not an ebike, it's pedal assist". :madman:
> 
> Oh...and there is no line. If ebikes, even Class 1's, ever get officially approved, there will be people out there riding one of these things on the trails and justifying it any way they can.





WHALENARD said:


> The problem with "drawing a line" between this and say a pedal assist bike is one could easily modify a pedal assist bike to have similar power. There will be a point in the not to distant future where electric motorcycles are more powerful than their combustion engine counterparts.





vikb said:


> Yes. If I was a land manager I'd draw the line at motors. It would make identifying compliant bikes easier. No motor = no problem.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Work smarter not harder


Why bother at all then?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Linktung said:


> Electric assist is a necessity in a lot of terrain


 And what would you have done 5 years ago? Walked, coffee and bacon or HTFU?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Linktung said:


> Bicycling fills a psychological necessity. Giving up on a climb that could be conquered with an electric bump is a form of surrender.


 Just get a dirt bike. Surrender fully.


----------



## eFat (Jun 14, 2017)

Very strange thread, almost all the posts are from users on my 'ignore list'.

Well, I think it's good it they have a place to vent their frustration with their peers.


----------



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

Linktung said:


> Electric assist is a necessity in a lot of terrain


Ride different terrain.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

WHALENARD said:


> The problem with "drawing a line" between this and say a pedal assist bike is one could easily modify a pedal assist bike to have similar power. There will be a point in the not to distant future where electric motorcycles are more powerful than their combustion engine counterparts.


 Already there, for sale in showrooms.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Varaxis said:


> Well, can see that this thread has gone to bigotry and fear-mongering. Land manager can keep their job if it's "democracy" deciding for them, rather than bigotry.
> 
> Apparently the bigots want to establish political correctness on this board. Instead of "ebike", bigots deem them to be referred to as moped, motor-something, e-something, but not bike. Their battlecry: "Things with motors are not bikes. Motors not allowed"
> 
> ...


 Are you in the right thread? OC is on a different page.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

For any reasonably objective individuals reading this thread, it's prudent to establish that most e+ (probably e-neutral too) individuals are opposed to Class 1/2 modifications and/or more powerful systems on the trails.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

fos'l said:


> For any reasonably objective individuals reading this thread, it's prudent to establish that most e+ (probably e-neutral too) individuals are opposed to Class 1/2 modifications and/or more powerful systems on the trails.


Cite a source for your claim.

I'd be willing to guess that most ebike owners will modify their ebike to be more powerful.

If anything, I highly doubt they are opposed to modifications.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## jeffkill (Jul 26, 2005)

Silentfoe said:


> Cite a source for your claim.
> 
> I'd be willing to guess that most ebike owners will modify their ebike to be more powerful.
> 
> ...


I can't speak for anyone else, but myself and 2 friends have them and we'd never modify the bikes to make them any faster.

I've been mtn biking for 20 years, and recently picked up a Turbo Levo. I still have normal bikes that I ride frequently. I'm not disabled and can pedal my normal bikes just fine. I wanted a new bike and just wanted to try something different. The ebike is definitely a different ride on the trail (and a lot of fun at that). But not so different that I would say they don't belong on a single track trail (if left at manufacturer spec).


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

My experience tends to call your statement as it is, BULLSHIT. It might be a sample of one, but it's a sample of the type of person I would expect to obey the rules and the first thing he did was hack the computer on his for absolute power.

Too many lazy and entitled individuals in this world who believe they are entitled to it all and shouldn't have to work to get it, our soft, give them everything, politically correct society coming home to roost 



fos'l said:


> For any reasonably objective individuals reading this thread, it's prudent to establish that most e+ (probably e-neutral too) individuals are opposed to Class 1/2 modifications and/or more powerful systems on the trails.


----------



## honkinunit (Aug 6, 2004)

LyNx said:


> My experience tends to call your statement as it is, BULLSHIT. It might be a sample of one, but it's a sample of the type of person I would expect to obey the rules and the first thing he did was hack the computer on his for absolute power.
> 
> Too many lazy and entitled individuals in this world who believe they are entitled to it all and shouldn't have to work to get it, our soft, give them everything, politically correct society coming home to roost


I have a Class 1 eMTB and I know three others who have them. None of us have hacked them, nor do we have any intention of hacking them.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Claiming they won't hack them. But they'll poach trails to ride them. Yep. 

I got a bridge I'll sell you.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

life behind bars said:


> Pure unadulterated B.S.


Word...


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Silentfoe said:


> Claiming they won't hack them. But they'll poach trails to ride them. Yep.
> 
> I got a bridge I'll sell you.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


What is your solution to poaching? Double ban them? Is the only reason why people are only riding unmodified human hybrid electric bikes illegally because they respect the law?


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

The reality is that human only riders provide the perfect cover for human hybrid electric bikes. If you do not want these bikes on your trails, then do not ride a bike and call for the banning on all bikes whether human or hybrid. We can accept them and admit that there isn't anything inherintly dangerous, or we can continue gnawing off our own foot.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Linktung said:


> The reality is that human only riders provide the perfect cover for human hybrid electric bikes. If you do not want these bikes on your trails, then do not ride a bike and call for the banning on all bikes whether human or hybrid. We can accept them and admit that there isn't anything inherintly dangerous, or we can continue gnawing off our own foot.


