# How Can We Grow This Forum?



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

The owner of MTBR created this forum as a "vehicle" to discuss products, components, procedures and other e-MTB aspects to increase knowledge about them. Unfortunately, a group of e-negatives has continued to attack proponents and turn almost every issue into one regarding access. The moderator(s), and I realize Walt doesn't moderate this forum, have exhibited consistent bias toward e-negatives by, for instance banning e-positives, but never AFAICT e-negatives no matter how egregious or off the wall their comments were. This further diluted the number of proponents here. How can we counteract this negative direction?

1) Promote a Moderator with the stones to ban e-negatives who divert a discussion or make stupid comments like an e-bike is a moped. Additionally, it would be nice to have an example of the so-called closing speed "problem" before being allowed to say that a guy going 20-50 mph down a hill is influenced by someone climbing at 6 mph instead of 4 mph.
2) Ban anyone who discusses access anywhere except in its own thread.
3) Don't allow any negative comments about e-bikes unless you've ridden one or have had an issue with someone riding one. Most of the BS negativity here is all made up on the couch.

Any more ideas? BTW, if you can't contribute some positive information, please just tell your Mommy about how mad you are.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

4. Don't silence dissent.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

My guess is that the fervor against e-mtbs will calm down somewhat as legal definitions and access becomes better defined by local, state and federal agencies regulate trails. 
That may take some time. 

In the meantime, better forum moderation might help.


----------



## eFat (Jun 14, 2017)

Banning and deleting is not a solution for me. But enforcing a strict policy where all off subject and provocative messages are moved to a single thread could be a step in the right direction.

And of course the "hot" subjects must have their own threads as these discussions should also be here, but simply not everywhere.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

It's ironic to see someone use a mommy reference while asking for special protection. But I do see that you are really just adding a thread counter to the one questioning whether there should be an e-bike forum at mtbr. So touche' my good friend.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

I believe that there needs to be a clear distinction between which type of E-Bikes we are talking about. i.e. have a "Pedal Assist" sub-forum, where the issues of Electric Motor bikes and non pedal assist are segregated.
That way the E-Bike negatives can continue to rant about the modified beasts that do damage the trails, and do have high closing speeds, unlike pedal assists, and leave genuine riders of pedal assist e-bikes to have discussions on our bikes without the rhetoric.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

It might be helpful if new users do some reading before they do any posting, specifically reading the forum rules, more specifically the e-Bike forum rules...... And then following them.

Also the only Moderator assigned to this section is Pro-Ebike in a big way. If you think a particular user is being rude or violating the rules of this site use the report funtion on the post in question and the Moderator assigned(not me) will get an email telling them to take a look.....

And while I do not need to defend myself, I have deleted many posts from what you call "e-haters" per site rules regarding name calling, taking threads off-topic and post designed to incite arguments. When I delete them they are fully gone from your view, only another moderator can look at them. If you want to know why a certain user was banned recently feel free to PM me. He made some very disgusting comments about others body parts that were wholly unacceptable on this site after he had been warned once. I happened to catch his post within a few hours so not many people saw it, but his post is still there if another mod wants to review it.


----------



## Sharp things (Jun 8, 2017)

Banning things is not the answer. I think that (eventually) e-bikes will become more accepted and the people who ride pedal assist and non pedal assist will work together to further mountain biking in general. There is strength in numbers and it will make the most sense in the long run.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

This needs to be a two way street. Any ebiker who promotes poaching, advocates or suggests modifying an ebike to outside legal limits or contributes to slandering those who disagree need to be censored. If someone has a legitimate point or anecdote they'd like to share, they shouldn't be attacked for it. Ebikes are still a huge grey area and as such, there is still literature and legal code calling them mopeds. It's a legitimate point and if it offends, well, get over it. Or, discuss ways to change it. There need to be more discussions here about how ebikers are actually fighting for access and who they are talking to to make it happen. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Silentfoe said:


> This needs to be a two way street. Any ebiker who promotes poaching, advocates or suggests modifying an ebike to outside legal limits or contributes to slandering those who disagree need to be censored. If someone has a legitimate point or anecdote they'd like to share, they shouldn't be attacked for it. Ebikes are still a huge grey area...


Not totally on board with censoring... but I get the point and otherwise agree with you.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Censor, as in correct or modify. Unless someone downright earns it, I don't like banning. We don't need name calling on either side.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

fos'l said:


> The owner of MTBR created this forum as a "vehicle" to discuss products, components, procedures and other e-MTB aspects to increase knowledge about them. Unfortunately, a group of e-negatives has continued to attack proponents and turn almost every issue into one regarding access. The moderator(s), and I realize Walt doesn't moderate this forum, have exhibited consistent bias toward e-negatives by, for instance banning e-positives, but never AFAICT e-negatives no matter how egregious or off the wall their comments were. This further diluted the number of proponents here. How can we counteract this negative direction?
> 
> 1) Promote a Moderator with the stones to ban e-negatives who divert a discussion or make stupid comments like an e-bike is a moped. Additionally, it would be nice to have an example of the so-called closing speed "problem" before being allowed to say that a guy going 20-50 mph down a hill is influenced by someone climbing at 6 mph instead of 4 mph.
> 2) Ban anyone who discusses access anywhere except in its own thread.
> ...


Yes, this works great at a certain colored house that a certain orange headed person runs. You can say how great something is, and anyone that disagrees needs to be banned.

Call your own mom and ask her if a bike has a motor, what is it.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Move this forum to its own Electric Mountain Moped site where it can bask in the glory of its own existence without the pesky 100% human powered bicycle crowd throwing shade on its magnificence!

That's what I would do.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

I tend to agree that a distinct URL would be the way to go for the forum (and associated though seldom used trail/review/classified sections). 

-Walt


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

You guys are missing the entire point. 

This site, and every sub-forum on it, exists to generate page-views and clicks, almost without exception. If PVs and clicks are up, only one thing would contravene that: a strong decrease in repeat visitors, i.e. users who were so pissed off they were logging off and not returning. 

I would be willing to bet that this sub-forum is doing just fine on that, despite (actually, because of) the controversy. Its certainly generating a lot of pageviews, and by extension, clicks. And, anti-ebikers probably aren't exiting the site because of the controversy, and pro-ebikers probably aren't either, except for a few, which becomes par for the course. 

You are not asking for the forum to grow, its growing just fine. You are asking for a safe space - that won't happen until that becomes more profitable than the forum as it exists today.


----------



## Sharp things (Jun 8, 2017)

Procter said:


> You are not asking for the forum to grow, its growing just fine. *You are asking for a safe space *- that won't happen until that becomes more profitable than the forum as it exists today.


No more mean and nasty trigger words?


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Let's just build a wall around the e-bike forum and only allow pro-ebikers in. If you don't like it, then get the heck out of my forum!


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Someday the owner will decide that this could be a valuable forum. I'll try to help it go forward at that time. This was just to elicit suggestions on how to accomplish it. There's a much different skill set here than any other e-forum; too bad we can't develop it positively. But, if not, no big deal. I've got enough bikes of all kinds, a plethora of places to ride and people to ride with when desired, so let the chips fall where they may.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

You should just read the forums that don't bring up access for the forums that don't insist that a motor on a bike is not a motor. Like the Levo spec, with less than 20 replies, or the ABS thread with 0 replies. Maybe check out that contorversial Ebike at sea otter and those 6 replies. The Ebike forum would be a ghost town if you actually talked about Ebikes and admitted what the are. I saw on here today, they are not pedal assist they are motor assist, and until you can admit that, they will never be accepted by REAL MOUNTAIN BIKERS.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

sfgiantsfan said:


> I saw on here today, they are not pedal assist they are motor assist, and until you can admit that, they will never be accepted by REAL MOUNTAIN BIKERS.


----------



## eFat (Jun 14, 2017)

KiwiPhil said:


> I believe that there needs to be a clear distinction between which type of E-Bikes we are talking about. i.e. have a "Pedal Assist" sub-forum...





Silentfoe said:


> This needs to be a two way street. Any ebiker who promotes poaching, advocates or suggests modifying an ebike to outside legal limits or contributes to slandering those who disagree need to be censored.


These are good ideas. Focus on legal pedal-assist even if the definition is not the same depending on location.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

sfgiantsfan said:


> they will never be accepted by REAL MOUNTAIN BIKERS.


 Seems someone has put himself on a pedestal.

Funny thing that I note, most of the people here TRYING to discuss E-bikes, are "REAL MOUNTAIN BIKERS" and have disclosed that they, like myself, still have and use "REAL MOUNTAIN BIKES".

How a new sub forum on a new offshoot of the sport is supposed miraculously have thousands of instant replies, I don't know. But I've taken some good info from them already, and can only see it growing.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Be even better when those who have nothing to say, but can send private messages which called me a dirty name leave for good.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Based on what I've seen on other forums, ebike sub forums on non ebike forums are small and usually quiet because like here, the relative population is small. On ebike specific forums which are very active, the emtb sub forums while more active than here, are also relatively small because most of the ebikes sold are not emtbs. Part of it is the fact that emtbs are a niche market in a niche market, the other is that any forum needs to have critical mass to get people to check in and post regularly. If there's only a few new replies a day and a handful of new threads a week, most people move on. Since I wanted to be part of an ebike forum, which I do, I go to where the ebikers are, where there's already a community. I don't feel any obligation to try to create a new one here. It's an amusing sideshow though.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

So this need to be a pro ebike forum? Hmmm. Dissent and civil discussion have merit as well. 27.5 is better than 29er? Plus are better than both? Fat tires are better than all? Strava does no wrong. Etc. Civil discussion seems appropriate.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

What all you pro e-moped riders don't get or can't fathom is not only thinking about your selves and being selfish, you are in the minority of people who might want or use an assisted bike without modifying it, the majority of people looking at e-moped, are looking for as much power as they can as attested to by the many videos on YouTube about such vehicles or how to mod them to such.

As said, when your group admits to the fact that you are your own group and stops trying to hide behind and piggyback on regular, HUMAN POWERED MTBs and all the issues associated with this, then you will gain "regular" MTBers respect and acceptance.


----------



## eFat (Jun 14, 2017)

LyNx said:


> you are in the minority of people who might want or use an assisted bike without modifying it


You are 100% wrong on this.

It may be the case for homemade realisations but the "from the shelf" market that is growing is not like that.


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

eFat said:


> You are 100% wrong on this.
> 
> It may be the case for homemade realisations but the "from the shelf" market that is growing is not like that.


Ebikes can help you see the future too?


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

LyNx said:


> What all you pro e-scooter riders don't get or can't fathom is not only thinking about your selves and being selfish, you are in the minority of people who might want or use an assisted bike without modifying it, the majority of people looking at e-scooters, are looking for as much power as they can as attested to by the many videos on YouTube about such vehicles or how to mod them to such.
> 
> As said, when your group admits to the fact that you are your own group and stops trying to hide behind and pggyback on regular, HUMAN POWERED MTBs and all the issues associated with this, then you will gain "regular" MTBers respect and acceptance.


A scooter doesn't have pedals. Look at the rules for the forum. And, aren't you better off sending private messages to individuals than exhibiting your ignorance to everyone?


----------



## Sharp things (Jun 8, 2017)

sfgiantsfan said:


> You should just read the forums that don't bring up access for the forums that don't insist that a motor on a bike is not a motor. Like the Levo spec, with less than 20 replies, or the ABS thread with 0 replies. Maybe check out that contorversial Ebike at sea otter and those 6 replies. The Ebike forum would be a ghost town if you actually talked about Ebikes and admitted what the are. I saw on here today, they are not pedal assist they are motor assist, and until you can admit that, they will never be accepted by *REAL MEN*.


There, I fixed it for you.


----------



## Sharp things (Jun 8, 2017)

LyNx said:


> What all you pro e-moped riders don't get or can't fathom is not only thinking about your selves and being selfish, you are in the minority of people who might want or use an assisted bike without modifying it, *the majority of people looking at e-moped, are looking for as much power as they can as attested to by the many videos on YouTube about such vehicles or how to mod them to such*.
> 
> As said, when your group admits to the fact that you are your own group and stops trying to hide behind and piggyback on regular, HUMAN POWERED MTBs and all the issues associated with this, then you will gain "regular" MTBers respect and acceptance.


That's like saying all gun owners are going to shoot up their workplace or some such nonsense. I would say the people that want to mod their bikes for more power are the minority.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

fos'l said:


> Someday the owner will decide that this could be a valuable forum. I'll try to help it go forward at that time. This was just to elicit suggestions on how to accomplish it. There's a much different skill set here than any other e-forum; too bad we can't develop it positively. But, if not, no big deal. I've got enough bikes of all kinds, a plethora of places to ride and people to ride with when desired, so let the chips fall where they may.


It is a valuable forum, its generating lots of views, comments, and clicks. This thread is no exception, this may generate another 300 posts and 10,000 views before its done.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

LyNx said:


> What all you pro e-moped riders don't get or can't fathom is not only thinking about your selves and being selfish, you are in the minority of people who might want or use an assisted bike without modifying it, the majority of people looking at e-moped, are looking for as much power as they can as attested to by the many videos on YouTube about such vehicles or how to mod them to such.
> 
> As said, when your group admits to the fact that you are your own group and stops trying to hide behind and piggyback on regular, HUMAN POWERED MTBs and all the issues associated with this, then you will gain "regular" MTBers respect and acceptance.


