# So why not "g"-bikes?



## deuxdiesel (Jan 14, 2007)

In all seriousness, if e-bikes are taking a foothold for trail use, why not the small gas motor converted bikes on these same trails? Far less expensive and are still "pedal assist" bikes, the only major difference is the energy source. Polite feedback only, please.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

deuxdiesel said:


> In all seriousness, if e-bikes are taking a foothold for trail use, why not the small gas motor converted bikes on these same trails? Far less expensive and are still "pedal assist" bikes, the only major difference is the energy source. Polite feedback only, please.


Using some peoples logic that would be next. Baby steps.


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

Buy a dirt bike and stick to the Moto trails.


----------



## deuxdiesel (Jan 14, 2007)

Shark said:


> Buy a dirt bike and stick to the Moto trails.


Not really answering the question. Again, if an e-bike is allowed, why not a gas-powered bike?


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

It would really simplify things if you did away with the stupid bicycle drivetrain, and replaced it with a clutch, and transmission.


----------



## andytiedye (Jul 26, 2014)

deuxdiesel said:


> In all seriousness, if e-bikes are taking a foothold for trail use, why not the small gas motor converted bikes on these same trails? Far less expensive and are still "pedal assist" bikes, the only major difference is the energy source. Polite feedback only, please.


Noise and fumes


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

My guess is because that is even more difficult to argue for and try to convince people that it belongs on a non-motorized trail.


----------



## Xaero (Mar 18, 2006)

At least the g-bike has a built in warning system that alerts you when the rider is close by... 

braaaaapppp!!!


----------



## mtbmike24 (Jul 25, 2009)

Was out on my road bike today taking a snack break and coming up the hill I see this bike I start to laugh only because it was so damn cool....I see this old lady just flying up this steep hill Wicked Witch of the West style. She was was upright and her bike had wide swooped out bars and was siting on what seemed like a old school banana seat she was going so fast and just looking around at the scenery....I think to myself how cool would that be. 

She came to a stop to wait for her husband then once he arrived she took off like a bat out of hell and dropped him like a hot rock lol.... Man if that battery took a crap she would be hosed I would not want to be stuck pedaling that bike anywhere without any assistance at her age but good for her getting out and enjoying to the day. 

I think ebikes are pretty cool personally and another way to get around nobody said riding bikes has to be a workout all the time and with me loving everything two wheels motor or not its great I think I would love to get one of these things for commuting just to help with the legs for recovery from previous rides and still be on a bike would be way cheaper than my motorcycles for commuting and being smoked from a training ride during the day not even crappy weather would not keep me from riding it and its a 15 mile commute all bike path into work. 

My wife hates bikes but a ebike would get her out with me she said. Anyway I loved this and had to share it with you guys. 

Sent from mTalk


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

deuxdiesel said:


> In all seriousness, if e-bikes are taking a foothold for trail use, why not the small gas motor converted bikes on these same trails? Far less expensive and are still "pedal assist" bikes, the only major difference is the energy source. Polite feedback only, please.


 There is that no motorized vehicles thing. Pertains to many multi use trail systems. Moto/orv areas, no issues.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

deuxdiesel said:


> Not really answering the question. Again, if an e-bike is allowed, why not a gas-powered bike?


And this is exactly why there is so much ebike hatred. It is the slippery slope and here you are asking for it. If trail mangers allow ebikes, then we'll get questions like yours. Then we'll have gas powered mopeds and then why not just allow motorcycles. No. Just no.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

mtbmike24 said:


> Was out on my road bike today taking a snack break and coming up the hill I see this bike I start to laugh only because it was so damn cool....I see this old lady just flying up this steep hill Wicked Witch of the West style. She was was upright and her bike had wide swooped out bars and was siting on what seemed like a old school banana seat she was going so fast and just looking around at the scenery....I think to myself how cool would that be.
> 
> She came to a stop to wait for her husband then once he arrived she took off like a bat out of hell and dropped him like a hot rock lol.... Man if that battery took a crap she would be hosed I would not want to be stuck pedaling that bike anywhere without any assistance at her age but good for her getting out and enjoying to the day.
> 
> ...