 Dude, do you even shred, bro? Where I ride, motorized vehicles not allowed. Period. Human hybrid? They be e bikes. thats all. Where do you ride or e bike? Don't like the rules, change them. They need to stand on their own, not be lumped in together. See also, rules and specs at the start of this page.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

leeboh said:


> Dude, do you even shred, bro? Where I ride, motorized vehicles not allowed. Period. Human hybrid? They be e bikes. thats all. Where do you ride or e bike? Don't like the rules, change them. They need to stand on their own, not be lumped in together. See also, rules and specs at the start of this page.


Thanks dad


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Linktung said:


> The reality is that human only riders provide the perfect cover for human hybrid electric bikes. If you do not want these bikes on your trails, then do not ride a bike and call for the banning on all bikes whether human or hybrid. We can accept them and admit that there isn't anything inherintly dangerous, or we can continue gnawing off our own foot.


Did you even look at the article in the OP? Nothing inherently dangerous?

This is why the line is drawn at 0. We don't need to double ban. We need penalties.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

^^^^ What he said. Banning all bikes? That would go over well. Or just not allow motorized vehicles, much easier.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Silentfoe said:


> Did you even look at the article in the OP? Nothing inherently dangerous?
> 
> This is why the line is drawn at 0. We don't need to double ban. We need penalties.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


We need penalties, personnel to enforce the penalties and we need to convince all the other trail users to bunch up their panties too.

Was there an injury or death discussed in the article? Was a newbie rider on a high powered human electric bike and somehow survive?


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Article title and subtitle:


> When Is an Electric Mountain Bike No Longer a Bicycle?
> We found that line with the 60 mph HPC Revolution


Can someone explain how enforcing a ban on e-bikes is easier/better than enforcing a speed limit?

60mph???????


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

EricTheDood said:


> Article title and subtitle:
> 
> Can someone explain how enforcing a ban on e-bikes is easier/better than enforcing a speed limit?
> 
> 60mph???????


The personnel/funding don't exist to enforce a speed limit on most trails (ok, basically all trails). Which is the reason that bikes (or motors) are banned from various places - it's the only cost-effective way to have an effective speed limiting policy.

Trails have been managed that way for a long, long time. I'm not saying it's fair (because it isn't), but it's how LMs have to do things.

-W


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Silentfoe said:


> Cite a source for your claim.
> 
> I'd be willing to guess that most ebike owners will modify their ebike to be more powerful.
> 
> ...


Probably 20 e-MTBer's that I've met who haven't modified their bikes. Also, read what most e+ individuals state on this forum. What you have is an isolated bike that nobody has ever seen on an MTB trail and you're attempting to generalize. Really easy to do; look at the individual who set an e-bike record with an 11 second, 100+ mph run and use that too. BTW, the post was directed to reasonable individuals; doesn't include you.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

LyNx said:


> My experience tends to call your statement as it is, BULLSHIT. It might be a sample of one, but it's a sample of the type of person I would expect to obey the rules and the first thing he did was hack the computer on his for absolute power.
> 
> Too many lazy and entitled individuals in this world who believe they are entitled to it all and shouldn't have to work to get it, our soft, give them everything, politically correct society coming home to roost


If you're looking for BS, you located it, that is taking one example and generalizing it to a whole group. As I said before, this post was for the reasonable individual who might happen upon this thread and think a few extreme bigots are representative of anything.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Silentfoe said:


> Claiming they won't hack them. But they'll poach trails to ride them. Yep.
> 
> I got a bridge I'll sell you.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Really bright; an individual makes a comment about an e-bike and you immediately accuse them of poaching. Do something like this again and your post is deleted.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

fos'l said:


> Really bright; an individual makes a comment about an e-bike and you immediately accuse them of poaching. Do something like this again and your post is deleted.


Not so fast. There were claims that no one would hack an e-bike but we've all seen the posts from those that have done it. We've also seen the posts from those that are poaching, so why single out a relevant post?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

life behind bars said:


> Not so fast. There were claims that no one would hack an e-bike but we've all seen the posts from those that have done it. We've also seen the posts from those that are poaching, so why single out a relevant post?


If the individuals claim to be hacking or poaching, you've got a point. That wasn't the case here or are you another who, as suspected, convicts with no proof? As stated, do it and get deleted.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

fos'l said:


> If the individuals claim to be hacking or poaching, you've got a point. That wasn't the case here or are you another who, as suspected, convicts with no proof? As stated, do it and get deleted.


No one was accused of it. It's a generality that really does apply in this particular sub-forum unfortunately.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Ha! He deleted my post calling him on it. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Ebiker...poaching.









Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Silentfoe said:


> Ebiker...poaching.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Unpossible.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

life behind bars said:


> Unpossible.


Please also notice the Bluetooth speaker in the water bottle cage that was blasting music. SOOO cool.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Silentfoe said:


> Please also notice the Bluetooth speaker in the water bottle cage that was blasting music. SOOO cool.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Taking pictures of your fellow cyclists for internet shaming equals cool?

No doubt blasting music will drown out the shrill haters he occasionally encounters


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Linktung said:


> Taking pictures of your fellow cyclists for internet shaming equals cool?
> 
> No doubt blasting music will drown out the shrill haters he occasionally encounters


Oh for sure. If he didn't poach he wouldn't have had his picture taken. I have no issue with sharing it. Public shaming works. He's also NOT a fellow cyclist.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Silentfoe said:


> Oh for sure. If he didn't poach he wouldn't have had his picture taken. I have no issue with sharing it. Public shaming works. He's also NOT a fellow cyclist.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Lucky him, I wish you weren't my fellow cyclist. Embarrassing behavior on your part.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Linktung said:


> Lucky him, I wish you weren't my fellow cyclist. Embarrassing behavior on your part.