I wholeheartedly agree with this. People are just looking for an excuse to let motors on multi use trails. I think once land managers realize this, it will put an end to the debate quickly.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

So, what should happen now Lemonaid and LyNx, in fairness to those reading this forum, is for you to disclose to us what you consider as being e-mopeds? 
I do not consider myself to have a e-moped, I have a Pedal Assist E-bike. From what I can determine, you are using the phrase E-moped as a condescending and derogatory manner even though it seems to have been emphasised that this should not happen? So, please enlighten us. Thanks

And it was noted LyNx,that your post originally read "pro e-scooter rider"


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

So you e-assist bike is a moped since it has a MOtor and PEDals. 

I'm not using it to be derogatory I'm using it to make it easy to distinguish from a 100% human powered mountain bike.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

vikb said:


> So you e-assist bike is a moped since it has a MOtor and PEDals.
> 
> I'm not using it to be derogatory I'm using it to make it easy to distinguish from a 100% human powered mountain bike.


There is a great paradox here - Ironically, the term moped is canonically derogatory, because they are almost uniformly viewed as puny, under-powered motorcycles. So those here viewing the term as derogatory, are doing so in some part due to the subconscious, inescapable inadequacy of mopeds, and by extension, e-bikes, compared to real motorcycles. If what e-bikers claim about e-bikes is true, they should embrace the moped moniker as reinforcement of e-bikes docility and meagerness.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Procter said:


> There is a great paradox here - Ironically,* the term moped is canonically derogatory, because they are almost uniformly viewed as puny, under-powered motorcycles*.


That's you projecting your biases on the term.



> a motorized bicycle that has pedals in addition to a low-powered gasoline engine designed for low-speed operation.


From dictionary.com ^^^. I added "electric mountain" to moped for your pedal assist machine to denote it's meant for offroad use and powered by a battery vs. gasoline. I don't use the term in a derogatory way.

I was calling all electric mountain motorcycles...motorcycles because I think there are pragmatic difficulties distinguishing pedal assist from throttle operated versions of these machines.

In listening to what proponents were saying in this forum about pedal assist being so different I relented and adopted the appropriate term - "moped" for the machines that require you to turn the pedals to activate the electric motor.

If moped really bothers the collective "you". I'm okay calling them electric motorcycles. Maybe that sounds more macho and hardcore to you and you won't feel put down. If that's the case I'm okay with electric mountain motorcycle.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

vikb, do you mind distinguishing which region that you believe them to be legally determined as mopeds?
I've posted here before, supported by links and excerpts from the legal definition (not the dictionary definition), that in NZ a pedal assist bike under 300w is classified as a Bicycle. You may find that disturbing....but, I would have thought legal definition trumps dictionary definition

Would it not be easier just to refer to them as Pedal assist e-bikes?


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

I'm not suggesting a legal definition. I'm talking about the colloquial shorthand we can all use to understand what we are talking about.

Secondly the motor vehicle code definition is not helpful when the use in question is not on public roads. As we've seen from the way land managers in a number of areas are responding to these machines they are not being considered the same as 100% human powered mountain bikes.

Thirdly a lot [maybe all] the rancor that moped proponents are complaining about is due to the intentional attempt to lump these motorized cycles as mountain bikes. So terminology that makes the distinction clear is a good thing.

Personally I'm good with:

- mountain bike
- moped
- motorcycle/ATV

Add in:

- hiker
- horse

...and you've covered most of the likely trail user categories.

It would be easy terminology to use on signs and pretty easy to understand. If a land manager wants to give a moped the same access as a mountain bike they can, but they can also provide different access levels.


----------



## #1ORBUST (Sep 13, 2005)

So I guess the way to grow the forum is disscus terms.

Bike 
Bicycle 
Ebike
Moped
Moto
Motorcycle 

It's all anyone talks about over here.


----------



## baddest grandpa (Oct 16, 2016)

#1ORBUST said:


> So I guess the way to grow the forum is disscus terms.
> 
> Bike
> Bicycle
> ...


Taint bicycle and taint moped.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

An electric mountain bike is not a moped or a motorcycle. You're all so worried about the freaking semantics and also worried about making sure that in every post and utterance people distinguish that it's a "new category all unto itself" and then in the next post call it a moped or a motorcycle....because it's pejorative and belittling BS. There's a small contigent of people who seemingly spend more time here mouthing off about ebikes than riding their pedal bikes. The rest of the world, pedal and ebike included, go about their days without the crap. 

It's an EMTB. Class 1 MTB. Electric mountain bike. Enough with the moped/motorcycle BS. You don't turn a throttle sit on it and ride.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

To add to the silly semantic argument, a 750w, 20 mph class 1 ebike here is considered a moped almost everywhere else in the world. So, KiwiPhil should be able to call it one, since under his regs, it would be. Right?


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

I think we all know that it's not a moped but we're beating the moped BS into the ground because it makes us feel giddy because it's fun to make fun and adds to the anti sentiment.

I think we also all know that if there was truly an interest in growing this forum the moderators and staff wouldn't allow the same haters to come into every thread, regardless of topic, bashing the poster, tossing out the terms moped and motorcycle as well as asking every member their name, rank, city state and town and serial number so they can customize their hater rhetoric to suit the individual poster. 


There's not one actual thread here that hasn't been ruined by people making snide comments. And it's allowed to happen each time. The same people, over and over and it just gets a pass. Conversely the actual emtbr who is posting in earnest and who has their thread crapped on by the gang here gets told to stop posting or has their post edited or removed for not using the right terminology, which is, of course, terminology that furthers the cause of anti mtb. This forum is going nowhere, and it's an active effort by a few haters and some mods who are empathetic to their cause. 

Meanwhile, in the actual world, Joe Murray is racing ebikes at Sea Otter, Gary Fisher is committed to them and so are quite a few others out there and it's not just a financial incentive. Hall of fame builders designers racers and people who grew the MTB cause and industry and were dealing with trail concerns and user conflicts before some of you were born. 

But, this forum, nah, it won't go anywhere because right now most people can't afford an ebike, it's a luxury, and what's new or different scares a lot of people and they mouth off, even if they don't know a damn thing about what they're talking about but they think they do, and they feel righteous about it.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Double Butted said:


> Hall of fame builders designers racers and people who grew the MTB cause and industry and were dealing with trail concerns and user conflicts before some of you were born.


Not so, many of us here that have been mtbing since before the inception of mountain bikes and we're not so inclined to just give up and hand over hard won access. Stop calling them mountain bikes, stop trying to coat tail your access on ours and go form an emotorbike advocacy organization and go do your own.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

life behind bars said:


> Not so, many of us here that have been mtbing since before the inception of mountain bikes and we're not so inclined to just give up and hand over hard won access. Stop calling them mountain bikes, stop trying to coat tail your access on ours and go form an emotorbike advocacy organization and go do your own.


I've been mountain biking since the 80's. Unless you're Charlie Kelly don't even bother with that ish. Stop using YOU vs ME terminology. That's your hubris. Get it through your head that there are those of us out there with just as much provenance as you, if not more. Who have been riding and racing for decades who were trail builders and advocates before there was advocacy who are PRO EBIKE.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Double Butted said:


> I've been mountain biking since the 80's. Unless you're Charlie Kelly don't even bother with that ish. Stop using YOU vs ME terminology. That's your hubris. Get it through your head that there are those of us out there with just as much provenance as you, if not more. Who have been riding and racing for decades who were trail builders and advocates before there was advocacy who are PRO EBIKE.


BFD, we are not all pro emotorbike, get used to it.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

life behind bars said:


> BFD, we are not all pro emotorbike, get used to it.


And some of us are. You get used to it. Maybe stop trolling this forum day and night.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Double Butted said:


> And some of us are. You get used to it. Maybe stop trolling this forum day and night.


It's not in the best interests of mountain bikers.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

Did you troll the 27.5 and 29er forum when they first came out too? Heck, with a 29'er any ham fisted dolt can ride over just about anything. You don't even have to really pick lines anymore. Is that mountain biking? Men women and children who never rode a 26 inch wheel are massing on the trails with bikes that are the comparative equivalent of monster trucks. Gosh, I wonder if 29'ers will allow people who don't know how to mountain bike to end up going down trails they don't belong on and get hurt? What if a guy with a heart condition buys a 29er and because of the big wheels he's gets past that filter log leading to the back country and he gets back there and has heart attack? What then? I mean, those are literally the stupid excuses being thrown out about ebikes.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

I guess someone needs to tell Elon his Teslas aren't cars because they run on electric batteries?

Ok, seriously Double Butted, if you would just ignore the terms you don't like and stay on the subject, it may work out better. But you're going to have to understand that this is a mountain biking site and the majority here do not consider ebikes to be mountain bikes. I am a pescatarian. I would not go on a vegan website and start telling them they need to consider me a vegan 'cause it's purty dern close and then not expect backlash.

If you really want to grow this forum, you'll need to find a way to get along with the mountain bikers. If you don't like their terms, ignore it. Look for how you can find common ground. In another similar thread, I mentioned that I was on the fence on allowing ebikes on paved paths. One ebike guy responded to what I said and then another ebiker started complaining about posters (probably me) going off subject. Silentfoe mentioned that he advocates for ebikes for basic transportation. I don't think I saw any response from the ebikers on that. Yes, I know you want to talk about riding ebikes on trails but you need to start somewhere.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

chazpat said:


> I guess someone needs to tell Elon his Teslas aren't cars because they run on electric batteries?
> 
> Ok, seriously Double Butted, if you would just ignore the terms you don't like and stay on the subject, it may work out better. But you're going to have to understand that this is a mountain biking site and the majority here do not consider ebikes to be mountain bikes. I am a pescatarian. I would not go on a vegan website and start telling them they need to consider me a vegan 'cause it's purty dern close and then not expect backlash.
> 
> If you really want to grow this forum, you'll need to find a way to get along with the mountain bikers. If you don't like their terms, ignore it. Look for how you can find common ground. In another similar thread, I mentioned that I was on the fence on allowing ebikes on paved paths. One ebike guy responded to what I said and then another ebiker started complaining about posters (probably me) going off subject. Silentfoe mentioned that he advocates for ebikes for basic transportation. I don't think I saw any response from the ebikers on that. Yes, I know you want to talk about riding ebikes on trails but you need to start somewhere.


Where is empirical evidence that the majority don't consider ebikes mountain bikes? The majority know little about them. Additionally I only see a handful of haters posting negatives but I see 40 or 50 people viewing this forum at any given time.

I myself have made negative comments about them when I first heard about them. I imagined throttle driven bikes and a myriad of other incorrect assumptions that turned out to just not be the case. I also thought fat bikes were entirely stupid when people started showing up on those. I still don't know what I think about those.  Where I live there aren't many ebikes at all. Most people have no idea what they are, how they feel to ride, how they even work. I took the time to learn about them. I didn't come to MTBR to do so though. If anyone were to come here where the (relatively few) haters take over every thread, they're going to get incorrect info. I guess that's why the haters persist with their sometimes logical, mostly illogical and silly comments about motorcycles and mopeds and harrowing tales of ebikes running over nuns hiking with orphans and of men having heart attacks because their battery ran out and they had to push the bike.

I think it's an educational issue. I think until you get these bikes in front of people, in their hands, and them out riding on them or at the very least around them or test riding them, it's important to have a quality forum that explains the bikes and how they work. But, as I said, that's why the haters spend so much time typing "motorcycle" "atv" "moped" "death" "destruction" "only fat people" "only old people" "only new riders" "only people who are lazy" because they're working to color those perceptions.

They work very hard to make sure each thread is hammered with these words and terms so that those reading don't realize that many if not most ebikers are are mountain bikers. Current standard bike mountain bikers. We are riders who have been riding for decades. Some of us are old school. We are young, we are old, are racers, we are strong, we are advocates, we are club members, trail builders.


----------



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

Double Butted said:


> Where is empirical evidence that the majority don't consider ebikes mountain bikes? The majority know little about them.


Everyone knows they are motor assist and I'm guessing the majority of riders consider one of the defining elements of a mountain bike is that it's 100% human powered, so IMO most people do know enough about them to comment. You may not agree with that and possibly even the letter of the law may not agree but I do believe that empirical evidence supports that statement. Ask any child to name 3 things that describe a bicycle and I bet 1 of them is "pedal powered" 8/10 times. I realize in 10 or 20 years that may not be the case but thankfully (for me) it is for now.

I hope you don't consider that hateful speech against electric bikes because it isn't.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Everyone knows they are motor assist and I'm guessing the majority of riders consider one of the defining elements of a mountain bike is that it's 100% human powered, so IMO most people do know enough about them to comment. You may not agree with that and possibly even the letter of the law may not agree but I do believe that empirical evidence supports that statement. Ask any child to name 3 things that describe a bicycle and I bet 1 of them is "pedal powered" 8/10 times. I realize in 10 or 20 years that may not be the case but thankfully (for me) it is for now.
> 
> I hope you don't consider that hateful speech against electric bikes because it isn't.


But defining elements change. At one time nobody thought a bicycle should be or could be ridden on trails, and here we are.

Ask that same child to describe a motorcycle or moped and I bet one of the descriptors won't be "you pedal it". Right?

And, for those who have not ridden an ebike, you don't just go through the motions when you pedal, you're putting in effort, you're just being assisted. Just like a suspension fork assists in absorbing bumps instead what your knees and elbows used to have to do in the beginning when we were all fully rigid, and didn't know any better, until someone took the fork design off a motorcycle and put it on a bike....


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

J.B. Weld said:


> I hope you don't consider that hateful speech against electric bikes because it isn't.


J.B, Definitely not a hate speech, and its great to see some debate in a clear and informative manner devoid of the antagonistic "its this, its that" argument. Thanks.
I would add though, is that all the MTB riders that have ridden my Levo were not expecting what they experience when they trial it. How the power is delivered is not what they thought it would be. I think it is one thing having some knowledge on the Pedal assist e-bikes, but another thing spending time in the saddle.