I think everyone here agrees that e-bikes are awesome for commuting/car replacement. The drama here is about recreational singletrack and e-bikes.

-Walt


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

deuxdiesel said:


> Not really answering the question. Again, if an e-bike is allowed, why not a gas-powered bike?


You're point is completely valid. 
Which is exactly why e-bikes should never, ever be considered to be the same thing as real bikes when it comes to trail access. The line needs to remain exactly where it is - between motor and no motor.


----------



## deuxdiesel (Jan 14, 2007)

slapheadmofo said:


> You're point is completely valid.
> Which is exactly why e-bikes should never, ever be considered to be the same thing as real bikes when it comes to trail access. The line needs to remain exactly where it is - between motor and no motor.


Agreed. I think pedal assist for commuting on public roads sounds great, but if e-bikes are going to be allowed on mtb trails, we might as well go all in and allow gas powered bikes.


----------



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

slapheadmofo said:


> You're point is completely valid.
> Which is exactly why e-bikes should never, ever be considered to be the same thing as real bikes when it comes to trail access. The line needs to remain exactly where it is - between motor and no motor.


Totally agree. Also why not electric bikes without pedals and more power but limited to the same speeds as current e-bikes? A rhetorical question, perhaps like the op's.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I don't even really care what sort of access e- or g-bikes get, as long as they get it on their own merits, and if there ever are any issues, real bikes are always considered a completely separate user group from motorized bikes. 

You know...common sense and all.


----------



## mtbmike24 (Jul 25, 2009)

Walt said:


> I think everyone here agrees that e-bikes are awesome for commuting/car replacement. The drama here is about recreational singletrack and e-bikes.
> 
> -Walt


Actually I should have read the title more closely it says so why not "G" BIKES thought it said why not E bikes my bad... carry on.

Sent from mTalk


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

I wondered if they posted such non-sense on the interwebz in 1868? This is fake post with fake questions that give the e*haters a chance to post in the e*forum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_motorized_bicycle_history


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Irony defined; "motorized", from the first line of the very thing you link to in an attempt to give creadance to "motorized" bicycles.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Giant Warp said:


> I wondered if they posted such non-sense on the interwebz in 1868? This is fake post with fake questions that give the e*haters a chance to post in the e*forum.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_motorized_bicycle_history


And what has anyone above said that was "non-sense"?


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

The non-sense is the insinuation that gas powered bikes will rule the universe. If motorized bikes have been around for 150 yrs and haven't taken over yet then pray tell when will they take over. LOL

Are people going to park a gas bike in their apartment? Are they going to roll a gas bike into their office at work?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yeah, gas powered things totally didn't take over around the turn of the 20th century...

Hilarious.

-W


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

Walt said:


> Yeah, gas powered things totally didn't take over around the turn of the 20th century...
> 
> Hilarious.
> 
> -W


I thought we were talking about bikes? Better put down the hash pipe.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

OP, guess no one got the irony of your thread, totally over everyone's head it seems. I totally agree with you, engine, is an engine, no matter what fuel it uses to make the power, but doubt the e-bikers will get it and try to say that somehow their electric powered engines are not really engines comapared to a gas/diesel motor, the MTB human powered riders are just going to jump on it like e-bikes without realising the intent of the thread :skep:


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Giant Warp said:


> The non-sense is the insinuation that gas powered bikes will rule the universe. If motorized bikes have been around for 150 yrs and haven't taken over yet then pray tell when will they take over. LOL
> 
> Are people going to park a gas bike in their apartment? Are they going to roll a gas bike into their office at work?


I don't see where anyone has insinuated that. And if you ever visit Asia, you'll see tons of motorized bikes of all types, g and e, being used for basic transportation. Which everyone here seems to agree is a good thing.