I'm not embarrassed. Why are you?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Silentfoe said:


> I'm not embarrassed. Why are you?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Great, what company do you guide for?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Linktung said:


> Lucky him, I wish you weren't my fellow cyclist. Embarrassing behavior on your part.


Real "Cyclists" don't put access at risk by poaching.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Silentfoe said:


> Cite a source for your claim.
> 
> I'd be willing to guess that most ebike owners will modify their ebike to be more powerful.
> 
> ...


 Most eMTBers are current or former MTB riders: if there is currently a problem with irresponsible behavior on eMTBs it is a problem of the MTB community and not the machine. What you all seem to be saying is:"there is such a sizeable part of our community who act like jerks that our access is pretty shaky and giving them eMTBs will ruin it for the rest of us." The expectation (projection) is that eMTBs will be ridden everywhere WFO, uphill and downhill, no matter who is in their way, because that's how lots of pedal MTBs are ridden everyday!


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Linktung said:


> Great, what company do you guide for?


I'm sorry, ebikes can't be ridden in our area. Please shop elsewhere.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

WoodlandHills said:


> Most eMTBers are current or former MTB riders: if there is currently a problem with irresponsible behavior on eMTBs it is a problem of the MTB community and not the machine. What you all seem to be saying is:"there is such a sizeable part of our community who act like jerks that our access is pretty shaky and giving them eMTBs will ruin it for the rest of us." The expectation (projection) is that eMTBs will be ridden everywhere WFO, uphill and downhill, no matter who is in their way, because that's how lots of pedal MTBs are ridden everyday!


Yes, I agree, and if eMTBs ride more mileage or more laps within the same amount of time, they're just proportionally increasing the amount of what MTBers are already doing. Criticizing them is like criticizing mtb.

Yapping on about beliefs and judging what is good and bad, is nothing more than a pseudo religion. I can't tell if there's some imaginary church of singletrack or if people are suffering from too much beer.

Playing the lazy card is no better than the boomer BS of blaming millennials for ruining everything when it's their own generation's greed and fun spoiling that is doing it. Also ignores the fact that behavior is passed down from the parents. Blame game gets us no where. Why can't we find purpose in something more meaningful. If you're not running everywhere and doing everything you want done by hand without tools yourself, you're being lazy too. Driving to the trailhead is f'ing lazy, esp if it's within riding distance.

Trail etiquette rules already exist for peacefully sharing trails. People just need to follow them.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Varaxis said:


> Trail etiquette rules already exist for peacefully sharing trails. People just need to follow them.


As well as following rules about access, no?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Silentfoe said:


> Ebiker...poaching.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would delete this if it were a picture of a rider poaching since they're not permitted in this sub-forum. However, it seems this bike is in a parking lot next to automobiles.
Is that illegal?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

fos'l said:


> I would delete this if it were a picture of a rider poaching since they're not permitted in this sub-forum. However, it's idiotic to claim that someone is poaching when their bike is in a parking lot next to automobiles.


Ah, you're so right. My life exists only in this picture and I completely failed to see what happened next.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

fos'l said:


> Really bright; an individual makes a comment about an e-bike and you immediately accuse them of poaching. Do something like this again and your post is deleted.


So you calling people , ironically, bigots is acceptable, but you can just delete posts that you don't agree with?


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

Silentfoe said:


> Ah, you're so right. My life exists only in this picture and I completely failed to see what happened next.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


I was present with SF when this occurred. After being politely told he couldn't ride his ebike legally, he became argumentative and then said "it's not an ebike, it's pedal assist". I suggested he call Over the Edge and even offered to give hime the number. He called and was told he can't ride there but guess what, they rode anyway. I saw him unloading his bike from his truck up at Guacamole two days later...


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

I don't think most people with ebikes will modify them. Most people wouldn't know how and would be worried about potential malfunctions. However, growing up riding dirt bikes and then being involved in the boat world, I'll bet everything I own that there will be plenty of folks that will modify their ebikes and if/when Class 1 ebikes get approved for mainstream trail usage, every manner of ebike will be out there. You can take that to the bank.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

The horror... it’s good to see we have another thread that we can argue and ***** about. Don’t ya’ll get enough from your boyfriends or wife?


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

k2rider1964 said:


> I was present with SF when this occurred. After being politely told he couldn't ride his ebike legally, he became argumentative and then said "it's not an ebike, it's pedal assist". I suggested he call Over the Edge and even offered to give hime the number. He called and was told he can't ride there but guess what, they rode anyway. I saw him unloading his bike from his truck up at Guacamole two days later...


The only thing that was harmed by him riding his bike was the small dent in your feeling of authoritarian control. Until the Federal Agencies acknowledge the presence of human power on an electric assisted bicycle, their rules are dead on arrival.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Gutch said:


> The horror... it's good to see we have another thread that we can argue and ***** about. Don't ya'll get enough from your boyfriends or wife?