----------



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

Double Butted said:


> Ask that same child to describe a motorcycle or moped and I bet one of the descriptors won't be "you pedal it". Right?


For sure I think an e-bike is different than a moped, but like a lot people I also think it's different than a bicycle.

And as for trails, bicycles have been traversing dirt paths since the high wheeler.



KiwiPhil said:


> J.B, Definitely not a hate speech, and its great to see some debate in a clear and informative manner devoid of the antagonistic "its this, its that" argument. Thanks.


Thanks mate!


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Where do you purchase an ebike?


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Where do you purchase an ebike?


China.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

Gutch said:


> Where do you purchase an ebike?


A bicycle shop.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Double Butted said:


> A bicycle shop.


Walmart isn't by any stretch a bicycle shop.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

I'll defer to Life Behind Bars knowledge on his bicycle shopping at WalMart. 

While I can't recommend Wal Mart, I'd suggest checking with your LBS Local Bike Shop. Support your LBS! I like to buy local when I can. All the major brands make Emtbs. The new scott ebike looks very nice. 

Scott
Trek 
Specialized
Rocky Mountain
KTM
GIANT
Lapierre 
etc.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Double Butted said:


> I'll defer to Life Behind Bars knowledge on his bicycle shopping at WalMart.
> 
> While I can't recommend Wal Mart, I'd suggest checking with your LBS Local Bike Shop. Support your LBS! I like to buy local when I can. All the major brands make Emtbs. The new scott ebike looks very nice.
> 
> ...


I can buy guns at my LBS but that doesn't make them bicycles. Using the sketchiest of logic to make motorbikes into bicycles isn't going to work.


----------



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

life behind bars said:


> I can buy guns at my LBS but that doesn't make them bicycles. Using the sketchiest of logic to make motorbikes into bicycles isn't going to work.


Really? That's freaking bizarre! I did actually once work at a shop that sold chainsaws though.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

life behind bars said:


> I can buy guns at my LBS but that doesn't make them bicycles. Using the sketchiest of logic to make motorbikes into bicycles isn't going to work.


You're grasping.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> Really? That's freaking bizarre! I did actually once work at a shop that sold chainsaws though.


Lots of people have FFL's, not really bizzare.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

life behind bars said:


> I can buy guns at my LBS.


I forgot your bike shop was Wal Mart. Now it makes sense.


----------



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

life behind bars said:


> Lots of people have FFL's, not really bizzare.


Maybe, I've been in a lot of bike shops though and have yet to see a gun section so it's at least reasonably bizarre. I say pics or it didn't happen......


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Double Butted said:


> But defining elements change. At one time nobody thought a bicycle should be or could be ridden on trails, and here we are.
> 
> Ask that same child to describe a motorcycle or moped and I bet one of the descriptors won't be "you pedal it". Right?
> 
> And, for those who have not ridden an ebike, you don't just go through the motions when you pedal, you're putting in effort, you're just being assisted. Just like a suspension fork assists in absorbing bumps instead what your knees and elbows used to have to do in the beginning when we were all fully rigid, and didn't know any better, until someone took the fork design off a motorcycle and put it on a bike....


Here's the thing - bicycles *already went through this* in the early 1900s when people started putting motors on them. Those turned into motorcycles, because the human power element quickly became irrelevant - but bicycles survived as their own thing.

FWIW, too, people were riding bicycles on trails in the 19th century, because (again, wait for it...) there weren't paved roads. I bet they were even having sepia-tone fun! Scandalous!

You can be pro e-bike or anti-e-bike but ignoring history here is just silly. Motorcycles have evolved from bikes once already, running them with electricity may or may not change the result the second time around.

I'd happily give up gears and suspension and dropper posts and tubeless 29+ tires if it were that or trail access. The trails matter more than the bikes, and anyone who feels otherwise... I don't know what to say, except WOW is calling you with all it's tech.

-Walt


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> Where do you purchase an ebike?


You can buy them at a couple of lbs, ebike specific shops and moto dealers around here.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I know, I'm just being sarcastic. After riding motorcycles my entire life, I find it hilarious that people reference them as motorbikes or mopeds. My Levo is fun, but has its place and limits. I could never bomb Pisgah Forest on an ebike, quite like I just did on my Niner.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Ok, sorry, I am going to go a bit off topic here.

The history of the bicycle is fascinating. I wonder how many people today know that bicycle racing used to be the biggest spectator sport in the US? I think to some degree, adding motors to bicycles helped kill that off. My understanding is that motorcycles were used to get bicycles up to speed in some of the events, eventually that lead to just racing the motorcycles instead, then with all the carnage, injuries and deaths, that died off. And few people realize how much roads were developed to accommodate bicycles; now the car drivers say they don't belong. I read an article the other day saying with all of the driverless car technology being developed, they want bicycles completely gone from the roads as they are problematic.


----------



## Cayenne_Pepa (Dec 18, 2007)

OP, just give it some time. Rome wasn't built in one day....

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> I know, I'm just being sarcastic. After riding motorcycles my entire life, I find it hilarious that people reference them as motorbikes or mopeds. My Levo is fun, but has its place and limits. I could never bomb Pisgah Forest on an ebike, quite like I just did on my Niner.


I know, we're starting the see people trying to cash in and sell garbage Chinese ebikes, which like garbage big box store bikes will mostly end up on bike paths, broken or gathering dust in garages. I'm sure a few will venture out on the trails and they'll figure out they're not up to it.


----------



## eFat (Jun 14, 2017)

LyNx said:


> ...suspension, disc brakes, 29" wheels etc makes mountain biking easier, is the fact, that despite all that, those bikes, with all that technology, are still human powered, ...
> 
> As soon as you add an engine, of any type, it's no longer in the same..


It's not the same you're correct.

But for you, the one and only categorization criteria is the presence of a motor.

For me, for a 250 W speed limited pedal-assist bike, the motor is not one of the criteria.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

LyNx said:


> super powered bikes that can pull several people uphill, will be on the trails tearing them up and terrorizing other users. The dirt bikers who want to ride all those off limit trails to gas powered motos, will simply go out and buy an electric powered one and call it a "class1" and go rip the trails.


I've been reading all these "reasons" ebikes are the devil in the voice of Adam Sandlers mom in the water boy. It makes it much better.

Oooh lawd, the ebike is the debil! Gonna make them men with the heart conditions go too fast and they gonna have the heart attacks. Da mountain bikes with dose' big powerful motors is gonna run too fast up the trails and flatten out the baby childrens and womens! There gonna be powerful motorcycles disguised as them ebikes pedalin' up da trails tearing em all up! Packs of em! It's gonna be like mad max out there in da bike park. Mark my words Bobby Boucher! E bikes is the debil!


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

Here's a question for KiwiPhil:

If a 250w ebike lets you keep up with your mates, what would you do if all your mates had 250w ebikes?


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Can everyone please agree to stop using the term "moped" to describe a pedal assisted bike? Electric Bicycle or e-Bike or PedElec is better.

In most places a MoPed requires an M1 or M2 to ride and generally need to be registered and have a license plate. That is not the case (as of now) with e-Bikes in the sense that this forum is designed to discuss.

Now if you want to discuss whether or not a PedElec should have to be registered and the rider have an M1 or M2, that is a totally different discussion and feel free to start a thread specifically about that.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

DB, seems like someone must have received a copy of the Brando film "The Wild One". Next thing you know, they'll be accusing e-MTB's of rapin deir womin and killen dem chillens.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

I don't understand the issue, I am not using the term mo-ped as the law dictates, I am using it as it was and is intended in the english language, it has a MOtor and you PEDal it as well, hence MOPED. Really just the evolution of the ones from the 60's & 70's, just using an electric instead of gas motor :skep:



Klurejr said:


> Can everyone please agree to stop using the term "moped" to describe a pedal assisted bike? Electric Bicycle or e-Bike or PedElec is better.
> 
> In most places a MoPed requires an M1 or M2 to ride and generally need to be registered and have a license plate. That is not the case (as of now) with e-Bikes in the sense that this forum is designed to discuss.
> 
> Now if you want to discuss whether or not a PedElec should have to be registered and the rider have an M1 or M2, that is a totally different discussion and feel free to start a thread specifically about that.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

LyNx said:


> I don't understand the issue, I am not using the term mo-ped as the law dictates, I am using it as it was and is intended in the english language, it has a MOtor and you PEDal it as well, hence MOPED. Really just the evolution of the ones from the 60's & 70's, just using an electric instead of gas motor :skep:


how the law dictates is a big concern in the e-bikes section since so many mountain bikers are fearful of trail access loss.

Also, the rules for posting in the forum dictate that users not use that term to describe them here.....
So there is that.

Posts referring to Electric Bicycles as MoPeds may end of disappearing.


----------



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

LyNx said:


> I don't understand the issue, I am not using the term mo-ped as the law dictates, I am using it as it was and is intended in the english language, it has a MOtor and you PEDal it as well, hence MOPED. Really just the evolution of the ones from the 60's & 70's, just using an electric instead of gas motor :skep:


Sort of, but they are pretty different in the sense that you never had to pedal a moped to keep it going. Nobody every pedaled a moped except to start it or if they ran out of gas.

I do think they are similar in the respect that an important reason both of the designs included pedals was to circumvent existing laws and consequently open previously untapped markets. You might notice that mopeds no longer have pedals.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Double Butted said:


> I've been reading all these "reasons" ebikes are the devil in the voice of Adam Sandlers mom in the water boy. It makes it much better.
> 
> Oooh lawd, the ebike is the debil! Gonna make them men with the heart conditions go too fast and they gonna have the heart attacks. Da mountain bikes with dose' big powerful motors is gonna run too fast up the trails and flatten out the baby childrens and womens! There gonna be powerful motorcycles disguised as them ebikes pedalin' up da trails tearing em all up! Packs of em! It's gonna be like mad max out there in da bike park. Mark my words Bobby Boucher! E bikes is the debil!


You left out the actual claims MTBers have posted.

To what Lynx said, a basic understanding of high school level physics tells us that that gears, 29ers, disc brakes, etc, do not change the amount of work required from the rider; if anything, they are a weight penalty and thus require the rider to do more work. Add an assist motor and this is no longer true; less work.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

chazpat said:


> You left out the actual claims MTBers have posted.
> 
> To what Lynx said, a basic understanding of high school level physics tells us that that gears, 29ers, disc brakes, etc, do not change the amount of work required from the rider; if anything, they are a weight penalty and thus require the rider to do more work. Add an assist motor and this is no longer true; less work.


If you don't think gears, 29er wheels and suspension don't change efforts/exertion and effect. I'll meet you at the next ride. You ride a rigid single speed 26 inch and I'll ride my full suspension 29er Scott.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Double Butted said:


> If you don't think gears, 29er wheels and suspension don't change efforts/exertion and effect. I'll meet you at the next ride. You ride a rigid single speed 26 inch and I'll ride my full suspension 29er Scott.


Deal, but I'll need a rigid fork for my SS. And if you notice, I said "work".


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

chazpat said:


> Deal, but I'll need a rigid fork for my SS. And if you notice, I said "work".


Gears, etc, are a mechanical advantage. But this is all really moot, isn't it.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Double Butted said:


> Gears, etc, are a mechanical advantage.


Yes they are, but they are a trade off, they don't magically lessen the amount of work performed by the rider.



Double Butted said:


> But this is all really moot, isn't it.


No it isn't, unlike a motor, they do not lessen the amount of work performed by the rider.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

chazpat said:


> Yes they are, but they are a trade off, they don't magically lessen the amount of work performed by the rider.
> 
> No it isn't, unlike a motor, they do not lessen the amount of work performed by the rider.


Hmmm. Next year at the Fools Gold 60 I'm gonna to enter myself and my geared bike in SS class. I'll explain I'm still doing the same amount of work so it's ok.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Double Butted said:


> Hmmm. Next year at the Fools Gold 60 I'm gonna to enter myself and my geared bike in SS class. I'll explain I'm still doing the same amount of work so it's ok.


I guess you didn't do too well in high school physics.

Why don't you just enter your ebike? It's a bicycle after all. You could enter the women's class, maybe move up some age groups. It'll be swell.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

You know, I gave some legitimate suggestions on the subject of this thread way back, Double Butted, but that doesn't seem to really be what you want to discuss.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

chazpat said:


> I guess you didn't do too well in high school physics.
> 
> Why don't you just enter your ebike? It's a bicycle after all. You could enter the women's class, maybe move up some age groups. It'll be swell.


And you must not have done too well in reading comprehension. Because I've been talking about mechanical advantage and Archimedes agrees with me.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

chazpat said:


> You know, I gave some legitimate suggestions on the subject of this thread way back, Double Butted, but that doesn't seem to really be what you want to discuss.


No, I want to discuss ebikes and I've made many comments in this thread about the discourse and how to make it better, and it included that people here seem to want to hinge on semantics or argue trivialities which takes the topic off course and leads down oddball rabbit holes. That said, when someone takes me to task on something I've said, I do try to respond. Case in point.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Double Butted said:


> And you must not have done too well in reading comprehension. Because I've been talking about mechanical advantage and Archimedes agrees with me.





Double Butted said:


> That said, when someone takes me to task on something I've said, I do try to respond. Case in point.


Please make up your mind, I took you to task about "work" and you responded about mechanical advantage.