I never parked my car in my apartment. And when I ride my bike to work, I park it outside. And no one said e-bikes should be replaced with g-bikes so I'm not sure what you are insinuating or what that has to do with this conversation. All that's really been said is that if e-bikes are allowed on trails, why wouldn't g-bikes as there is no real difference other than how the motor is powered.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Exactly. 
And I for one don't see why there should be a distinction. 

Curious as to what reasons e-bike proponents could possibly give for thinking their choice of motorized bikes should be allowed on non-motorized trails while denying others access at the same time? 

BTW - "they aren't as easy to store in my bedroom" isn't any sort of valid argument when it comes to access issues.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

SHM, one reason in socal; horses traverse many of the trails. They are used to "quiet" bikes as I've encountered multitudes on an MTB or e-bike. An ICE overtaking them might be dangerous for the equestrian, maybe biker. Still, I agree that e-bikes are different than MTB's and should be accepted or rejected on their own merits. Of interest (TO ME) is that some bike paths where e-bikes would be permitted have "no electric bikes" signs on them --- "signs of the times" (pun intended)".


----------



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

LyNx said:


> OP, guess no one got the irony of your thread, totally over everyone's head it seems.


Totally, everyone but yours :skep:


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

fos'l said:


> SHM, one reason in socal; horses traverse many of the trails. They are used to "quiet" bikes as I've encountered multitudes on an MTB or e-bike. An ICE overtaking them might be dangerous for the equestrian, maybe biker. Still, I agree that e-bikes are different than MTB's and should be accepted or rejected on their own merits. Of interest (TO ME) is that some bike paths where e-bikes would be permitted have "no electric bikes" signs on them --- "signs of the times" (pun intended)".


Hey bud. Happy spring!
I can see how that might make sense on popular horse trails. Though I wouldn't be surprised if horses are actually more comfortable with an ICE than something "quiet" like an MTB or e-bike coming up on them; no expert though.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

The main hinderance is that legally, ebikes are no longer mopeds or motorized bicycles while gas powered bikes still are. Which leads to none of the motoped riders or industry claiming they are bikes. Given the realities of similar performance from what some people sell and claim are still ebikes, like this:






and a 49cc/@3000w 4 stroke motoped like this:






it's an interesting discussion.

You could certainly engineer a smaller power plant or mod an RC airplane motor (ironically, like some ebike motors) to get within the 750w limit and likely keep it pretty quiet.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Giant Warp said:


> Are people going to park a gas bike in their apartment? Are they going to roll a gas bike into their office at work?














The image above is a joke reply to your comment, but in all seriousness, yes, many people do park motorcycles inside their homes and places of work depending on circumstances. A friend of mine keeps his Harley Fat Boy in his office, next to his desk, of course he owns the business, but it can be done, especially if we are talking about a bicycle that is powered by a small Gas Powered Motor, if you live or work someplace a Bicycle could be parked inside, the ICE is not going to change that anymore than a battery would.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Giant Warp said:


> I thought we were talking about bikes? Better put down the hash pipe.


I thought you were saying that (I quote) "motorized bikes... haven't taken over yet". This is patently untrue - motorcycles DID in fact (along with cars) replace bicycles almost completely in the United States in the early 1900s. Now, if your point was that motorcycles with pedals and cranks never caught on, sure - that's clearly true, because once you have even a tiny engine (as long as it's reliable) there's really no reason to have the pedals anymore. Even a crappy 50cc motor will put out 5+ times the power a human can.

If anything, your argument taken to it's logical extreme suggests that the pedals on e-bikes will go away/become vestigial (50mm cranks that can be locked in place, with footpegs?) on vehicles with significantly more motor power than human power.

-Walt


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

Internal combustion motors can be pretty darn clean and quiet when that is the primary goal. I do think it's possible to build a g-bike that is clean and probably no louder than an I9 or Hope hub.

So yes, I do think that a g-bike could be a viable competitor to an e-bike. And with the lower price point and increased range, it would get more people into the sport.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I've ridden trials motos that probably weren't any louder than a loud rear hub, and they had loads more power than you'd need to ride trails as fast as you wanted. 