Abusing cyclists is a favorite pastime of the internet. At least it is a rather harmless venting of pent up aggression. Their spouses are probably happy they are busy seeking out victims online.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Silentfoe said:


> I'm sorry, ebikes can't be ridden in our area. Please shop elsewhere.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Based on your story, they can be ridden there. Give it a couple years, you will be super busy dealing with the influx of electric cyclists looking for a guide. C'mon man, give up the name of your business. I want to be your first electric assisted client.

What are you embarrassed about?


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Travis Bickle said:


> Riding a bicycle is not a necessity unless it's transporting your ass to work and it's too far to walk or run.


Other than food, water and oxygen, nothing is really a necessity and that includes an ebike used for transportation, That said, if the poster that said electric assist is a necessity, so be it.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Linktung said:


> The only thing that was harmed by him riding his bike was the small dent in your feeling of authoritarian control. Until the Federal Agencies acknowledge the presence of human power on an electric assisted bicycle, their rules are dead on arrival.


How do you know that? Maybe he caused a user conflict on a blind corner with a hiker, and that hiker assumed he was on a mountain bike and complained to the land managers. Are you saying you, representing e-bikers, ignore laws that you don't agree with? Oh e-fos'l!!!


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Linktung said:


> Abusing cyclists is a favorite pastime of the internet. At least it is a rather harmless venting of pent up aggression. Their spouses are probably happy they are busy seeking out victims online.


I don't see any mountain bikers abusing e-bikers. In fact, it's the e-bikers doing the name-calling.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Linktung said:


> The only thing that was harmed by him riding his bike was the small dent in your feeling of authoritarian control. Until the Federal Agencies acknowledge the presence of human power on an electric assisted bicycle, their rules are dead on arrival.


And therein lies the problem, people's ability to justify that what they are doing is "ok", despite the fact they aren't supposed to be doing it. It won't hurt anything, no one will really care, I should be allowed to ride here, that's an old law, a little more power won't hurt, it's not class 1 but it doesn't really matter, etc, etc, etc.

Ride where's it's legal.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Linktung said:


> The only thing that was harmed by him riding his bike was the small dent in your feeling of authoritarian control. Until the Federal Agencies acknowledge the presence of human power on an electric assisted bicycle, their rules are dead on arrival.


 Unless the poaching gets all wheeled access shut down? Many land mangers and agencies have made rules regarding motorized vehicles.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

chazpat said:


> Ride where's it's legal.


Yup.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I agree with the title of this post: we do need to draw a line.

We need to stop venting our frustrations on this forum.

I’ve been an active member of MTBR for over a decade and I find this forum to be one of the more politicized and inappropriate on MTBR.

This forum is dragging MTBR down and would likely turn off any new member who reads this repetitive, vindictive, diatribe chock full of personal attacks.

Sadly, the moderators are not helpful in sorting the wheat from the chaff, and some moderators appear to make matters worse.

My line in the sand is avoid participating in this forum until the arguments over access end or the moderators move those threads to the access forum or off topic forums.


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

HPC has been selling, albeit less refined at the start, overvolted e bikes for years. The Endless Sphere forum is full of "bikes" that have an even better power to weight ratio. Although I have known about these for years I have never had any interest in riding one or seen one in the wild, maybe I just don't get around enough. Or more likely don't hang with dentists. 

The line to me is using common sense within legal bounds. Use it, or lose it, trail access that is.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Nurse Ben said:


> My line in the sand is avoid participating in this forum until the arguments over access end or the moderators move those threads to the access forum or off topic forums.


Access is 90% of the e-bike discussion here for a reason. It's not going away if this forum stays here.

What MTBR should do is start another site called e-BikeR and put all e-bike content there. I doubt many if any human powered mountain bikers will go there to comment. Just like we don't spend time on hiker or moto forums.

You'd solve all the problems this sub-forum is having.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Linktung said:


> Electric assist is a necessity in a lot of terrain


Read the thread. You haven't said_ anything _that makes any sense.

Machines like this are great! The sooner all your lazy e-bike asses get booted off the trails the better and this just speeds up the process.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

I'm wondering where 250w+ of extra power is a "necessity" on purpose built MTB trails.

Can you provide a TrailForks or MTBProject link to any of these trails that require e-bike power?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

chazpat said:


> And therein lies the problem, people's ability to justify that what they are doing is "ok", despite the fact they aren't supposed to be doing it. It won't hurt anything, no one will really care, I should be allowed to ride here, that's an old law, a little more power won't hurt, it's not class 1 but it doesn't really matter, etc, etc, etc.


And don't forget.....


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Harryman said:


> And don't forget.....
> 
> View attachment 1183279


Just needs a "Class 1" sticker.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Nurse Ben said:


> I agree with the title of this post: we do need to draw a line.
> 
> We need to stop venting our frustrations on this forum.
> 
> ...


And if we moderate too much, someone else will start whining about the mods being too heavy-handed.

If you don't like the way the forum is moderated, complain to the powers that be or just feel free to avoid it.

I've been watching this thread and it's actually taken this sub-forum back many months as far as where I believe we've managed to get to as far as respectful conversation. I've been considering going into clean-up mode on it or just deleting it completely but haven't decided yet. If you feel you can do better, I will gladly volunteer you to take my place. Let me know.

Until then, if you have a problem with moderation, take it to FC.