Regardless, what you have done is convince me that several of the posters here are correct, a number of you ebikers are not really interested in legitimately working to have ebikes accepted but rather are just looking for short cuts to get motorized vehicles allowed on non-motorized trails with as little effort as possible. I've come across some ebikers here who seem legitimate and I feel sorry for them, as it seems others here have a much different agenda.

And don't worry, I won't be in the forum any more.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

Cornfield said:


> Here's a question for KiwiPhil:
> 
> If a 250w ebike lets you keep up with your mates, what would you do if all your mates had 250w ebikes?


Well, at present they have no need or desire to do so. But when we ride we all ride together, as a group. I doubt anything would change. Here's a fact, and i'm not sure if this goes for the groups you ride with, but we are a group of mates who enjoy spending time together. So, if they did by an assist bike, nothing would change.
I've been for two night rides this week (mid winter here). First one was with my FAF (Fit As F&^k) mate, he set a blistering pace on the uphill leg considering the conditions that night, and I followed him with the Levo set on low. to put it mildly, I felt the burn!!!! but enjoyed every minute.
Last nights run was with a mate who has been a "little lazy" and not in shape. Again, I let him set the pace and again had the Levo on Low. And, once again I enjoyed every minute. 
Sometimes its more about getting out there and enjoying time outdoors with ya mates. 
My Levo has aided me in doing just that.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

What if your friends got slower but didn't want to buy a motor assist bike and could no longer keep up with you. Would you sell it and go back to a real bike?


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

sfgiantsfan said:


> What if your friends got slower but didn't want to buy a motor assist bike and could no longer keep up with you. Would you sell it and go back to a real bike?


I cant go "BACK" to a "REAL" bike, when I currently don't only ride one....but Two "Real" bikes. A Giant reign and a specialized Levo Turbo comp 6Fattie. They both feel real when I sit on them!!
I think implying my mate will go slower is clutching at straws, and getting off topic....


----------



## #1ORBUST (Sep 13, 2005)

sfgiantsfan said:


> What if your friends got slower but didn't want to buy a motor assist bike and could no longer keep up with you. Would you sell it and go back to a real bike?


We do this thing is socal called waiting. We get to a spot on trail and wait.

I know it sounds crazy to Gaint fans from San Fran.


----------



## motocatfish (Mar 12, 2016)

fos'l said:


> ...
> How can we counteract this negative direction?
> 
> 1) Promote a Moderator with the stones to ban e-negatives ...
> ...


Banning or censoring will always be biased & wrong.

The ebike owners & enthusiasts should do the following;

1. Do not reply to _ANY_ off-topic or condescending post no matter how badly it makes your blood boil. IGNORE 'EM!!!

2. When you do reply on-topic, quote some portion of the last real on-topic post you are replying to (see above) so the others realize they are being IGNORED.

Ignored troublemakers will whiny LOUDER for a bit ... but will lose interest when they don't see the reactions they are baiting us to get. Remove their reward (your reply) and watch what happens!!! 

Catfish ...


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

MC, good suggestions; better than mine. For now, I just put the trolls on ignore. Maybe someday they'll be back under their rocks.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

////misposted////


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Sharp things said:


> Please explain the part in bold further.


Please don't.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I can't say that I see why anyone would get their panties bunched about how much effort complete strangers feel like putting into their leisure time activities. I'm also a fan of motorized off road vehicles in general and am pretty clear on the differences between an e-bike and a real ORV. Obviously, the PAS low powered rigs are much closer on the spectrum to bicycles than ICE stuff; my son's new quad makes well over 40 HP/30000 W. Motorized stuff is fun AF as far as I'm concerned, and you can definitely wear yourself out at it, if that's what you're going for. The whole 'purist' mindset is ********; if somebody is riding an e-bike, or anything else for that matter, on an open trail, who gives a damn how hard they're working? Worry about your own self.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

SHM, well said. Some of these guys are rabid about e-bikes. It goes back to H L Mencken who said, basically, that one of the attributes of Americans is they are afraid that someone someplace is having a good time. These guys have the disease in spades.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

fos'l said:


> SHM, well said. Some of these guys are rabid about e-bikes. It goes back to H L Mencken who said, basically, that one of the attributes of Americans is they are afraid that someone someplace is having a good time. These guys have the disease in spades.


Quite the opposite, we simply wish to preserve the places that we recreate in to have a "good time". I couldn't care less how hard you do or don't work at your recreation. And yes, it really is that simple. Not every place has to be open to motorized travel.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

life behind bars said:


> Quite the opposite, we simply wish to preserve the places that we recreate in to have a "good time".


You obviously haven't read the same posts I have. 
Start with the one just above this one; obviously LyNx and others like him are wildly judgmental regarding how much effort they have determined the rest of the population should be required to put out while recreating. The arrogance is obvious.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

.
..
...
....
This forum might grow if there was a way to keep my eyes and other like me, off it.


Can the admins make an ignore filter for e-bikes, so those of us who absolutely abhor e-bikes and e-bikes discussion and the ranting...can just not see any of it when surfing new posts ? 

I mean truly, it is a toxic subject for many, above and beyond anything else on this mtbr site. So, methinks it deserves special 'ability to ignore' status for those of us who never, ever will accept them, yet are not so easy to ignore it themselves, and might be prone to say the wrong thing too often, as is apparent in the e-bike forum already.

I would love to have an ignore option and block out the entire e-bike forum and posts...
and that would keep me a lot less riled up, and tempted to say or post something negative.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Just exercise some self control. It's how I keep from going into the Fad Bike sub-forum and poking fun at that epic dork-fest on a regular basis.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Sharp things said:


> Please explain the part in bold further.





LyNx said:


> Well, if you fall into the category of continually trying to convince the world that regular human powered mountain bikes and electric powered off road mopeds are the same, then most definitely yes. And if you're an able bodied person, with no physical disability who own's and rides one of those, then yes again.


You, my friend have no idea.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

baddest grandpa said:


> Taint bicycle and taint moped.


I like this!

"I'm going out to ride my taint today"


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

LyNx said:


> And if you're an able bodied person, with no physical disability who own's and rides one of those, then yes again.


Wow. You are an impressive one....


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> You obviously haven't read the same posts I have.
> Start with the one just above this one; obviously LyNx and others like him are wildly judgmental regarding how much effort they have determined the rest of the population should be required to put out while recreating. The arrogance is obvious.


Okay, that's fair. Throw out the true outliers though and there are actually a lot of reasonable people that have similar views towards motorized travel, no matter the power source. And the constant references to anyone that doesn't maintain the lock step pro emotorbike agenda as "haters" is pretty hypocritical as well, it only adds fuel to an already enormous conflagration. My two cents.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

slapheadmofo said:


> You obviously haven't read the same posts I have.
> Start with the one just above this one; obviously LyNx and others like him are wildly judgmental regarding how much effort they have determined the rest of the population should be required to put out while recreating. The arrogance is obvious.


No more so than the ignorance.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

life behind bars said:


> Okay, that's fair. Throw out the true outliers though and there are actually a lot of reasonable people that have similar views towards motorized travel, no matter the power source. And the constant references to anyone that doesn't maintain the lock step pro emotorbike agenda as "haters" is pretty hypocritical as well


Yup; I pretty much ignore the opinion of anyone who feels the need to whine about 'hate' and 'haters' constantly too. Throw out the opinions of both the arrogant purists and the wanna-be-victims expecting to just ride the MTB access coat-tails or they'll cry about it and there are actually some reasonable posters on both sides.

What I'd like to see in this forum is more mobilization on the part of e-bikers to further gain access without any reliance on having mountain bikers fight their fight for them. There are a number of very knowledgeable folks posting regularly here that seem more than willing to share advice and solid information regarding the best ways to go about this but it doesn't seem that anyone is really taking advantage of that, nor does there seem to be much of a grassroots effort taking shape to work on establishing e-bike access other than the silly insistence that a motor isn't a motor and anyone who realizes this is a ridiculous position is a 'hater'.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Klurejr said:


> how the law dictates is a big concern in the e-bikes section since so many mountain bikers are fearful of trail access loss.
> 
> Also, the rules for posting in the forum dictate that users not use that term to describe them here.....
> So there is that.
> ...


Since, apparently, everyone can't agree to the terms and definitions, why not take action? Half the threads just argue about semantics or some macho idiot trying to convince us he's a real man because he rides a real bike.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Seems the little whinny e-whatevers have gotten their way and mommy has come in to defend them. Shame to see MTBR fall so low from what it once was and just be all about the $$.

Well thanks for removing my valid opinion just because it doesn't suit the marketing wants of the sites advertisers, glad to know you've got non. They don't want them called "mo-peds" because then it differentiates them from regular mountain bikes, which is the point those who call them that are trying to get across, go play in your own sandbox. I don't get pissy when people tell me I have an "off road" bike instead of calling it a mountain bike since we have no mountains here :skep:



Klurejr said:


> how the law dictates is a big concern in the e-bikes section since so many mountain bikers are fearful of trail access loss.
> 
> Also, the rules for posting in the forum dictate that users not use that term to describe them here.....
> So there is that.
> ...


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

In answer to the OP, what about the idea of consumerREVIEW.com, who owns both mtbr.com and roadbikereview.com, launching a site dedicated to e-bikes, ala ebikereview.com, complete with its own forum section. If road bikes and mountain bikes are different enough to warrant their own sites, it could easily be argued that mountain bikes and e-bikes are different enough as well. And if e-bike sales growth continues to escalate, it might be a decent opportunity with less risk than one might think. Easy enough to test.

In short, to grow the forum, spin it off as part of an altogether different site/url. A divorce, in other words.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

LyNx said:


> Shame to see MTBR fall so low from what it once was and just be all about the $$.


Ummm...that's precisely what it's always been about.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

I disregard all opinions based solely on emotion in this forum, either for or against. They might make the poster feel good, and get the page views up, but they accomplish nothing in the real world. 

Talk reasonably about the pros and cons and how best to manage ebikes in the future and you'll have my attention.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

LyNx said:


> Seems the little whinny e-whatevers have gotten their way and mommy has come in to defend them. Shame to see MTBR fall so low from what it once was and just be all about the $$.
> 
> Well thanks for removing my valid opinion just because it doesn't suit the marketing wants of the sites advertisers, glad to know you've got non. They don't want them called "mo-peds" because then it differentiates them from regular mountain bikes, which is the point those who call them that are trying to get across, go play in your own sandbox. I don't get pissy when people tell me I have an "off road" bike instead of calling it a mountain bike since we have no mountains here :skep:


And while you feel that you are helping, you're not helping when you use derogatory terms of endearment to express your disdain. Most of us have been guilty of it at some time or another but at some point it's got to evolve into a civil discourse.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

that is why I want to block the entire e-bike forum on my profile settings.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Forums are in decline across the spectrum, this is like a hail Mary pass to keep the new clicks coming.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> Just exercise some self control. It's how I keep from going into the Fad Bike sub-forum and poking fun at that epic dork-fest on a regular basis.


 Once you go FAT, you won't go back, just saying.


----------



## Sharp things (Jun 8, 2017)

AGarcia said:


> Wow. You are an impressive one....


You missed the part I quoted in bold. It was really special. Too bad I didn't take a screen cap.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Sharp things said:


> You missed the part I quoted in bold. It was really special. Too bad I didn't take a screen cap.


I guess I'm glad I did.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

leeboh said:


> Once you go FAT, you won't go back, just saying.


Oversold goofy-ass slow crappy handling dork-mitt framebag and alt-bar sporting fadchasing fanboy rigs are not for me. 
Well, except maybe on the handful of days a year when the stars align and the conditions actually favor them over a normal bike. Other than that, meh...


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Hey Klurejr!

The "4 inches" got to you???


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Moe Ped said:


> Hey Klurejr!
> 
> The "4 inches" got to you???


The "comparison" logic had the potential to set this entire forum on fire...... I know what you were getting at... but really we do not want to go there. Just not productive at all.


----------



## eFat (Jun 14, 2017)

slapheadmofo said:


> Oversold goofy-ass slow crappy handling dork-mitt framebag and alt-bar sporting fadchasing fanboy rigs are not for me.
> Well, except maybe on the handful of days a year when the stars align and the conditions actually favor them over a normal bike. Other than that, meh...


You should try a e-fat !


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Klurejr said:


> The "comparison" logic had the potential to set this entire forum on fire...... I know what you were getting at... but really we do not want to go there. Just not productive at all.


Glad you appreciated the potential. (Just think of all the clicks....!)

I do see how some advertisers would find it too hot to handle.

(Productive in the revenue sense; keeping the lights on)


----------



## eFat (Jun 14, 2017)

MattMay said:


> In answer to the OP, what about the idea of consumerREVIEW.com, who owns both mtbr.com and roadbikereview.com, launching a site dedicated to e-bikes, ala ebikereview.com, complete with its own forum section. If road bikes and mountain bikes are different enough to warrant their own sites, it could easily be argued that mountain bikes and e-bikes are different enough as well. And if e-bike sales growth continues to escalate, it might be a decent opportunity with less risk than one might think. Easy enough to test.
> 
> In short, to grow the forum, spin it off as part of an altogether different site/url. A divorce, in other words.


It's the same people that ride MTB and e-MTB. Most e-bikers also ride regular bikes or had in the past. Their interests are the same.


----------



## Double Butted (Jan 27, 2015)

eFat said:


> It's the same people that ride MTB and e-MTB. Most e-bikers also ride regular bikes or had in the past. Their interests are the same.


This. I have 6 mountain bikes in my household and one ebike.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Double Butted said:


> This. I have 6 mountain bikes in my household and one ebike.


I need more mountain bikes!!! Have a good weekend, ya'll!