Could also go fuel cell - keep the quiet operation/electric drive/no fumes, but add a lot of range while still using some form of liquid fuel. Cost to set that up would be pretty high of course. 

-Walt


----------



## Bjorn2Ride (Apr 4, 2017)

deuxdiesel said:


> In all seriousness, if e-bikes are taking a foothold for trail use, why not the small gas motor converted bikes on these same trails? Far less expensive and are still "pedal assist" bikes, the only major difference is the energy source. Polite feedback only, please.


If that small gas motor was silent, produced no emissions, posed zero fire risk, could only be accessed via torque-assist, was limited in terms of power augmentation, and was seamlessly integrated into the bike, it would be a great idea. The "gas" could be hydrogen liberated from water via solar powered electrolysis. It's an interesting proposal.

Battery and EV tech is lightyears ahead, though, so what would the purpose be?

I understand your point that once you are using the mechanical advantage of a bicycle, you are no longer solely "muscle powered".


----------



## Giant Warp (Jun 11, 2009)

A couple of responses:
1. Just because someone has parked a motorcycle in their house doesn't mean it is common. Think about what you are saying. Only a idiot brings gasoline into a living space whether at home or the office. It is valid to suggest that people will choose an ebike over a gas bicycle. 
2. I was not talking about how many gas powered bikes were sold in Asia or the U.S. for street use. Use some common sense here. Are we not talking about local "dirt" trails? Who cares how many bikes electric or gas are on the streets. Sheesh....The point was these things have been around for a very long time. If they are a threat to the local trail systems then how come we do not see any on the trails? And I am not talking about an occasional poacher. 
3. It was asked how an ebiker could differentiate between the ebike and the gas bike as far as trail access is concerned. I could ask the same question of mountain bikers that want bikes allowed in wilderness areas.
4. People need to learn that the "trail access" issue is confined to limited areas in a few states. They should stop acting like their problems are something that mountain bikers nationwide need to worried about. Times are changing fast. Whole communities are being built with the idea of bike access in mind. I've run into many old people who are on electric bikes. Old people vote, old people have the power in this country, old people make things happen. Who do you think are buying these Turbo Levos? Do you think some young hooligan is shelling out $5000-7000 for a bicycle so they can go rip up some local trail? Working professionals and retired professionals are buying these things. 
5. I can see why places like Park City don't want the ebike. It is obvious. Park City is already severely overcrowded. They don't want tourists buzzing around on their ebikes running down the tourist hikers that just bought there first pair of hiking boots. On a side note, you should see the mountain biker trains of Park City tourists that come bombing down Millcreek Canyon in Salt Lake City. They ride the lift or shuttle up the mountain on the Park City side and then bomb the Salt Lake side in large groups of people. It doesn't matter if the trails are wet or not. 
6. Another concern the anti-ebikers bring up is uphill trail speed and some even say the ebike causes more erosion. Let's take Moab for an example. Moab has a blanket ban on ebikes on mtn bike trails. Are there blind corners in Moab where an uphill rider is going to get in a collision with a downhill biker? Can slick rock be eroded by an ebike? Doesn't Porcupine start out as 4X4 road and then turn into a downhill trail? Pray tell how could an ebike threaten anybody on the Porc? Moab is building tons and tons of new mountain bike trails for mountain bikes. How could one insinuate that these new trails could have access taken away? These trails were built for bikes. LOL. They only exist for bikes. The number of hikers that I have seen out in the middle of nowhere on Moab mtn bike trails is statistically .0001% . There is no threat to access by ebikes in Moab. Take Captain Ahab for example. Did the trail builders follow the natural contour of the land? No, they decided where they wanted the trail to go and then moved and stacked the rocks and boulders to do what they wanted them to do. It is a completely "un-natural" trail . Essentially they've built a mountain bike highway on public land. Who are they to say who can ride what kind of mountain bike on the mountain bike highway on public land?
7. My ebike is speed limited to 17 mph. Some ebikes are very fast and can roost the tire. Would someone with a very fast ebike want to go tear up the local trails? The local trails that are crowded with dogs and hikers and mountain bikers? How are they going to have fun roosting at high speed when they have to spend all of there time waiting to pass people and pets? The truth is that they are going to seek out harder trails in more remote areas to have fun. Let me use a moto example. Say a person always rides a 125cc moto. Then one day they get a 450cc moto. Do they want to ride the 450 in the same places that they ride the 125? Of course not, that would be boring as hell. The ebike is no different. For many mountain bikers it is all about the downhill. With my ebike I look for steeper places to go. A 51lb Levo plus a 190lb rider plus 3.0 tires equals good traction. That baby climbs. In our area there are many rogue hiking trails. These aren't the same kind of trail that a "save our planet" type of person goes out to count butterflies on. These are made my mountain runners and people walking their pets. Mountain bikes don't usually hit these trails because they have loose gravel or are too steep. With the ebike they are free game. 
8. So far the only people that I have seen violently opposed to the ebike are mtn bkrs on this forum. I guess I am lucky I live in Utah. Every time I stop and talk to a hiker and explain my bike to them (whether man or woman) they are crazy impressed and want to either get one for trails or commuting. Times are a changing indeed. Maybe it is a red state blue state thing I don't know. Cheers.