----------



## Bjorn2Ride (Apr 4, 2017)

Varaxis said:


> Well, can see that this thread has gone to bigotry and fear-mongering. Land manager can keep their job if it's "democracy" deciding for them, rather than bigotry.
> 
> Apparently the bigots want to establish political correctness on this board. Instead of "ebike", bigots deem them to be referred to as moped, motor-something, e-something, but not bike. Their battlecry: "Things with motors are not bikes. Motors not allowed"
> 
> ...


Well said, and an accurate portrayal of the nonsense here. Any "land manager" who doesn't understand the difference between an electric motorcycle and a Levo will be quickly made irrelevant by rational people.


----------



## Bjorn2Ride (Apr 4, 2017)

vikb said:


> Access is 90% of the e-bike discussion here for a reason. It's not going away if this forum stays here.
> 
> What MTBR should do is start another site called e-BikeR and put all e-bike content there. I doubt many if any human powered mountain bikers will go there to comment. Just like we don't spend time on hiker or moto forums.
> 
> You'd solve all the problems this sub-forum is having.


To refer to a bike like a Levo as not being "human powered" is either lying or ignorance. I will extend the benefit of the doubt and assume it's ignorance. Maybe you don't understand that the experience of riding the bike is roughly 125% to 50% (rough numbers) as much human exertion as a comparable Stumpjumper. When my Levo is OFF, as it is for about 8 miles of my typical 30 mile training rides, it is much harder to ride than I suspect your bike is. You can completely gas yourself because you know that adding assist will get you home. On a regular bike, you need to leave "more in the tank" or risk getting stranded.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> To refer to a bike like a Levo as not being "human powered" is either lying or ignorance.


You can stand next to your motorized vehicle and say it's not motorized all you want, the motor and battery won't disappear into thin air. And honestly if that's the argument you are going to make to land managers you have zero hope for getting access to non-motorized trails.

The first step in e-bikes getting expanded access is admitting they are motorized and a distinct user class and working from there.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> And if we moderate too much, someone else will start whining about the mods being too heavy-handed.
> 
> If you don't like the way the forum is moderated, complain to the powers that be or just feel free to avoid it.
> 
> ...


I agree on the heavy or light moderation. Moderation should be used to keep things civil, not to edit content.

You may feel that the thread set us back months. If you feel that, maybe it's because things are being edited to the point that relevant topics are not being discussed as they should be. There is a level of passion involved on both sides, which should be fine.

There are major points here.
1. Ebikes come in many forms. As much as one would like to think, they are NOT regulated. Until they are, any ebike will be lumped in with any other ebike, regardless of power rating.

2. Ebike access. Rules and regulations are in place. Address them at your local level. Don't ride them where not allowed and don't apologize for or accept those who poach.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

:eekster::shocked::shocked::shocked:


slapheadmofo said:


> And if we moderate too much, someone else will start whining about the mods being too heavy-handed.
> 
> If you don't like the way the forum is moderated, complain to the powers that be or just feel free to avoid it.
> 
> ...


 Tough line for balance. Just ask for a pay raise?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> Well said, and an accurate portrayal of the nonsense here. Any "land manager" who doesn't understand the difference between an electric motorcycle and a Levo will be quickly made irrelevant by rational people.


 Both fall under the ( wait for it) motorized vehicles thing( most places) Both have motors, and?


----------



## Bjorn2Ride (Apr 4, 2017)

vikb said:


> You can stand next to your motorized vehicle and say it's not motorized all you want, the motor and battery won't disappear into thin air. And honestly if that's the argument you are going to make to land managers you have zero hope for getting access to non-motorized trails.
> 
> The first step in e-bikes getting expanded access is admitting they are motorized and a distinct user class and working from there.


You said that they are not human powered. Of course it has a motor. The motor responds to torque generated by the human and adds to it. That's how they work. Saying that they are not "human powered" indicates a complete lack of understanding of how these bikes work.


----------



## Bjorn2Ride (Apr 4, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Both fall under the ( wait for it) motorized vehicles thing( most places) Both have motors, and?


I wouldn't plan on paying your mortgage as a "land manager" for very long.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> To refer to a bike like a Levo as not being "human powered" is either lying or ignorance. I will extend the benefit of the doubt and assume it's ignorance. Maybe you don't understand that the experience of riding the bike is roughly 125% to 50% (rough numbers) as much human exertion as a comparable Stumpjumper. When my Levo is OFF, as it is for about 8 miles of my typical 30 mile training rides, it is much harder to ride than I suspect your bike is. You can completely gas yourself because you know that adding assist will get you home. On a regular bike, you need to leave "more in the tank" or risk getting stranded.


 See also, forum rules here at the top of the page. Our opinions matter not. What matters is how the local land managers, state and federal agencies define motorized vehicles. Here in MA, look at the ride, does it have a motor? Yup. Well there you go, motorized. Watts, assist, hp, exertion, power by rider? Yup, still has a motor. Risk getting stranded? By what? Wait, you're tired? Pull out the snack, PBJ, forage for some calories, hit up a friend. Sometimes I will walk up a hill, the feet still work, no motor needed. I've hit up random people for food, campers, someone at a BBQ once, and I always carry $ 10 in the camelbak for resupply.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> You said that they are not human powered. Of course it has a motor.


Put your head back in the sand dude. That argument will get you exactly nowhere.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> You said that they are not human powered. Of course it has a motor. The motor responds to torque generated by the human and adds to it. That's how they work. Saying that they are not "human powered" indicates a complete lack of understanding of how these bikes work.