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

fos'l said:


> ...1) Promote a Moderator with the stones to ban e-negatives who divert a discussion or make stupid comments like an e-bike is a moped.
> 2) Ban anyone who discusses access anywhere except in its own thread.
> 3) Don't allow any negative comments about e-bikes unless you've ridden one or have had an issue with someone riding one.


Probably one of the most outrageous posts I've seen, nice one!

For a start, as I've said before, this is by far the best run forum I have very been on. And I have been using forums for almost as long as there have been forums! While nothing is ever perfect, it has to be said that the moderators do a superb job of the very tricky balance between keeping order and not stifling discussion. This place is civilised, friendly and open and this is achieved with very low-profile moderation which displays an abundance of something quite rare in cyberspace, common sense. To suggest that the moderators are doing a poor job is an insult.

Your vision of a good forum is thankfully not one many of us share. You propose an Orwellian environment where freedom of expression is crushed and the only opinions allowed are ones that coincide with yours. The comment about e-haters running to Mommy is pretty funny coming from someone who has just requested the very definition of a safe space!

You want to ban anyone who calls an ebike a moped? Seriously?! Maybe you should up sticks and move to North Korea, I reckon you'd fit right in.


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

eFat said:


> It's the same people that ride MTB and e-MTB. Most e-bikers also ride regular bikes or had in the past. Their interests are the same.


Your data and logic is simply too strong to refute. Overwhelming. It's so obvious that interests are the same. How could I miss that? Maybe all the arguments threw me.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

MattMay said:


> In answer to the OP, what about the idea of consumerREVIEW.com, who owns both mtbr.com and roadbikereview.com, launching a site dedicated to e-bikes, ala ebikereview.com, complete with its own forum section. If road bikes and mountain bikes are different enough to warrant their own sites, it could easily be argued that mountain bikes and e-bikes are different enough as well. And if e-bike sales growth continues to escalate, it might be a decent opportunity with less risk than one might think. Easy enough to test.
> 
> In short, to grow the forum, spin it off as part of an altogether different site/url. A divorce, in other words.


MM, Sounds viable to me. I know the owner is considering his options now, so maybe he'll read these suggestions and decide how to proceed.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

MattMay said:


> Your data and logic is simply too strong to refute. Overwhelming. It's so obvious that interests are the same. How could I miss that? Maybe all the arguments threw me.


Limited sample size (probably 20 individuals), but everyone I know who rides e-bikes is or was a long time MTB'er.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

fos'l said:


> Limited sample size (probably 20 individuals), but everyone I know who rides e-bikes is or was a long time MTB'er.


Likewise. Mine is a more limited sample size (about 8), but each of them with an e-mtb has other mtbs.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

They are like fat chicks, fun to ride til your friends see you riding them! I know, very wrong.


----------



## Sharp things (Jun 8, 2017)

leeboh said:


> Once you go FAT, you won't go back, just saying.





slapheadmofo said:


> Oversold goofy-ass slow crappy handling dork-mitt framebag and alt-bar sporting fadchasing fanboy rigs are not for me.
> Well, except maybe on the handful of days a year when the stars align and the conditions actually favor them over a normal bike. Other than that, meh...


I thought he was referring to women. Guess I need to learn the lingo around here.


----------



## Sharp things (Jun 8, 2017)

fos'l said:


> MM, Sounds viable to me. I know the owner is considering his options now, so maybe he'll read these suggestions and decide how to proceed.


Once they become more common it will be a no brainer.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

139 posts. Again... This forum is clearly growing just fine. Ebike proponents don't want growth, they want a safe space.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Procter said:


> 139 posts. Again... This forum is clearly growing just fine. Ebike proponents don't want growth, they want a safe space.


They want growth AND safe space.

Funny you would mention this; I posted a similar notion a bit more poetically and the post got deleted.

The e-bikers complaining about complainers is epic funny. Pretty sensitive bunch.


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Gutch said:


> They are like fat chicks, fun to ride til your friends see you riding them! I know, very wrong.





Sharp things said:


> I thought he was referring to women. Guess I need to learn the lingo around here.


Really. Is that how you refer to women??? Seriously. This is pathetic.



Moe Ped said:


> They want growth AND safe space.
> 
> Funny you would mention this; I posted a similar notion a bit more poetically and the post got deleted.
> 
> The e-bikers complaining about complainers is epic funny. Pretty sensitive bunch.


Call it "safe" call it "sensitive" if you like. I'd call it civil.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Relax, it was a pun on mopeds. You know, the ones we ride.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Relax, it was a pun on mopeds. You know, the ones we ride.


Although you probably don't really mean to, misogyny is no joke.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

life behind bars said:


> Although you probably don't really mean to, misogyny is no joke.


I'm pretty sure Gutch was talking about bestiality; you know, sex with plump chickens in this case. If I was into that kind of behavior I wouldn't want my friends to know.


----------



## Sharp things (Jun 8, 2017)

AGarcia said:


> Really. Is that how you refer to women??? Seriously. This is pathetic.


It was a joke. Admittedly in poor taste, but a joke none the less. That being said, I'm no fan of skinny women.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Look, everybody has their own humor. No big deal. If I upset you, sorry. I'll try and be more sensitive next time. Maybe I hate too much bacon and drank way too much beer.


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

Gutch said:


> Maybe I hate too much bacon


Now you've crossed the line, buddy.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Gutch said:


> Look, everybody has their own humor. No big deal. If I upset you, sorry. I'll try and be more sensitive next time. Maybe I hate too much bacon and drank way too much beer.


Too much bacon? Surely you jest?


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Gutch said:


> Look, everybody has their own humor. No big deal. If I upset you, sorry. I'll try and be more sensitive next time. Maybe I hate too much bacon and drank way too much beer.


No, no..I get it. Misogyny. Hahaha. Real funny stuff. The internet is 100% male, on board with your idea of humor, and all of us are laughing with you. I'm sure. Hehehe.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

AGarcia said:


> No, no..I get it. Misogyny. Hahaha. Real funny stuff.


He's still funnier than you.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

We could tell some lawyer jokes, those are almost always true and funny 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Gutch said:


> Maybe I hate too much bacon


Confirmed, Gutch is a hater.:eekster:


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Again, sorry if I upset you. Yeah, I'm not into Misogyny. Why is it every lawyer I meet or run into typically are elitist a**** with zero humor? Not saying you are...


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Harryman said:


> Confirmed, Gutch is a hater.:eekster:


That is funny. Funny, I used to love bacon. Maybe the Levo is making me "hate" bacon!


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

sfgiantsfan said:


> We could tell some lawyer jokes, those are almost always true and funny
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Got any good ones?


----------



## AGarcia (Feb 20, 2012)

Gutch said:


> Again, sorry if I upset you. Yeah, I'm not into Misogyny. Why is it every lawyer I meet or run into typically are elitist a**** with zero humor? Not saying you are...


No, of course your not! I'm an elitist a**** lawyer who's funny as f*&K!


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Gutch said:


> Why is it every lawyer I meet or run into typically are elitist a**** with zero humor?
> Not saying you are...


That's a rubbish joke.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Getting back on topic; this space will never be more than a "let's pretend" forum being as it's hosted on a MTB site. Keep the discussion about legit hardware on legit trails and it MIGHT stay civil.

Pretty soon somebody might develop a separate e-MTB site where lobbying about motors on motor-less trails might be better received. Put the "growth" there when you find it.

E-bike growth here at MTBR seems (is) cancerous.

Don't go to a fly-fishing forum to discuss gill netting.


----------



## turnerbikes (Apr 12, 2004)

Good point! There is no way the race won't go on and on, my motor is bigger than your motor. Motorcycles came from bicycles once before and there is another class of motorcycles on the way to your local 'bicycle dealer'. Just as early motorcycle development was spurred on by the competitive nature of man, so too will this electric motor revolution. For those of you talented in writing code, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity, performance chipping has one more frontier. Just like the auto / motorcycle world, 'chipping' is big business and can make big gains. Sure the batteries will run down quicker with hot 'tunes', but who cares! Ebikers are'nt fit enough to be on the bike for a full charge, so flash that bike and smoke some Schwalbes!



Cornfield said:


> Here's a question for KiwiPhil:
> 
> If a 250w ebike lets you keep up with your mates, what would you do if all your mates had 250w ebikes?


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

But isn't that why they classify Ebikes into different classes? Anything larger than 250w will not fall into the same classification as a 250w Pedal assist bike. Yes, Ebikes will evolve and, in some instances, have high output motors, but this is why the classification system is there, is it not??
Class 1 bikes will also evolve, but mainly around the battery technology, weight, not higher motor wattage, otherwise they wont be class 1.
It seems to me that some fail to understand that, and can only comment on those that I know that ride class 1 Ebikes (But I'd bet for those that ride them on forum would agree), a 250w output class 1 bike is more than suffice. If I wanted a high output, fast bike to race around at a extreme speeds, I certainly wouldn't have brought a Specialized Levo!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

KiwiPhil said:


> But isn't that why they classify Ebikes into different classes? Anything larger than 250w will not fall into the same classification as a 250w Pedal assist bike. Yes, Ebikes will evolve and, in some instances, have high output motors, but this is why the classification system is there, is it not??
> Class 1 bikes will also evolve, but mainly around the battery technology, weight, not higher motor wattage, otherwise they wont be class 1.
> It seems to me that some fail to understand that, and can only comment on those that I know that ride class 1 Ebikes (But I'd bet for those that ride them on forum would agree), a 250w output class 1 bike is more than suffice. If I wanted a high output, fast bike to race around at a extreme speeds, I certainly wouldn't have brought a Specialized Levo!


If the industry had adopted the EU regs, which are what are close to what you're operating under in NZ Phil, there wouldn't be as much pushback as we're seeing here in the US. Our regs allow 750w nominal, instead of your 300w max, plus 20mph instead of 15.5 in the EU and I think you mentioned 12 mph in NZ? I couldn't find speeds in the NZ regs. I'm not sure the Levo is even legal there since it's max power is 530w, but that's not my battle to wage, so ride on.

https://gazette.govt.nz/notice/id/2013-au4618



turnerbikes said:


> For those of you talented in writing code, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity, performance chipping has one more frontier.


No need to write code, speed limits are easily bypassed with dongle or in the case of the levo, a free ap.

The classification system sounds nice, but I think it's mainly to make people feel better, there won't be any strict enforcement of it.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

KiwiPhil said:


> But isn't that why they classify Ebikes into different classes? Anything larger than 250w will not fall into the same classification as a 250w Pedal assist bike. Yes, Ebikes will evolve and, in some instances, have high output motors, but this is why the classification system is there, is it not??
> Class 1 bikes will also evolve, but mainly around the battery technology, weight, not higher motor wattage, otherwise they wont be class 1.
> It seems to me that some fail to understand that, and can only comment on those that I know that ride class 1 Ebikes (But I'd bet for those that ride them on forum would agree), a 250w output class 1 bike is more than suffice. If I wanted a high output, fast bike to race around at a extreme speeds, I certainly wouldn't have brought a Specialized Levo!


I do not believe all states are using the Classification that California is at the moment. Perhaps they will follow suit, perhaps not.

Classifications also do not account for those who will modify their Class 1 eBikes to where they would graduate into a higher class, but still retain the looks and markings of a class 1 vehicle.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

Harryman said:


> Our regs allow 750w nominal, instead of your 300w max, plus 20mph instead of 15.5 in the EU


750w !!!!! that is stupid amount of power, and in my mind, excessive !!!!!! Thanks for shedding some light on that Harryman.
My opinion is that there needs to be a clear distinction between the different classes. I ride a Levo, It should be in a classification along with other 250w pedal assist bikes. A class 1 should be a manufacturing standard world wide.



Klurejr said:


> Classifications also do not account for those who will modify their Class 1 eBikes to where they would graduate into a higher class, but still retain the looks and markings of a class 1 vehicle.


Yes, and unfortunately there is little that can be done to curtail people doing just that. I for one cannot understand why anyone would need anymore power than what the Levo puts out, unless they plan to tear around like idiots, and not ride them to enjoy the trails in a legal fashion. These bikes are not cheap, and there is no way I would void my warranty by modifying mine, but I guess there are people out there that would.

Unfortunately, like a lot of things in life, its the few that spoil it for the many.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

KiwiPhil said:


> 750w !!!!! that is stupid amount of power, and in my mind, excessive !!!!!! Thanks for shedding some light on that Harryman.
> My opinion is that there needs to be a clear distinction between the different classes. I ride a Levo, It should be in a classification along with other 250w pedal assist bikes. A class 1 should be a manufacturing standard world wide.
> 
> Yes, and unfortunately there is little that can be done to curtail people doing just that. I for one cannot understand why anyone would need anymore power than what the Levo puts out, unless they plan to tear around like idiots, and not ride them to enjoy the trails in a legal fashion. These bikes are not cheap, and there is no way I would void my warranty by modifying mine, but I guess there are people out there that would.
> ...


Agreed, 250w is plenty, everyone I've seen in Europe seemed perfectly happy being able to easily outclimb me with it (I'm not a huge climber to be fair)

Unfortunately, the forces behind the legislation chose to adopt the existing 750w when they came up with the Class 1-3 classifications which they intended for bike paths, although they intentionally never directly stated their intent for emtbs. It's being considered here (Colorado) and should have been considered elsewhere to create a specific emtb classification that mirrors the EU pedelec. 250w/15.5mph. I don't really have a problem with 750w on a bike path, even though you can rip around on a 750w bike, for a cargo bike for example, or to haul a very large person, more power makes sense, and bike paths do have speed limits set on them.