----------



## andytiedye (Jul 26, 2014)

Gas powered bikes are heavier and much more difficult to lift over downed trees.

Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Why not g-bikes? Simple: greenhouse gas emissions. Prior to the Trump administration it was government policy to encourage the transition from fossil fuels to renewables by promoting all types of electric transportation, including bicycles, over gasoline or diesel. This is now off of the agenda for at least the next four years which may be a good thing for those opposed to the concept of ebikes everywhere pbikes can go. However the impulse to exploit federal lands for private profit may result in a libertarian anything goes policy that would allow access by anything a free citizen wanted to use anywhere he wanted to go. Who really knows what the plan might be with these guys currently in power, I'm none too sure that they have any clue either at this point.....

I do know that an awful lot of power sports fans (dirt bikes, quads, ATVs and four wheelers, etc) voted for Trump. And that the proposed deep budget cuts argue against enforcement of any rules in any park......


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Giant Warp said:


> 1. Just because someone has parked a motorcycle in their house doesn't mean it is common. Think about what you are saying. Only a idiot brings gasoline into a living space whether at home or the office. It is valid to suggest that people will choose an ebike over a gas bicycle.


To be fair you were not questioning if it was common, just if it would be done and I was simply pointing out that it IS being done and backed it up with a personal account and photographic evidence. No it is not common, but it is also not common (yet) for ebikes or small ICE engines in Bicycles to be primary methods of transportation to and from work. Do people do it, yes, is it common, not yet.

Personally if I did not have a Garage with space for my bikes I would store them in the house/apartment, gas or no gas. When items get left outside they are at much higher risk to be stolen.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

WoodlandHills said:


> Why not g-bikes? Simple: greenhouse gas emissions. .


This point has nothing to do with trail access.

Where does the electricity for charging batteries come from?
How 'green' is the manufacture and disposal of batteries?

If you think g-bikes should be disallowed because you believe e-bikes are 'greener', then why do you not think the same argument applies to e-bikes versus real bikes?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Bjorn2Ride said:


> If that small gas motor was silent, produced no emissions, posed zero fire risk,


But...those parameters don't apply to e-bikes either.
Electric motors aren't silent (some are pretty damn noisy actually).
Ever see a battery blaze up? It's no joke.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Carbon schmarbon. We're all living lifestyles that generate way more than is sustainable, no matter how much organic food you get from the coop or how much you ride your bike. 

Trail access and user experience/safety are the issues. 

-W


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

slapheadmofo said:


> This point has nothing to do with trail access.
> 
> Where does the electricity for charging batteries come from?
> How 'green' is the manufacture and disposal of batteries?
> ...