Guess what, a twist throttle responds to the torque generated by the human. So using your thought process, saying a motorcycle is not human powered indicates a complete lack of understanding how any motor works.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

tahoebeau said:


> Guess what, a twist throttle responds to the torque generated by the human. So using your thought process, saying a motorcycle is not human powered indicates a complete lack of understanding how any motor works.


So true.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> I wouldn't plan on paying your mortgage as a "land manager" for very long.


 Your land manger lets you ride your e bike on Mt Tam? Or any bike? No restrictions on e bikes or bikes anywhere in CA? Your state seems to be the test case for the E thing. Not some much in the rest of the country. The point is, that they both have motors. I too, get the difference, really. So many variations on rules and regs as to local, conservation, state and federal lands. And their policies. As well as the the bike rules and access. What works in one place won't fly in another. At all. Cheers.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

chazpat said:


> And therein lies the problem, people's ability to justify that what they are doing is "ok", despite the fact they aren't supposed to be doing it. It won't hurt anything, no one will really care, I should be allowed to ride here, that's an old law, a little more power won't hurt, it's not class 1 but it doesn't really matter, etc, etc, etc.
> 
> Ride where's it's legal.


I think people justify what they're doing as ok because in essence it is. Except for the idiot law makers and land managers that say it's not.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

ALimon said:


> I think people justify what they're doing as ok because in essence it is. Except for the idiot law makers and land managers that say it's not.


That'll get you far. Make sure you attend access meetings and make those feelings known.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> Well said, and an accurate portrayal of the nonsense here. Any "land manager" who doesn't understand the difference between an electric motorcycle and a Levo will be quickly made irrelevant by rational people.


I don't think you would recognize a rational person if they punched you, which they might. Please prove to me that you don't deserve those red squares by giving a logical response to the following:

High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.

It is inevitable that some selfish people will either modify lower powered eBikes to exceed safe limits, or simply buy powerful bikes, and ride them in inappropriate places.

Those charged with regulating and policing trails, parks and paths cannot be expected to differentiate between a low-powered eBike and modified or higher powered bikes at the side of the trail/road. As the technology improves, and eBikes get more stealthy, this task will only become harder.

As it is necessary to keep powerful machines off of the routes in question, there is no option but to blanket ban all electric bikes from them.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Mr Pig said:


> I don't think you would recognize a rational person if they punched you, which they might. Please prove to me that you don't deserve those red squares by giving a logical response to the following:
> 
> High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.
> 
> ...


I'd rep you again but alas.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ALimon said:


> I think people justify what they're doing as ok because in essence it is. Except for the idiot law makers and land managers that say it's not.


 The land mangers just follow the rules as set forth by the guidelines. Idiot lawmakers are elected. Don't like the rules? Change them. Don't like the lawmakers? Elect someone else. Good thing we live in a democracy. Change happens. Stomping your feet and whining " it's not fair" seldom makes headway in real life. Start there.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> :eekster::shocked::shocked::shocked:
> 
> Tough line for balance. Just ask for a pay raise?


 Exactly.

I'm doing this as a favor cuz I was asked. It's actually a bit of a PIA, and now I actually have to moderate myself a lot more than I do anyone else. You guys are all missing out on some decent entertainment.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Silentfoe said:


> I agree on the heavy or light moderation. Moderation should be used to keep things civil, not to edit content.
> 
> You may feel that the thread set us back months. If you feel that, maybe it's because things are being edited to the point that relevant topics are not being discussed as they should be. There is a level of passion involved on both sides, which should be fine.


And for most of the regular posters here, it is, as you know; you and I have both been here long enough. Those that can't play nice tend to get shut down, no matter which 'side' they're on. I'm pretty sure you can vouch for that.

So due to the wishes of the powers that be, this subforum is going to tend to be moderated more heavily than others. So when people drop in who haven't been part of previous discussions, they tend to get all fired up and start tilting at windmills. If someone decides to add little to the conversation besides an attitude, I don't spend a lot of time trying to sort the wheat from the chaff. If someone types 1000 words of well communicated, reasonable opinion and but then can't help themselves from throwing in some insults, they can expect to have wasted their time typing. This thread has a number of example of that, and if it keeps up, it's gone.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> And for most of the regular posters here, it is, as you know; you and I have both been here long enough. Those that can't play nice tend to get shut down, no matter which 'side' they're on. I'm pretty sure you can vouch for that.
> 
> So due to the wishes of the powers that be, this subforum is going to tend to be moderated more heavily than others. So when people drop in who haven't been part of previous discussions, they tend to get all fired up and start tilting at windmills. If someone decides to add little to the conversation besides an attitude, I don't spend a lot of time trying to sort the wheat from the chaff. If someone types 1000 words of well communicated, reasonable opinion and but then can't help themselves from throwing in some insults, they can expect to have wasted their time typing. This thread has a number of example of that, and if it keeps up, it's gone.


Very true. Thanks for the thankless job.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## bchampig (May 15, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> I don't think you would recognize a rational person if they punched you, which they might. Please prove to me that you don't deserve those red squares by giving a logical response to the following:
> 
> High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.


Using this logic, no mountain biker should share trails with hikers, or equestrians due to the disparity in weight, and speed. Mountain bikers certainly do more harm to the trails than a person on foot.