IMO, if emtbs had a specific class, they'd gain more access in the long run.


----------



## GT58 (Mar 20, 2017)

Hello , I'm 58 and only been mountain bikeing about 3 years I am now in my life financially Abel to buy more than one bike I have several an in my Krio is a 2017 specialized expert turbo levo with several build up parts replace on it not only I'm I out having fun I'm contributing lots of money to my local bike dealers and when I found this form I got pretty excited until I found that about every comment and every column is someone complaining about Someone one riding a e-mtb on the bike trails where do you expect us to ride them and how can we be hurting anyone I thought we lived in a free country I'm not going to debate it because it's stupid to debate it anyway I'm going to keep trying to find cool stuff to read about instead of people complaining about a e-mtb again if you do not like them don't look at them thank you ,And GOD BLESS OUR COUNTRY


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

You're free to use some more punctuation. Free country yup, free to ride where the motos go.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Just ride them on open trails and there's not an issue. Welcome to the forum.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

GT58 said:


> not only I'm I out having fun I'm contributing lots of money to my local bike dealers


Maybe ask them to take some of that money and put it towards working for better trail access for e-bikes. That's about when you'll (well, probably not YOU in particular based on your post) will find exactly how much 'bike dealers' have to do with trails and access. Get ready to be disappointed.


----------



## Mookie (Feb 28, 2008)

GT58 said:


> Hello , I'm 58 and only been mountain bikeing about 3 years I am now in my life financially Abel to buy more than one bike I have several an in my Krio is a 2017 specialized expert turbo levo with several build up parts replace on it not only I'm I out having fun I'm contributing lots of money to my local bike dealers and when I found this form I got pretty excited until I found that about every comment and every column is someone complaining about Someone one riding a e-mtb on the bike trails where do you expect us to ride them and how can we be hurting anyone I thought we lived in a free country I'm not going to debate it because it's stupid to debate it anyway I'm going to keep trying to find cool stuff to read about instead of people complaining about a e-mtb again if you do not like them don't look at them thank you ,And GOD BLESS OUR COUNTRY


:lol::lol:
Make America great again!


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

GT58 said:


> Hello , I'm 58 and only been mountain bikeing about 3 years I am now in my life financially Abel to buy more than one bike I have several an in my Krio is a 2017 specialized expert turbo levo with several build up parts replace on it not only I'm I out having fun I'm contributing lots of money to my local bike dealers and when I found this form I got pretty excited until I found that about every comment and every column is someone complaining about Someone one riding a e-mtb on the bike trails where do you expect us to ride them and how can we be hurting anyone I thought we lived in a free country I'm not going to debate it because it's stupid to debate it anyway I'm going to keep trying to find cool stuff to read about instead of people complaining about a e-mtb again if you do not like them don't look at them thank you ,And GOD BLESS OUR COUNTRY


If you don't like people complaining about ebikes, stay off of mountain bike forums. Feel free to get lost.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

GT58 said:


> Hello , I'm 58 and only been mountain bikeing about 3 years I am now in my life financially Abel to buy more than one bike I have several an in my Krio is a 2017 specialized expert turbo levo with several build up parts replace on it not only I'm I out having fun I'm contributing lots of money to my local bike dealers and when I found this form I got pretty excited until I found that about every comment and every column is someone complaining about Someone one riding a e-mtb on the bike trails where do you expect us to ride them and how can we be hurting anyone I thought we lived in a free country I'm not going to debate it because it's stupid to debate it anyway I'm going to keep trying to find cool stuff to read about instead of people complaining about a e-mtb again if you do not like them don't look at them thank you ,And GOD BLESS OUR COUNTRY


Periods are customary.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

I don't even own an eBike, but this whole "us against them" mentality is really sad. So many moronic hills that people stand on.

-eBikes are "motor vehicles" because they have a motor. That's just nonsense. The term "motor vehicle" was derived by regulatory agencies long before eBikes were ever thought of. This would be similar to say all interstate phone calls are "long distance". It doesn't apply any more because technology has changed things. eBikes are NOT motor vehicles in the sense that the term was created. It is an extremely weak argument to make claiming that the are.

-If it has a motor, it should all be put in the same "motorized vehicle" category. This places a class 1 eBike in the same category as a 7kW e Dirtbike. That's akin to saying a squirt gun should be regulated like a .44Magnum because it has a trigger.

-There is no evidence that class 1 eBikes present any harm to the environment or risk to other riders moreso than a conventional mountain bike.

-If it is not completely human powered, it's not a mountain bike. I bet there's some downhill guys who would disagree. By this dim theory, a DH bike is not a MTB in the sense that a cross country bike is. Yet I don't see any haters trying to support banning DH bikes.

-You shouldn't be posting on a MTB forum about eBikes. Duh! This is a specific sub-forum created by the owners of this site specifically for eBike discussion.


From my perspective, I have seen little to no rational discussion from the anti-eBikers. Only ad hominems and emotional rhetoric. So, the way to deal with that is not by censorship. The way to deal with that is to challenge the eBike haters to support their statements. From what I've seen... they can't. Heck, I haven't even seen anyone produce one piece of real evidence that ANY trails are closed to class 1 eBikes. All I have seen are flyers and anecdotes which do not have the effect of law or regulation. 

But the one thing that really frustrates me is the way people don't see that what harms one MTBer harms us all. When we readily accept trail restrictions based on nonsense and emotion for one category of bikes, then we invite more trail restrictions for other categories of bikes. All MTBers should be offended about any eBike (especially class 1) restrictions that are not based on reasonable, rational logic. Just saying "if it has a motor, it is a motor vehicle" effectively means, "I have no rational argument to make!"


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Jim_bo said:


> The term "motor vehicle" was derived by regulatory agencies long before eBikes were ever thought of....


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.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

Mr Pig said:


> 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 trail.


I think we all agree with that, but most here are not riding "High- powered" ebikes, we are mostly Class1 riders......as well as standard mountainbike riders.



> 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..


So is it punish the many, for the sake of, as you state, "the selfish few"?



> 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..


Same as a police officer cannot distinguish between those cars on the road with or without Registration or a Warrant of Fitness (the system here where the vehicle is deemed fit for purpose), or even in fact that a licensed driver at the wheel.



> 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.


Yes, and as technologies advance, there will be no way to tell the difference between a Ebike and a standard mountain bike, so applying your logic all MTB's should be banned from the trails as they may have a in hub motor that those policing the trails cannot detect??? This is where ebikers and MTbers need to be united in helping set standards for ebikes existence on trails, rather than fighting for blanket bans.
I cannot see banning all ebikes will help in the future with ebikes becoming more prevalent. I would think gaining access for class1 bikes would be beneficial for all mountain bikers in the future as it sets a standard the MOST will adhere to.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Mr Pig said:


> 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.
> 
> ...


Yours is exactly the attitude of blindly accepting needless restrictions that will lead to all MTBers having needless restrictions placed upon us.

But before you rant, take a look at the California Law that requires all electric bicycles to come marked from the manufacturer as to the class of bike it is. That way anyone can tell the class of the bike. And before you start talking about illegal modifications, consider that this would be the equivalent of advocating the ban of all diesel trucks simply because the owner can "chip" it. That is ridiculous, just as the conclusion that all eBikes should be lumped together and banned from certain trails simply because some people may make illegal mods.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> -eBikes are "motor vehicles" because they have a motor. That's just nonsense. The term "motor vehicle" was derived by regulatory agencies long before eBikes were ever thought of. This would be similar to say all interstate phone calls are "long distance". It doesn't apply any more because technology has changed things. eBikes are NOT motor vehicles in the sense that the term was created. It is an extremely weak argument to make claiming that the are.


Anything with pedals and under 750w/20mph is not considered a motor vehicle in the US according to some parts of the Federal government and many of the states.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/727/text

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title15/html/USCODE-2011-title15-chap47-sec2085.htm

Keep in mind that "motor vehicle" and "motorized vehicle" are not one and the same, with a "motor vehicle" being a legal definition for a specific class of vehicle, while "motorized vehicle" is a common term describing anything with a motor on it. There are a lot of vehicles that have developed since "motor vehicles" were defined, like ebikes, they are still considered motorized since they have a motor.



Jim_bo said:


> -If it has a motor, it should all be put in the same "motorized vehicle" category. This places a class 1 eBike in the same category as a 7kW e Dirtbike. That's akin to saying a squirt gun should be regulated like a .44Magnum because it has a trigger.


Yep, many codes would consider segways, scooters, atvs, ebikes, motorcycles, cars, earthmovers all to be motorized.



Jim_bo said:


> -There is no evidence that class 1 eBikes present any harm to the environment or risk to other riders moreso than a conventional mountain bike.


There's only been one study that I know of that has published results, that done in 2015 by IMBA (http://b.3cdn.net/bikes/c3fe8a28f1a0f32317_g3m6bdt7g.pdf) which showed that there was slightly more impact from a Class1 PAS ebike compared to a mtb in turns and while climbing, it was negligable really. There was substantially more from a Class 2 emtb. Not mentioned is that the same rider on an ebike typically rides twice as far in the same amount of time, doubling the impact per ride.



Jim_bo said:


> -If it is not completely human powered, it's not a mountain bike. I bet there's some downhill guys who would disagree. By this dim theory, a DH bike is not a MTB in the sense that a cross country bike is. Yet I don't see any haters trying to support banning DH bikes.


What? DH bikes don't have auxiallary power, unless you count gravity. If you're trying to equate shuttling or chairlifts as "cheating", it's no more valid than claiming ebikes are "cheating". Cheating and bruised egos have no bearing on whether allowing ebikes on single track makes sense.

I'm not going to argue about how many legal angels can dance on the head of a pin, I'll let you know how ebike legislation works in the real world, feel free to take up the legality of their policies with them. There's the fed definitions of what one is listed above, here's the USFS/BLM decisions on how to manage them, you can dig up the actual legislation if you want, the sections are listed:

https://mwba.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/20160324ElectricBikesAndTrailManagement_final.pdf

https://www.blm.gov/policy/ib-2015-060

At the state level, some like CA have further defined the classes and where you can ride them via lobbying from Peopleforbikes/BPSA, others have not. State parks can have system wide management policies or it could be up to each park supervisor. At the local level, land managers can opt out as they choose, leading to a patchwork system where an entire system might be ebike legal, or singular properties could be either way. There isn't uniformity anywhere and in practical terms, the people on the ground decide and then pass that info up to the people who formulate the policy to back it up.

And as to why ebikes might get banned before they even exist, this is worth reading:

http://b.3cdn.net/bikes/8834549e2b0ec018d0_qum6b48z6.pdf

I was involved in formulating ebike policy locally and statewide and I can assure you that the main concerns from land managers are higher speeds, impact on the trails and the impact on other user groups. 250w/20mph class 1 ebikes enable average speeds that are twice as high and double the impact per ride. Torque values have increased 10-20% since that study was done and we haven't even studied 750w emtbs yet since they don't really exist. They're not close to being motorcycles, it's silly for anyone to suggest such, but they're not bicycles either and at least here, the land managers recognize it. Until they can see what the impact of a large number of 750w ebikes are, they're going to hold off letting them on their trails.

And then we can get into enforcement. In most places, there's going to be no enforcement, zero, as in none. I've been riding mtbs since 1985 all over the west and can count on one hand the number of times I've seen a leo or ranger, and they certainly weren't concerned about enforcing anything. To expect them to check stickers, or throttles or have a dyno at the trailhead is a fantasy. (Ok, maybe in Marin) So a land managers choices are, to ban ebikes knowing full well that some people will ignore the no ebike signs, but it will be a deterrant to most and the shops that want to sell them keeping the numbers low. If you allow class 1, you're essentially allowing any and all, since people will rationalize whatever ebike they want to ride. "Well, it has a throttle, but I only use it when there's no one around" or "It's got pedals so even though it's got a 3kw motor, it's just a bike in the eyes of the law". Or, raise the money to pay for increased enforcement, but from where? I'm not making these options up, I work with my parks dept on a weekly basis and this is the kind of behavior they see daily and they make their decisions based on how they know people act. They banned drones too before they became a problem, because they knew they would be in the long run. I still see them, but not very often.


----------



## Flamingtaco (Mar 12, 2012)

GT58 said:


> ...someone complaining about Someone one riding a e-mtb on the bike trails where do you expect us to ride them...


We expect you to ride them where they are permitted, not poach trails where they are not permitted. Pretty simple.



GT58 said:


> ...and how can we be hurting anyone...


You can move significantly faster, on a significantly heavier bike, that has significantly degraded handling due to aforementioned weight. Couple this with a not insignificant number of riders that will behave as if they are on a motorcylce, you end up with a recipe for serious injuries to riders and pedestrians. We already have issues keeping non e-mtb'rs within speeds safe for other trail users, and in a lot of places, the only fix will come when there are dedicated mtb only trails. A trail that is designed to be enjoyable and relatively safe for a pedal bike would permit higher speeds for an e-bike. When you build a trail for the average rider, you have problems with the 250w riders, because those boys can fly. Now you ask to open these trails to 250w riders on 250w bikes... that's just too much of a difference, a trail safe for those riders is going to be tedious for most people moving completely under their own power.



GT58 said:


> ...I'm not going to debate it because it's stupid to debate it anyway...


True debate is never stupid, as it requires an exchange of ideas and can result in solutions that can not be achieved by remaining within an echo chamber.

You are correct that you will not get into a debate. When lacking substance to back up claims, one is best served by employing hit and run tactics when engaging opposing viewpoints. You can at least hope some fence sitters will mistake your strongly spoken claims as originating from a strong base of facts, and totally miss the cowardly tactic that you employed.

