# Pedal Assist vs Strong Climber



## 779334 (Oct 10, 2014)

*Upfront disclaimer:* *I don't advocate E-Bikes or Pedal Assist ones. My position remains neutral. This question is only to gain insight and clarification. *

I'm not the strongest climber. In fact, I'm somewhere in the middle. For the sake of the argument, let's say that I'm in the Top 10 percent of all the uphill climbers out there.

Also, there's Joe Slowmo, who is a pedal assist bike rider. He may be having health issues or just a very slow climber.

Side-by-side comparison. Who will output more power when climbing uphill? My strong legs or Joe Slowmo with his weak legs and some pedal assist? If Joe isn't climbing any faster than I am, is he really causing more trail damage than me?

I know e-bikes have quite some power, but this question is regarding pedal assist only.

I am not trying to stir up an argument or make a biased statement. I'm only looking for the facts. As I have said, my position is neutral at this point.


----------



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

This was posted somewhere else so you may have seen it already, not hard science by any means but it wasn't even close.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

> Side-by-side comparison. Who will output more power when climbing uphill? My strong legs or Joe Slowmo with his weak legs and some pedal assist?





> If Joe isn't climbing any faster than I am, is he really causing more trail damage than me?


Two separate questions.

For the first, you need to define how powerful of a motor is on his bike and what PAS setting. I'm not even going to mention battery voltage.... He could be blazing by you depending on what he's riding.

On the second, no, less impact than you if he's slower. More than if he was crawling up under his own power.


----------



## 779334 (Oct 10, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> This was posted somewhere else so you may have seen it already, not hard science by any means but it wasn't even close.


I have not. Thanks for posting.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

It seems if you can get around the supermarket, you can out climb Lance Armstrong 

Here is a funny video on the subject:


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Ritchie has a better choice in beverages....

It's amazing what a 275% boost in output will do for you on a climb.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

A very weak/small person who's pretty out of shape can still produce 100W or so sustainably. So probably very slight advantage to grandma+250W if we're comparing to an unassisted pro. Total power output will be similar, but granny+e-bike should be a bit lighter than pro+bike. Depends on granny though. The skinny whippet grannies will kill the pro. The bigger grannies, probably not.

-Walt


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Walt said:


> The bigger grannies, probably not.
> 
> -Walt


Very memorable, Walt LOL I'm glad Mrs Merton died before she could read that 

"Apparently Nico Vouillioz likes to train on his Lapierre pedelec because he can climb singletrack at downhill speeds, sharpening his handling skills while gaining vert. Angling your bike to deal with berms on the climb is an odd but thrilling sensation and with the right trails the ascent can approach the stoke level of downhilling."
Haibike Xduro AMT 27.5 E-Bike Review - NSMB.com


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yup, that's why I used to train for mountain biking on a dirtbike. Bike handling at all times.

-Walt


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

AshevilleMTB said:


> Side-by-side comparison. Who will output more power when climbing uphill? My strong legs or Joe Slowmo with his weak legs and some pedal assist? If Joe isn't climbing any faster than I am, is he really causing more trail damage than me?


How fast a bike goes up hill depends on two factors. Power output and weight. Pretty simple formula that works reasonably well. It gets complicated with more rocks and lower traction of course.

Now as for trail damage with e-bikes you need to remember a few things. Weight and power are both increase on e-bikes. That means more torque to the rear wheel and more power to tear up the ground. So with same power/weight resulting in the same climb speed the e-bike will have both more power and more weight. Now I doubt a 100 watt power benefit from electric assist will do anything to the trails, but who is going to stop a 100watts? Heck is 100 watts enough to cover the extra weight of the batteries? Why not add 200 watts to cover that weight? Then at that point what is another 50more watts..... Then the snow ball grows and how do you police that?