Personally, I think the trail damage argument is overstated since we're not talking about bikes that can throw a roost. I've seen more damage to hills from out of the saddle grinding in the granny gear, than I do from my 3KW electric bikes since the ebike carries more momentum into the hill.

As for the speed argument, I can ride downhill on my pedal MTB faster than I can on my ebikes.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Silentfoe said:


> Very true. Thanks for the thankless job.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Cheers man, thanks!


----------



## PinoyMTBer (Nov 21, 2013)

I totally agree! 

Ride where it is legal. Let’s keep the few places we have and be a good ambassador to our new sport.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

bchampig said:


> Using this logic, no mountain biker should share trails with hikers


MTBs are banned from certain trails.



> Personally, I think the trail damage argument is overstated since we're not talking about bikes that can throw a roost. I've seen more damage to hills from out of the saddle grinding in the granny gear, than I do from my 3KW electric bikes...


Please read my post and respond to what it says, rather than what you want it to say in your dreamy dream head?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

PinoyMTBer said:


> I totally agree!
> 
> Ride where it is legal. Let's keep the few places we have and be a good ambassador to our new sport.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Additionally, neither modify our OEM bikes nor ride ones which don't qualify as "legal".


----------



## bchampig (May 15, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> MTBs are banned from certain trails.
> 
> Please read my post and respond to what it says, rather than what you want it to say in your dreamy dream head?


I have read your post. You state that "High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists" due to "The disparity in speed". I can make the exact same statement applied to pedal bikes and hikers. It's pretty obvious that you are making the same argument that hikers use against mountain bikers.

You also state as fact, that " the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails". I simply disagree with you. It's Ok, people CAN have different opinions.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

bchampig said:


> I have read your post. You state that "High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists" due to "The disparity in speed". I can make the exact same statement applied to pedal bikes and hikers. It's pretty obvious that you are making the same argument that hikers use against mountain bikers.
> 
> You also state as fact, that " the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails". I simply disagree with you. It's Ok, people CAN have different opinions.


You are both right, and wrong.

Yes, the same argument can, and IS, being said about mtbs and the disparity of speed. Hence the reason we have so many access issues. Look into debates on bikes in Wilderness and you'll see that as one of the main complaints. Adding even faster ebikes to the mix does not help mtb access. Can you begin to see why mtbs try to distance themselves as far as possible from ebikes? We don't need to add further fuel to the fire.

Look at the video in the OP. See the roost behind the ebike? I can absolutely guarantee that a bike cannot create roost like that. The fact that you ride a 3kw ebike and can't see that is baffling.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

bchampig said:


> Using this logic, no mountain biker should share trails with hikers, or equestrians due to the disparity in weight, and speed. Mountain bikers certainly do more harm to the trails than a person on foot.
> 
> Personally, I think the trail damage argument is overstated since we're not talking about bikes that can throw a roost. I've seen more damage to hills from out of the saddle grinding in the granny gear, than I do from my 3KW electric bikes since the ebike carries more momentum into the hill.
> 
> As for the speed argument, I can ride downhill on my pedal MTB faster than I can on my ebikes.


 Trail damage? Hmmm, horses? Yes for sure. Plenty of studies find similar impacts from bikes and hikers. The issue is the speed differential, especially the up hill speed with the ebikers.


----------



## bchampig (May 15, 2017)

Silentfoe said:


> You are both right, and wrong.
> 
> Yes, the same argument can, and IS, being said about mtbs and the disparity of speed. Hence the reason we have so many access issues. Look into debates on bikes in Wilderness and you'll see that as one of the main complaints. Adding even faster ebikes to the mix does not help mtb access. Can you begin to see why mtbs try to distance themselves as far as possible from ebikes? We don't need to add further fuel to the fire.
> 
> ...


As someone who has ridden 250cc motocross bikes my entire life, I know what a roost is. I can also say that the photo you are referring to is sensationalized. That rider had his front brake locked up as he gunned the throttle. Yes, that will create a roost on a powerful ebike, but I doubt that the typical ebike rider is purposely going to do that.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Ever roost on your dirt bike? And no roosting on an e motorcycle ?( what it is with pedals) All the kids and poachers I see are roosting lots of times. Even on the small dirt bikes and kid sized atvs. My observations would say otherwise.


----------



## bchampig (May 15, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Ever roost on your dirt bike? And no roosting on an e motorcycle ?( what it is with pedals) All the kids and poachers I see are roosting lots of times. Even on the small dirt bikes and kid sized atvs. My observations would say otherwise.


Sure, I roost on my dirt bike, but not intentionally on single track. Also, I'm not talking about E-Motorcycles. I'm talking about my 3000W electric bike...it's not possible to "roost" unless I lock up the front brake and un-weight the rear-end by leaning forward. The bike in that picture had a hub motor...heavy as hell, and lacking the torque of a mid-drive, even at 6000watts. That's about 7 horsepower...basically the power of a mini-bike, but with more weight over the rear tire. I'm sure it's a real roost thrower...please.

People are capable of doing all kinds of stupid stuff...hikers leaving garbage in the woods, mountain bikers skidding through a berm or dragging the rear break on a downhill, horseback riders chewing up trails, etc.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I would think 3000w is pretty tough to roost with lacking a clutch.

My kid's little CRF100 trail bike is ~7000w and I can ride it on trails without roosting.
His KX85 is about twice that and it comes on hard, so that's a different game.