If you want people to take you seriously, you need to clean up your message. The volume of punctuation and spelling errors was cringe-worthy. If you can't be bothered to present yourself as an individual that at least tries to appear educated, few will bother to pay you any attention. You say you're 58yo, but you drop a hit and run post that reads like an annoyed 12yo that subsequently rage quits. You're not helping your ebike brethren here.


----------



## Flamingtaco (Mar 12, 2012)

Harryman said:


> Anything with pedals and under 750w/20mph is not considered a motor vehicle in the US according to some parts of the Federal government and many of the states.


Damn good post.

'Motorized' means both ICM and electric powered, but is not to be confused with motor vehicles, which is a special designation to define the types of vehicles that may travel our interstates and highways (and maybe other roads I am not familiar with).

I'd also like to note that not all ebikes fall within the definition of 'pedal assist', which correctly would be conveyances where pedals can be used to assist the primary means of propulsion, or in place of an unavailable (out of gas) or disabled (when moving only 20 feet, why bother starting the motor?) vehicle. Low-power e-Bikes would be more correctly called motor assist, whereas the primary form of propulsion is the rider, but move up in power range and it quickly transitions to pedal assist, even when there is no throttle, as the power output of the motor exceeds the user.

Another case of industry getting the jargon wrong and the resulting confusion of the masses. Whatever the jargon one uses, it is obvious that, at some point, torque and speed output requires either classification with motorcyles, or a unique classification all it's own, but definitely not with bicycles.

I think we are committing folly by falling in line with speed output limits, as this is not the sole factor impacting other users. I like to use an old axiom: the quicker the car, the earlier you will get into trouble. As ebike motors are built to be more efficient and handle more heat, they get to their max speed quicker, which is more dangerous than being at max speed.

I can equate this to those motorcyclists that pass vehicles at 20mph above the traffic rate, then get pissed off when someone moves into their lane and they crash. From the motorcyclist's perspective, who was looking forward, had a high line of sight, and can clearly see what's in front of him/her, the driver was an idiot. From the driver's perspective, who looks into a side mirror that can't see the entirety of the lane beside them (was the motorcyclist in the center or to the side of their lane?) and reduces the size of objects, there was no motorcyclist when they checked their side view.

How... In the few seconds it takes a driver to look back to the front to check the lane they are going to move in to, and then begin to change lanes (let's say three seconds), the motorcyclist has reduced the gap between the vehicles by 90ft.

90ft, whoop-de-do. Well, if traffic is moving at 60, and the motorcycle at 80, it will take the motorcyclist about 100 feet of full brake to match the speed of the car, and few motorcyclists use full brake due to the risk of locking up the front wheel. Should a motorcyclist instantaneously recognize the threat and brake full on, his safe distance to start is at least 200ft from the car. At 200ft, few motorcyclists can instantaneously recognize threats, and fewer drivers can make out a motorcycle in their side view mirror.

With mountain biking, the dangers are more along the lines of slowing on a descent for a blind curve as their most be climbers moving up at 3mph, to be confronted by someone doing 18mph. About the only way to deal with that would be for the downhill riders to slow to a walking pace so they have time to brake and move to the side for the uphill rider.

If only obese or debilitated people purchased ebikes, a case could be made that they are only to help certain persons keep up. They are not. Some want ebikes so they can go faster. The problem with this is the fact that, to keep the trails safe for everyone involved, either other user groups will have to go slower, or everyone will have to go annoyingly slow.

We can talk all day about intent, but the fact is that ebikes are going to exacerbate problems we already have with trail poachers and strava demons.

I've been whacked by a stravatard or two with their head down that were moving uphill at 8-10mph when I stopped for a brake on the side of the trail. A shoulder in the arm at those speeds hurts for a good time and leaves a nasty bruise. I don't want to image what would happen should someone be rolling up on me at 18-20, loses control in their haste to get on the brakes, and hits me full on. Pedestrians die from being hit by cyclists at much slower speeds.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Interesting post, Flamingtaco. Based on what you have pointed out, is the speed regulator set too high for class 1 ebikes? Since it seems the purpose of riding an ebike on a trail is that the rider doesn't want to put out the energy to climb, would it make sense to match climbing speed to that of a real bicycle? I know that would really vary but it seems like if they were limited so they climb at only 3 miles an hour, it would solve a lot of problems. They could still be pedaled faster descending and on flats, or even climbing if the rider has the leg power, but since the speed discrepancy is really on climbing, it seems like bringing them more in line with bicycles would be a good idea.

This actually would solve some of the issues I have with them. eBikers, what do you think? A lot of you guys say it's not about the speed, are you willing to give up the ability to zip up climbs?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> I don't even own an eBike, but this whole "us against them" mentality is really sad. So many moronic hills that people stand on.
> 
> -eBikes are "motor vehicles" because they have a motor. That's just nonsense. The term "motor vehicle" was derived by regulatory agencies long before eBikes were ever thought of. This would be similar to say all interstate phone calls are "long distance". It doesn't apply any more because technology has changed things. eBikes are NOT motor vehicles in the sense that the term was created. It is an extremely weak argument to make claiming that the are.
> 
> ...


 Yikes, slow your roll some. We? Us? Clear line in the sand, motorized and not motorized, clear. Bikes don't have motors. E bikes are something different, and need to be treated as such. Just like dirt bikes, ORV's and such. How to grow the forum? Can't lump the bikes and ebikes all together. At all. Maybe you are not familiar with the mt bike struggles on the crowed east coast. MA and other states. Or how most of the areas ( MA) open to orv and dirt bikes got closed to them because of bad behavior. Still a sore point of land managers and trail uses here. Every regulatory agency have definitions for DOT motorized vehicles, motor vehicles, bicycles etc. And those don't always add up to the same definitions for off road, multi use paths. Harming mt bikers? Like getting trails shut down to all users? Start there. How's the single track riding on Mt Tam? Start with your facts, go from there. Just remember that this is not the pro e bike forum. Present your facts with clear conversation. Just not your opinions. And it's not hate, just not legal. Just ride where they are legal, no issues. Been thinking about getting and e commuter for my 17 mile commutes.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

Harryman said:


> And then we can get into enforcement. In most places, there's going to be no enforcement, zero, as in none. I've been riding mtbs since 1985 all over the west and can count on one hand the number of times I've seen a leo or ranger, and they certainly weren't concerned about enforcing anything. To expect them to check stickers, or throttles or have a dyno at the trailhead is a fantasy. (Ok, maybe in Marin) So a land managers choices are, to ban ebikes knowing full well that some people will ignore the no ebike signs, but it will be a deterrant to most and the shops that want to sell them keeping the numbers low. If you allow class 1, you're essentially allowing any and all, since people will rationalize whatever ebike they want to ride.


And here's an example of exactly this. The Garfield County Commissioners are requesting that RFTA (Roaring Fork Transit Authority), which oversees and set trail use rules for the Rio Grande trail (Glenwood to Aspen), allow class 1 e-bikes. Current regs for the trails explicitly state no ebikes. In addition to asking RFTA to allow ebikes, they're also sending this request with the stipulation that RFTA does not require local law enforcement to actually enforce any trail rules. WTF?:madman:

RFTA board to weigh e-bikes on Rio Grande Trail | AspenTimes.com

From the article: 
Allowing electric pedal-assist bicycles on the lower Rio Grande Trail, even temporarily during the Grand Avenue Bridge detour, should come with greater enforcement of the trail rules, Roaring Fork Transportation Authority staff advised.

"RFTA trails' staff currently has no enforcement authority and cannot monitor speeds or issue tickets to users for any violations of the Rio Grande Trail rules and regulations," notes a staff memo for the RFTA board's consideration.

"If the RFTA board decides to allow the temporary use of e-bikes between Glenwood Springs and Carbondale during the (bridge) closure, staff will need additional resources to assist with enforcement and potentially allow for the issuance of tickets to those violating the rules and speed limit on the trail," the report advises.

Enforcement questions also were raised Monday as the Garfield County commissioners agreed to sign a letter to the RFTA board in support of allowing e-bikes during the bridge detour. *However, the support came with the caveat that the county sheriff would not be asked to do trail enforcement.*


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

Pitkin County bans e-bikes pending community discussion | PostIndependent.com

Dovetailing into the above post, Pitkin County decides to ban all e-bike activity on county trails in response to Colorado HB-17-1151 that goes into affect today, which identifies the classes of ebikes and allows certain classes on road, bike lanes and bike paths. The new state law requires manufacturers to label e-bikes so they are easy to identify and *gives local government authority to manage e-bikes on bike paths under their jurisdiction*. The bill doesn't affect management of eMTBs on public mountain bike and hiking trails. It's only applicable to the road, bike lanes and bike paths.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

While this sounds very measured and thoughtful, I am completely opposed to these "rationalized" restrictions. If your goal is to restrict riders, one can rationalize anything. 

Class 1 bikes can be ridden faster? Well one could argue that modern advanced mountain bikes are far faster than bikes from 20 years ago. Ban them? 

E bikes are heavier than mountain bikes so they cause more trail damage? The trail doesn't see bike weight. It sees combined bike and rider weight. Should I be banned because I weigh more than a 140 pound female rider? 

We should ban all eBikes from some trails because some people may abuse them? Well that ridiculous argument could be used to ban everything. 


The bottom line is, government doesn't rob you of your liberties all at once. It nibbles. Banning class 1 eBikes from some trails simply because it has a motor is a nibble. Once that is fully accepted, there will be another nibble. Finally, in the end, you have no liberties left.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> While this sounds very measured and thoughtful, I am completely opposed to these "rationalized" restrictions. If your goal is to restrict riders, one can rationalize anything.
> 
> Class 1 bikes can be ridden faster? Well one could argue that modern advanced mountain bikes are far faster than bikes from 20 years ago. Ban them?
> 
> ...


Using your logic, there should be no restrictions on anything, anywhere because "liberties".


----------



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

Jim_bo said:


> The bottom line is, government doesn't rob you of your liberties all at once. It nibbles. Banning class 1 eBikes from some trails simply because it has a motor is a nibble.


Or you could also say that allowing something that only has a small motor on lands that were previously designated for non-motorized use is a nibble.

By your reasoning it's an absurd infraction on my liberties to not be allowed to drive a ww2 surplus tank on my local trails, as long as I drive it responsible that is. And no, I'm not comparing a 250w e-bike with a tank.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> The bottom line is, government doesn't rob you of your liberties all at once. It nibbles. Banning class 1 eBikes from some trails simply because it has a motor is a nibble. Once that is fully accepted, there will be another nibble. Finally, in the end, you have no liberties left.


It's obvious that you see the government as the faceless other, while in reality, at the local level where all these decisions are made, because ALL of the ebike related legislation defaults to whatever the land manager decides, they're your neighbors and likely enjoy recreating outdoors just like we do. At my local parks dept, everyone I know rides mtbs, hikes, runs, and/or rides horses. With all the land managers I interact with, City Parks, County, State Parks and USFS, the #1 priority is preserving the land for the future, recreation comes after that. So, if a type of recreation is deemed incompatible with priority #1 for any of a long list of reasons, it's not going to be allowed, no matter what. We can all check our entitlement at the door, while we all have a right to access public land, we don't have a right to do whatever we want on it. There's no Orwellian conspiricy to deprive us of access to public lands, none.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Jim_bo, please clarify, full access for all? Or if there is a line to be drawn, where is it and why?

I'm also curious as to how much trail work you have contributed.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> While this sounds very measured and thoughtful, I am completely opposed to these "rationalized" restrictions. If your goal is to restrict riders, one can rationalize anything.
> 
> Class 1 bikes can be ridden faster? Well one could argue that modern advanced mountain bikes are far faster than bikes from 20 years ago. Ban them?
> 
> ...


 Hmmm, did you read my above post? Liberty? How about not ever allowed to begin with? As Harryman said, local and managers have the final say. I ride on town conservation areas a lot, as well as conservation owned areas with deed restrictions and the like. The Trustees of the Reservation( 150 or so properties here in MA) does great outreach for all human powered users on some of their properties. Historical houses and gardens usually don't allow mt biking. They host bike rides, walks, historical tours, trail days etc. Just people powered and sometimes horses too. Their property, their rules. Yes, it is all about the motor. And leaving the land and trails intact for future generations.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

Jim_bo said:


> The bottom line is, government doesn't rob you of your liberties all at once. It nibbles. Banning class 1 eBikes from some trails simply because it has a motor is a nibble. Once that is fully accepted, there will be another nibble. Finally, in the end, you have no liberties left.


Generally, I agree with you. But in this case, we are starting already from a position of already severely restricted liberties: Depending on where you live (SF Bay for example) Mountain bikes are already severely restricted to a significant subset of trails and single-track, and the prospect of motor power threatens that tenuous hold . . . motor power which is practically impossible to restrict or maintain at arbitrary boundaries like 'class 1'. Those boundaries are easily surmounted through modifications or simply fake stickers. That fact completely changes the calculus of how we approach such things.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> The bottom line is, government doesn't rob you of your liberties all at once. It nibbles. Banning class 1 eBikes from some trails simply because it has a motor is a nibble. Once that is fully accepted, there will be another nibble. Finally, in the end, you have no liberties left.


With each passing year, there are more and more trail miles to access, both dirt singletrack and paved paths in my area. These trails have been developed through a collaboration with local non-govt. groups, private land owners and public land management entities, funded in part by private money but primarily through Greater Outdoor Colorado (GOCO) funds. There is a new push for some large scale trail development throughout the state, like further development of the Carbondale to Crested Butte trail system, trail routing of the Palisade Plunge has already begun, and several others. Collaboration and support of the local govt. entities has been fundamental in this progress.