Right now it very simple. Does it have a motor or not? If has a motor of any kind it needs to stay on "motorized" trails. If it does not then it goes on "non-motorized" trails. Very simple. I think pedal assist bikes are great for commuting and going from point A to point B, but they are not really the same as human powered bikes.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

FWIW, I don't think the trail damage argument makes much sense at the 250-750W power levels we're talking about here. Keep in mind that even a small ICE moto (say, a KX80 or something, intended for kids) can produce ~20hp or 15,000W bone stock.

That's not to say that electric motos won't get there at some point, but the bikes most of the folks here are talking about are much less powerful. If mountain bikes don't do much to the trail, neither will the currently available mass produced e-bikes. 

Actually, that's a pet peeve of mine in general - traffic of ANY kind (ok, the kind you'd see on a trail) almost never causes significant erosion. Poor trail routing + water does thousands of times as much damage - a single big storm can literally erase a section of trail if it's not built and routed well. Every time I have to sit through a meeting where some concerned citizen starts gabbling about erosion and bikes I want to strangle them. 

Whew. Sorry.

-Walt


----------



## NEPMTBA (Apr 7, 2007)

One thing you have to remember is an E-bike won't spin the tire like a Motocrosser will. My Gas Gas moto trails doesn't do damage to dirt with the same effect as the e-bike cause the HP is low and the it always has traction.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Having spent 30 years riding motorized trails and watching guys on motorcycles sit with both feet out while they rototill their way up climbs, I would never suggest ebikes at whatever power level have the same impact as a 2 or 4 stroke. I don't think anyone here is seriously claiming that.

I've designed @ 10 miles of singletrack and then been able to ride it for years and see how it holds up. I'm pretty much a full on geek about trail design, I study where bike lines develop, where people walk, how trails drain, what design decisions were good, what were mistakes and I do the same whenever I travel. In Europe, I was curious as to whether I could see any difference on their trails with all the ebikes and following ebikes, I would watch the bikes to see if discern any difference when climbing. I was riding with older riders on 250W bikes and I couldn't notice any difference compared to a fit cyclist. 

All users have impact and I think it's a toss up when you compare someone hiking or pushing their bike up a steep hill because they don't have the power to climb it, or someone grinding their way up on an 250W ebike. Both displace the same amount of soil and cause @ the same amount of trail damage IMO.

I'm unsure about 750W bikes though, primarily for the reason that you can ride up climbs that most people wouldn't bother trying to ride or push. For example, we have a trail here that is motorized, although at the moment, motos aren't allowed on it. It's multi use and multi direction, although for all practial purposes, it's DH only for bikes. I've been riding it since 1985 and while I'm sure someone has ridden it uphill, I've never seen anyone try. It's steep in many places, full of gravel and would require too much pushing to make it even semi enjoyable. There's trails that connect to the top, so everyone rides it in some sort of a loop. Motos though, can and have to ride up and they trash it since it's steep and loose. I believe someone on a 750W bike could manage riding up it as well, and while they would never have the impact a moto would, just riding up it and adding uphill traffic would increase the impact overall compared to what it is now.

I guess my point is that I don't expect that 750W ebikes are going to be out roosting turns, but I do expect that they will have an impact that is different than a bike, both in weight and power over a 250W ebike, but also how they will change how and where people will ride. I don't think they are destroyers of trails, but at the same time, to take the attitude that "meh, they're just like bikes, nothing will change" is not quite accurate either. 

I also fully agree with Walt, weather will trash a poorly designed trail far faster than any user group will. Fixing those trails is an endless chore.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Good old Cap'n Jacks?

I did actually ride up it once in college just to see how it went. It went pretty poorly. 

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Indeed, the world famous one. 

The Pros Weigh In: ?What?s Your Favorite Trail?? Part 1 | Singletracks Mountain Bike News

Motos will be back on it this fall, but for the past couple of years it's been in blue groove state.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Walt said:


> Actually, that's a pet peeve of mine in general - traffic of ANY kind (ok, the kind you'd see on a trail) almost never causes significant erosion. Poor trail routing + water does thousands of times as much damage - a single big storm can literally erase a section of trail if it's not built and routed well.
> 
> -Walt


Could not agree more.  Took me a few years to see how riders, trail design and weather interact. Motorcycles get much grief for digging trenches, but as Harry noted, that's usually happening on something stupid steep. Actually motorcycles are fantastic at holding trails in the face of weather damage, because they compact and fill in those little water canyons before they really start deep erosion. Worse damage I see is on abandoned trails. Motorcycle tires are a big factor, and thankfully trials tires are increasingly in use. I just wish there were more trials bikes, but nobody bothers to adapt them.