There's definitely a power line as far as what I think would work as far as sharing certain MTB trails, but I definitely can't say I'm worried much about anything under a few thousand watts causing a lot of 'damage'.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Mr Pig said:


> I don't think you would recognize a rational person if they punched you, which they might. Please prove to me that you don't deserve those red squares by giving a logical response to the following:
> 
> High-powered electric bikes should not share space with walkers and pedal cyclists. The disparity in speed is dangerous and the weight and torque of the machines can potentially damage certain trails.
> 
> ...


You're just repeating the law and the article. The lines have already been drawn. Continuous power of 750W and under, and motor assistance up to 20mph is considered a low powered electric bicycle. That's the line drawn by the fed. This is one loophole people use to exempt their ebikes from motorized vehicle laws.

You touch on the real debate. Modification that allows a bike to cross the line of what's legal or not, on demand, and the reason why they will be problematic: the speed differential.

Your logic is as flawed as the others though. Since there lacks enforcement to control illegal behavior, you suggest banning ebikes? You can't tell a high powered motor from a legit one, ban all on ebikes? By the same logic, can't tell a poaching strav-asshole from a decent mtber, ban all bikes? Can't tell a booby trapper or illegal trail builder from another trail user, ban all means of transporting these materials? What about the bikes that have hidden motors that can be turned off to make them totally like a normal bike, crossing that new line you desire, between ebike and mtb? Can't expect them to check this too, right? Ban all bikes?

Why'd you give up on the problem of lacking enforcement? Do you think enforcement believes using more advanced tools is the epitome of laziness? Motion detecting cams to capture evidence of trail user behavior in trouble areas? What if there doesn't need to be enforcement through better designed trails?

The ebike is merely a tool. How it's used is up to the user. I've said before, there's rules of the trail, but it's not official, just etiquette. IMO, make 'em official. The message can likely fit on the same sized board as a no-ebike or no-bike sign. If you insist on something needing to be escalated, take it through proper channels and report it to those enforcing. Use your phone to take evidence. Personally, I don't bother since I dislike big govt and am forgiving of acts that don't result in any strong persistent detrimental side-effects.

The bias in strong in this thread. That's another problem. Linktung has some strong bias for motors. And others have some strong bias/prejudice against ebikes. Threads turn toxic because of this stupidity and negativity being flung back and forth. Neg rep getting tossed freely too. *shrug* If I hear a good argument, I'll pos rep it, especially if it progresses things, reduces frustration and saves time. Do people even have standards for neg repping? Nurse Ben doesn't condone such toxic behavior. I agree, since tolerating toxic behavior makes it seem that it's not bad. Depending on where we draw a line on behavior here and on the trail, whether it's tolerated or excessively toxic... not going to suggest forums should be banned since they can be modified to be cool or toxic.

New tools will be made for every purpose. People buy the ones that are made to be more capable and more convenient, saving them time and frustration. People might see the ebike as such. It makes sense to save time on the pedally parts, considering fitness don't build up without regular fitness building (1x a week definitely not enough). Does anyone dislike big group rides due to all the waiting around? What's a quick fix to that? The power levels are adjustable to adapt. Can taper it off as you get more fit. It's up to the rider. People who buy ebikes will be looking for places to use it. If you make them feel like outcasts, how's that any different from treating criminals? Criminals are often repeat offenders since they can't reintegrate. Is there less detriment in tolerating them? IMO, leave the rules for safety. How about refining that ambiguous yield rule with one that's more specific on how to pass?


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

Can't we all just get along..... oh, wait....opinions. The "bike" in the linked article has no place on trails where motorized vehicles are banned from being ridden. I think to some extent the ebikers are trying to piggy back on the efforts of mtbers to get access and it's annoying the mtbers who have been given access on the terms that they are respectful to the land on which they are riding. I've seen more crazy riding on snowmobiles and ATVs than I have dirt bikes and some of those guys tear it up wanting to put dirt in the air and leave gouges in the earth. I can't appreciate that opinion. While I don't see that the majority of ebikes are capable of this destruction that doesn't mean that ebikers don't have to address that argument with the land managers in order to get access. No one has the right to poach, but in this country there is a history of doing what you want if you can get a way with it. No one takes confrontation easily and most get overly emotional about it. However, it doesn't matter how strongly you feel about the issue if you can't present a rational argument to address the concerns of the land managers and those who have access, the potential allies to the cause. After reading this thread, it's clear to me that the ebikers are tired of having to justify their purchase and justify their "right" to ride it where they want to, if they want to, and as such the postings are more emotional and less rational. I think everybody should back away from the keyboard, take a few breaths, investigate the land managers' position and provide a rationale to address that position and behave accordingly if you even want to hope of being granted access.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

k2rider1964 said:


> I was present with SF when this occurred. After being politely told he couldn't ride his ebike legally, he became argumentative and then said "it's not an ebike, it's pedal assist". I suggested he call Over the Edge and even offered to give hime the number. He called and was told he can't ride there but guess what, they rode anyway. I saw him unloading his bike from his truck up at Guacamole two days later...


This is it. Arguing here or anywhere isn't going to change the fact that those with e-bikes will ride them wherever they want to and they will modify the power as they wish. There really isn't much do be done about it as more and more people buy them and adopt these attitudes.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

I draw the line and endless bickering and personal attacks.

Those sorts of posts need to stop right now.


----------