While that is a good point in the grand scheme of things and I agree that when it comes to overall greenhouse emissions as long as fossil fuels are burned to make electricity, electricity is not "green". HOWEVER, I think for me personally I would rather see an e-bike on my local trail than anything gas powered just so I would not have to smell exhaust while out for a hike or a ride.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

Klurejr said:


> While that is a good point in the grand scheme of things and I agree that when it comes to overall greenhouse emissions as long as fossil fuels are burned to make electricity, electricity is not "green". HOWEVER, I think for me personally I would rather see an e-bike on my local trail than anything gas powered just so I would not have to smell exhaust while out for a hike or a ride.


Agree, I wouldn't either. Thing is, IC emissions on modern engines have been cleaned up to the point where there virtually aren't any fumes. If you are smelling fumes at the trailhead, it's from an older car or one that is not functioning properly. Yeah an off-road 2-stroke spews out a ton of fumes, but as discussed, that's out.

Anyway, electric may be the cleanest ATM, but other options may be just as viable.

The greenhouse argument only applies if you are riding to the trailhead, or using a 100% electric car to get there. If you are driving, it's a moot point, and you are hauling extra weight with an IC motor on the drive. Also as mentioned, the electricity has to come from somewhere, though it should contribute less to greenhouse gasses than an IC motor.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

JACKL said:


> Agree, I wouldn't either. Thing is, IC emissions on modern engines have been cleaned up to the point where there virtually aren't any fumes. If you are smelling fumes at the trailhead, it's from an older car or one that is not functioning properly. Yeah an off-road 2-stroke spews out a ton of fumes, but as discussed, that's out.
> 
> Anyway, electric may be the cleanest ATM, but other options may be just as viable.
> 
> The greenhouse argument only applies if you are riding to the trailhead, or using a 100% electric car to get there. If you are driving, it's a moot point, and you are hauling extra weight with an IC motor on the drive. Also as mentioned, the electricity has to come from somewhere, though it should contribute less to greenhouse gasses than an IC motor.


If someone made a gasoline powered motor that was virtually silent and had no emissions smell, then yes, there is no viable difference for use on MUT. If such a thing exists I am not currently aware of it.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

slapheadmofo said:


> This point has nothing to do with trail access.
> 
> Where does the electricity for charging batteries come from?
> How 'green' is the manufacture and disposal of batteries?
> ...


 I'm not promoting or endorsing any point of view, just trying to explain how the present policy came about. Sources of electricity are many and varied, but some are non greenhouse gas emitting, something that no ICE can claim no matter how much you scrub the exhaust. Anyway nobody cared about MTBers or trail impact when the law was written, either the MTB advocacy groups took their eyes off of the ball or they totally misread the situation, but there did not seem to be any input given at the time. Certainly MTB groups would not have been the ones who made Class 1 and Class 2 ebikes equal to all other bikes!

And if there is ever an ICE bike as quiet and as clean and as cool-running as my ebike, or maybe a similar fuel cell bike of Class 1 power level then I would welcome them.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

JACKL said:


> Agree, I wouldn't either. Thing is, IC emissions on modern engines have been cleaned up to the point where there virtually aren't any fumes. If you are smelling fumes at the trailhead, it's from an older car or one that is not functioning properly. Yeah an off-road 2-stroke spews out a ton of fumes, but as discussed, that's out.
> 
> Anyway, electric may be the cleanest ATM, but other options may be just as viable.
> 
> The greenhouse argument only applies if you are riding to the trailhead, or using a 100% electric car to get there. If you are driving, it's a moot point, and you are hauling extra weight with an IC motor on the drive. Also as mentioned, the electricity has to come from somewhere, though it should contribute less to greenhouse gasses than an IC motor.