I took a big ride yesterday with about 11k of vertical from the Headwaters of the Salmon to Big Smoky and back. It was a heavy snow winter and still many trails are not cut out. I had to go around more than 30 trees, some in very inconvenient places. On my KTM this would have been impossible by myself, and brutal with a team. The 150lb GG is another story. In ten years I have not been turned back by logs, and it does not leave many marks going around.

What kills me is we already have the tech to make fantastic low-impact backcountry motorcycles in the 160LB range. They don't exist. Partly because the AMA actually has a minimum weight rule for motocross!

Here in Idaho we also have the phenomena of remote trails falling to disuse once they are made non-motorized because nobody cuts them out anymore and they are way out anyway, so everybody just forgets them.

Another thing I was interested to learn today, was that Scotland has just made all walking trails accessible to mtbs, period. The story was complete with Hiker curmudgeons who did not want to step to the side for a biker 

In idaho it's hard to have a favorite trail, as there are so many unbelievable options. The Headwaters of the Salmon, was just totally redone, with the original two-track plowed under at the start , and a whole new modern ST laid in to get the party started 

Deeper in, of course.....

Water on the trail by unoh7, on Flickr

Barely Used by unoh7, on Flickr


Big Smoky by unoh7, on Flickr


High Mark by unoh7, on Flickr


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Don't get me started on the stupid AMA weight limit. That was a big factor in killing trail access for motos all over the country, and it's why we don't have 150# (or less) nice quiet trail bikes - unless, as you mention, you want to go nuts on a GG or something and basically rebuild the frame for a trail riding seat height.

Crap, I bet you could get down to 100# or less, even. No need for more than about a 65-80cc engine for most trail riding (especially once you've eliminated 100+ pounds of vehicle), and DH mountain bike componentry (minus the drivetrain) would basically be up to the task as long as the rider wasn't too huge. And if you're not in such dire need of more power all the time, you can make it really quiet too. 

Too late now, though. 

-Walt


----------



## Raymo853 (Jan 13, 2004)

JoePAz said:


> How fast a bike goes up hill depends on two factors. Power output and weight. Pretty simple formula that works reasonably well. It gets complicated with more rocks and lower traction of course.
> 
> Now as for trail damage with e-bikes you need to remember a few things. Weight and power are both increase on e-bikes. That means more torque to the rear wheel and more power to tear up the ground. So with same power/weight resulting in the same climb speed the e-bike will have both more power and more weight. Now I doubt a 100 watt power benefit from electric assist will do anything to the trails, but who is going to stop a 100watts? Heck is 100 watts enough to cover the extra weight of the batteries? Why not add 200 watts to cover that weight? Then at that point what is another 50more watts..... Then the snow ball grows and how do you police that?
> 
> Right now it very simple. Does it have a motor or not? If has a motor of any kind it needs to stay on "motorized" trails. If it does not then it goes on "non-motorized" trails. Very simple. I think pedal assist bikes are great for commuting and going from point A to point B, but they are not really the same as human powered bikes.


Find for commutter bikes? No way. In a few years when we have people on ebikes doing 45 mph on bike paths hitting and killing pedistrains, runners and cyclsts. And other e bikers.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Raymo853 said:


> Find for commutter bikes? No way. In a few years when we have people on ebikes doing 45 mph on bike paths hitting and killing pedistrains, runners and cyclsts. And other e bikers.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


 Speed limits on bike paths are much lower than 45mph, if and when there is a rash of fatalities caused by violators, public outcry will bring enforcement. Supported by the income from the hefty fines....... Sort of like what we do today on our highways, why would this be any different?

In the meantime, a reckless individual can still be held to account in civil court for their actions should they cause harm. A few well publicized 5 to 10 million dollar awards may have a deterrent effect (at least upon that individual).


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

WoodlandHills said:


> Speed limits on bike paths are much lower than 45mph, if and when there is a rash of fatalities caused by violators, public outcry will bring enforcement. Supported by the income from the hefty fines....... Sort of like what we do today on our highways, why would this be any different?
> 
> In the meantime, a reckless individual can still be held to account in civil court for their actions should they cause harm. A few well publicized 5 to 10 million dollar awards may have a deterrent effect (at least upon that individual).


So, you'd rather wait until the bodies start piling up instead of enacting intelligent legislation proactively?


----------



## Raymo853 (Jan 13, 2004)

WoodlandHills said:


> Speed limits on bike paths are much lower than 45mph, if and when there is a rash of fatalities caused by violators, public outcry will bring enforcement. Supported by the income from the hefty fines....... Sort of like what we do today on our highways, why would this be any different?
> 
> In the meantime, a reckless individual can still be held to account in civil court for their actions should they cause harm. A few well publicized 5 to 10 million dollar awards may have a deterrent effect (at least upon that individual).


In the Wash DC region, there are contradictory laws and regulations on bike path speed limits. Most are 15 mph but a few are, not joke, 100% unlimited. I know as the locally infamous driver of an ELF has cited this as proof he is not going too fast on the WO&D paved rail trail. His smart phone tracking shows max speeds over 35 and averages around 20. He modified his ELF to exceed the manufacture's design specifications. http://www.solarbikecar.com/

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

What are common top speeds for expert DH mtb riders in the National Forest?


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

uhoh7 said:


> What are common top speeds for expert DH mtb riders in the National Forest?


Expert DH riders most likely have the skillset to handle to speed, and knowledge to slow around blind corners etc....
what's your point?


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

uhoh7 said:


> What are common top speeds for expert DH mtb riders in the National Forest?


Nobody knows?

I would guess 30 is very common...

As to "the skillset to handle to speed, and knowledge to slow around blind corners" on backcountry ST, I don't find it a given. No other users in the backcountry are as dangerous to others as those riding a mtb fast.

That's what makes all this postulation about crazy e-bikers so hypocritical. The same behavior is bragged about and displayed by plenty of mtb riders under gravity assist.

Double standard, obviously.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

uhoh7 said:


> Nobody knows?
> 
> I would guess 30 is very common...
> 
> ...


No, the motor makes it hypocritical.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

30 is not common. I am a pro-level descender and on fast non-technical downhill trails my top speeds are generally around 25mph/averages in the 17-19mph range, but we've got trails that I can only average 8-9mph on too that are 5% grade downhills. 

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

The winner of the recent world cup DH in Lenzerheide finished with an average time over 1.3 miles of 33mph. Just to put speed in perspective.

I stopped keeping track of data like that a decade ago, but I do remember if you were flying, you were pushing into the 20's, I doubt I ever hit 30 back then on singletrack. Or likely now. It's tight and twisty around here, no wide open straightaways. 

You could always check Strava if you want to see speeds relative to your neighborhood.


----------



## Raymo853 (Jan 13, 2004)

There is a big difference between DH racers on a specifically built downhill track at 30 ad an ebike on a flat trail with hikers and horses doing 30. Double if the DH course is a closed race course. 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

Harryman said:


> The winner of the recent world cup DH in Lenzerheide finished with an average time over 1.3 miles of 33mph. Just to put speed in perspective.


I think you are wrong here... Danny Hart: 1.3 miles in 3 minutes 5 seconds = 25.2972 mph.

You can do your own calculation here: Speed Distance Time Calculators


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Huh. I am wrong. I saw "speed" listed in the results as 53.2, which I both assumed was Kmh and average. Maybe that's the max speed? Because other people went faster but obviously didn't win.

Lenzerheide 2016 DH replay, results and race action

Gotta scroll down.....


----------