 I'm not up on the latest moto tech: do dirt bikes have catalytic converters these days? Because if they don't they are still polluting far, far more than any ebike, or pickup truck!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

andytiedye said:


> Gas powered bikes are heavier and much more difficult to lift over downed trees.
> 
> Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk


Considering these roughly equivelent electric bikes and motopeds are within @ 10lbs of each other, I think the difference between a comparable Class 1 ICE bike would not be as great as one might think.

https://motoped.com/pro/

2017 HPC TYPHOON - Hi-Power Cycles


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

WoodlandHills said:


> I'm not up on the latest moto tech: do dirt bikes have catalytic converters these days? Because if they don't they are still polluting far, far more than any ebike, or pickup truck!


Nuclear waste? A great deal of California's electricity is generated in AZ. @ Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, very little is solar generated power. All this "clean" energy you tout isn't all that clean after all. How about carbon foot print? Emotorcycles are far from being the panacea every proponent makes them out to be.


----------



## portnuefpeddler (Jun 14, 2016)

I'll answer like the OP really had a legitimate interest in whether we e bikers were somehow missing the boat by not looking into ICE powered bikes, rather then some convoluted access issue point to make. I'll pass on that issue.

I am surprised no one has mentioned the best thing about electric motors, the lack of performance drop off with altitude gain. Though in some applications they ARE derated due to the thinner air providing less cooling effect, the power they can produce does not drop off like a ICE. I spend a lot of time at 8k and twice have been above 10, and this is a huge advantage. As is the total lack of noise as compared to an ICE, all my bikes have bear bells. My tires and Rohloff hub together make more noise then my BBSHD drive, it's virtually silent for all practical purposes. I also recharge with 100% renewable energy, (either wind, hydro, or PV, I have all three) try that with a ICE. Also full torque, or nearly so, at low RPM's, is another great characteristic of an electric motor as opposed to an ICE. Driving down the road I use a small inverter to charge the bike, and still get over 50 MPG in the Prius I drive, that green enough for you? I don't stay awake nights worrying about my carbon footprint, I just have been making 100% (actually more then 100%) of my own electrical needs for decades now, so an e bike was a natural for me instead of an ICE powered one, I've had plenty of motorcycles of all sizes in the past. For some reason I still struggle to comprehend, riding an e mountain bike is way more fun then any dirt or road bike I've had, or a regular bicycle for that matter. Laziness or being out of shape (I'm not either) have nothing to do with it, they are just more giggly all out fun.


----------



## Steve71 (Mar 15, 2004)

andytiedye said:


> Gas powered bikes are heavier and much more difficult to lift over downed trees.
> 
> Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk


That's why you ride them over. With a motor and skill, you can clean a 2ft+ dia log.


----------



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

Steve71 said:


> That's why you ride them over. With skill you can clean a 2ft+ dia log.


fify


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> fify


Gotta get rid of that cheater log on the exit side or it's just a log pile.

If he's got a cheater on the other side too, then it really doesn't count for ****.
Major difficulty factor drop.


----------



## Steve71 (Mar 15, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> Gotta get rid of that cheater log on the exit side or it's just a log pile.
> 
> If he's got a cheater on the other side too, then it really doesn't count for ****.
> Major difficulty factor drop.


^ exactly!

Not to mention logs are a ton more fun on a moto.


----------



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

Steve71 said:


> ^ exactly!


ok maybe a bad example but plenty of riders can clear 2' logs, some can do even better.










I admit that a motor and 12" of travel would make it easier but "fun" is subjective.


----------



## Steve71 (Mar 15, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> ok maybe a bad example but plenty of riders can clear 2' logs, some can do even better.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


13" of travel and 50hp make it easier in some ways, but the additional 200lb's makes it a lot harder in other ways.

Hard to tell from a still photo, but Danny looks to be using a kicker there. None the less, what one of the worlds best trials riders can do, doesn't have much to do with what the average-expert MTB'er can do. Ever seen what a trials moto rider can get up and over?

But I mentioned this in the first place, not to start a pi$$ing contest, but to counter the statement made earlier that gas bikes were to heavy to lift over a big log.


----------