The only thing currently nibbling away at this progress is the issue of e-bikes, and their impact on non-motorized easements that have been secured (or are hoping to be secured) so that these trails systems can continue to be developed.

So, where you see the govt. nibbling away at your freedoms and liberties, I see the actions of my local governments banning ebikes as as a way to protect my liberties and maintain access to places I love to operate my human powered bicycle.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

watermonkey said:


> The only thing currently nibbling away at this progress is the issue of e-bikes, and their impact on non-motorized easements that have been secured (or are hoping to be secured) so that these trails systems can continue to be developed.
> 
> So, where you see the govt. nibbling away at your freedoms and liberties, I see the actions of my local governments banning ebikes as as a way to protect my liberties and maintain access to places I love to operate my human powered bicycle.


Very true.

The motor cannot be pretended away no matter how much e-bike riders and salesmen wish it could, and being strictly human powered conveyances has been a huge boon for MTB access. The manta that 'mountain bikes have motors now, deal with it' is a sure poison a lot of relationships that mountain bikers have spent many years building. It's taken us a long time to distance ourselves from motorized user groups and to convince LMs that we're a completely different animal. E-bikes muddy that distinction to the detriment of mountain bike access opportunities.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

slapheadmofo said:


> Very true.
> 
> The motor cannot be pretended away no matter how much e-bike riders and salesmen wish it could.


But on the same token, you cannot pretend away the fact that Ebikes here for good and only going to get more prevalent. I would have thought that it may be beneficial to all to work together to get distinct lines between the classifications of ebike, Then regulate the output, wattage, torque, and the ability for any class1 bike to be modified, with the aim of having a registry of bikes that comply. Making strict compliancy regulations will also keep the cheap crappy bikes off the trails, and charge manufacturers to have their bikes on the register. The monies taken from the registration process would pay for the registry administration and could also be put forward to the policing of the trails? Just a thought, but a lot of work for it all to be put in place.....


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

KiwiPhil said:


> But on the same token, you cannot pretend away the fact that Ebikes here for good and only going to get more prevalent. I would have thought that it may be beneficial to all to work together to get distinct lines between the classifications of ebike, Then regulate the output, wattage, torque, and the ability for any class1 bike to be modified, with the aim of having a registry of bikes that comply. Making strict compliancy regulations will also keep the cheap crappy bikes off the trails, and charge manufacturers to have their bikes on the register. The monies taken from the registration process would pay for the registry administration and could also be put forward to the policing of the trails? Just a thought, but a lot of work for it all to be put in place.....


It's too late, the proverbial cat's out of the bag and the manufacturers already pulled a fast one with power levels. There's no going back now.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

KiwiPhil said:


> But on the same token, you cannot pretend away the fact that Ebikes here for good and only going to get more prevalent. I would have thought that it may be beneficial to all to work together to get distinct lines between the classifications of ebike, Then regulate the output, wattage, torque, and the ability for any class1 bike to be modified, with the aim of having a registry of bikes that comply. Making strict compliancy regulations will also keep the cheap crappy bikes off the trails, and charge manufacturers to have their bikes on the register. The monies taken from the registration process would pay for the registry administration and could also be put forward to the policing of the trails? Just a thought, but a lot of work for it all to be put in place.....


I don't understand what I or other mountain bikers have to gain from spending our time and energy working for e-bike access and helping e-bikers get all that sort of stuff sorted out. My hands (and limited spare time) are quite full already, and working to align e-bikes with mountain bikes is a losing proposition for mountain bikers access-wise.

What's in it for me? For example, assuming you don't ride ICE off road bikes, do you spend a lot of time working to get them better access and sort out legislation regarding them, and try to get e-bikes aligned with them as user groups? Why or why not?

I have nothing against e-bikes, I just have zero interest in being forced to become a de facto lobbyist for them. That's what happens when people try to pretend that adding a motor, however small, isn't a fundamental game-changer to LMs everywhere.


----------



## KiwiPhil (Jun 2, 2008)

Why, because in the future ebikes will become more prevalent, there is no doubt about that. So, maybe its best to set in stone the limitations of whats expectable on the trails, before the combined voice of ebikers gets more rights than what you'd be willing to except. Class1 bikes aren't the devil, by excepting them and putting tight regulation around them now, would be better than what could come in the future?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

KiwiPhil said:


> But on the same token, you cannot pretend away the fact that Ebikes here for good and only going to get more prevalent. I would have thought that it may be beneficial to all to work together to get distinct lines between the classifications of ebike, Then regulate the output, wattage, torque, and the ability for any class1 bike to be modified, with the aim of having a registry of bikes that comply. Making strict compliancy regulations will also keep the cheap crappy bikes off the trails, and charge manufacturers to have their bikes on the register. The monies taken from the registration process would pay for the registry administration and could also be put forward to the policing of the trails? Just a thought, but a lot of work for it all to be put in place.....


In the EU, there are sticter controls with Type registration, although, it's really a system to certify that whatever a manufacturer says a part is, or a complete system it is what it is. So, you have to be able to back up your claims that a 250w bike is a 250w bike for example and there are potential fines if it's not. Tampering and dongles have been around for years and the industry acknowledges it's an issue, but I've yet to see them do anything about it, I really don't think they care. There's only one manufacturer that makes a bike you can't dongle, so it can be done. For example:

German Industry Calls for Measures Against E-Bike Tuning - Bike Europe

As far as collecting registration fees, sticker fees, licensing fees, what have you, how much would you be willing to pay? I say this seriously, because if you work backwards from what a full time ranger and their associated costs to keep a ranger in the job, it's a lot of money. We've have 44,000 acres and 250miles of trail in our city park system, spread over many individual properties, so if you had one person cruising around to various trailheads or out on the trail and that costs you $75,000 a year, even spread over 1,000 ebikes, that's $75ea a year. There's probably less than 100 emtbs here, I've never seen one myself, and the numbers aren't that big in the US. This is pretty unscientific, but it gives you an idea.

https://www.singletracks.com/blog/m...-electric-mountain-bikes-2017-still-not-many/

While I agree that all those things, increased and enforced controls would be great, there's been no action from those would most benefit from it, the sellers and riders of ebikes. Their strategy is to just push on with "It's just a bicycle, pay no attention to the motor". So, if those who would benefit aren't willing to adress it, why should we?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

KiwiPhil said:


> Why, because in the future ebikes will become more prevalent, there is no doubt about that. So, maybe its best to set in stone the limitations of whats expectable on the trails, before the combined voice of ebikers gets more rights than what you'd be willing to except. Class1 bikes aren't the devil, by excepting them and putting tight regulation around them now, would be better than what could come in the future?


I'm not a legislator, nor do I play one on TV, and I personally don't care if e-bikers get all sorts of access. If they can make it happen and are a responsible user group, more power to them. If asked about them by my local LMs at a point if and when they are considering granting trail access, I'll be as unbiased as possible. But I have better things to do with my time than getting involved in sorting out their access issues. Been through enough of that with MTBs; I've had it with sitting in hours and hours of meetings for years on end. My local access battles have been won and now I reap the rewards by building and riding trails all I want. It's a much better way to spend time than listening to people ramble on about power levels and children being run over and all sorts of other BS in some stuffy room with a bunch of suits. Don't know how much of this sort of thing you've actually been heavily involved in, but it's frigging tedious, and having no dog in the fight means I have no passion for it whatsoever.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

KiwiPhil said:


> But on the same token, you cannot pretend away the fact that Ebikes here for good and only going to get more prevalent.


That is very debatable in my opinion and the cost of the eBikes and the way the Land Managers make laws about them will most certainly determine if they become more prevalent.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

KiwiPhil said:


> But on the same token, you cannot pretend away the fact that Ebikes here for good and only going to get more prevalent. I would have thought that it may be beneficial to all to work together to get distinct lines between the classifications of ebike, Then regulate the output, wattage, torque, and the ability for any class1 bike to be modified, with the aim of having a registry of bikes that comply. Making strict compliancy regulations will also keep the cheap crappy bikes off the trails, and charge manufacturers to have their bikes on the register. The monies taken from the registration process would pay for the registry administration and could also be put forward to the policing of the trails? Just a thought, but a lot of work for it all to be put in place.....


 Here for good in NZ, great. Not so in the USA, maybe you can advocate for them where you live, if thats your thing. Beneficial for who again? They make great commuters, i'll start there. Same can be said for dirt bikes. Lots of sales, just not on the multi use off road hiking/biking paths.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

KiwiPhil said:


> Why, because in the future ebikes will become more prevalent, there is no doubt about that. So, maybe its best to set in stone the limitations of whats expectable on the trails, before the combined voice of ebikers gets more rights than what you'd be willing to except. Class1 bikes aren't the devil, by excepting them and putting tight regulation around them now, would be better than what could come in the future?


 Oh your crystal ball looks so rosy. Don't see the current motorized ban on trails here in MA changing anytime soon. We will send them all to NZ. Combined voice? Not even a peep.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Those hover boards sure were popular a few years ago, now not so much. Mopeds were big back in the early '80s but pretty much died out here in the US. Ebikes may get more prevalent as commuter vehicles.


----------



## Flamingtaco (Mar 12, 2012)

chazpat said:


> Interesting post, Flamingtaco. Based on what you have pointed out, is the speed regulator set too high for class 1 ebikes? Since it seems the purpose of riding an ebike on a trail is that the rider doesn't want to put out the energy to climb, would it make sense to match climbing speed to that of a real bicycle?


Honestly, no, that won't work. Ex. How do you determine a twisty single track climb Vs wide multi-use path with clear line of site Vs a road, where it's much safer to be at 20 than 3?

It's not fair for me to say mountain bikers shouldn't have to suffer for ebikers, but expect ebikers to suffer, and I don't anyone to suffer for the benefit of any other group, but there are a lot of valid concerns that ebikes are largely incompatible with other user groups.

This does not mean ebikers deserve to be relegated to motorized trail access, and some of the ebikes are obviously incompatible with certain motorized systems, ex. trails that permit speeds up to 50mph shouldn't be ridden on ebikes that cut the power at 25mph.

I think the long term solution is going to be a combination of dedicated trails and trails that cross the lines between non-motorized, electric, and ICE. I don't see this as being an issue as this already exists between hikers, mtbr's, and equestrians, and works well most of the time.

In the meantime, ebikes are permitted on all motorized trails, and some non-motorized trails, as the country works to figure out how to handle this new sport. During the coming decades, I ask that ebikers resist poaching, much like mtbr's have had to resist poaching hiker only trails for decades.

I also ask ebikers to use and abundance of common sense when hitting motorized trails, of which I know many would be hella fun on a decent ebike, just like they were on my old snail (Kawa 125). If your motor cuts out past 25mph, you don't need to be on a trail that other users can achieve 50. You don't deserve to be injured by a fast ICE any more than I deserve to be injured by you.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Have you seen all the new e bikes coming out? all for the trail use ??


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

rider95 said:


> Have you seen all the new e bikes coming out? all for the trail use ??


Now all they need are legal trails to ride them on.


----------



## Flamingtaco (Mar 12, 2012)

KiwiPhil said:


> Why, because in the future ebikes will become more prevalent, there is no doubt about that. So, maybe its best to set in stone the limitations of whats expectable on the trails, before the combined voice of ebikers gets more rights than what you'd be willing to except. Class1 bikes aren't the devil, by excepting them and putting tight regulation around them now, would be better than what could come in the future?


Using a 'let us in now, or you won't like what comes later' argument isn't going to provide the results you want. Mtbr's have been dealing with threats from other user groups for decades now, and can see right through that charade.

I'm beginning to understand that few advocating for ebike access on multiuse trails understand the tenuous relationship mtbr's have with other user groups and land managers, and how fear of ebikes 
can tip the balance away from mtbr's.

In the world of ORV's there is a real problem with trail maintenance. There aren't enough people willing to maintain trails for a tenth of the volume of trail users. The result is trails are ground down to the bedrock quickly. In Kentucky, they close trail systems because use wears trails through 15ft of hardpack clay and dumps tens of thousands cu-ft of silt into creeks and rivers.

The ORV community has real issues with self governance that land managers must deal with, and they do not have the time or funds to distinguish a 5w assist motor from a 5000w motor that rooster tails dirt, rock, snakes and gophers for a hundred feet.

Why don't MTBr's like the idea granting ebikes access to non-motorized trails? BECAUSE THEY DON'T NEED TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH EBIKES IN A TIME WHEN MOST LAND MANAGERS DO NOT HAVE A GOOD GRASP ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 250W MOTOR ASSIST BIKE AND A KTM 450 SX-F. Seriously, the argument for wide swath access smacks of ignorance and/or lack of concern for what it has taken mtbr's to get to where we are.

My personal saga is that until about ten years ago, we had zero trails approved for bikes of any type. There were no specific prohibitions, so trails would get built, or existing trails shared, then they would be shut down or policed to get the bikes off of them, because there was no legislation specifically defining mtb's as a user group. Access had been fought for since the early 80'sm and I joined the fight for access and also safer roads in the mid 90's. Years of abuse at the hands of hikers, equestrians and cyclist haters, both at access meetings and on the roads and trails, led me to quit all forms of cycling out of frustration, for over a decade.

It's been a long, arduous fight, filled with missteps, tenous relationships, and a cargo ship full of headaches. My only comment to land managers about ebikes is that ebikers need to fight fight for access on their own merit, and the land managers should handle them as a separate user group so that decisions for or against their use do not impact other users. Yes, this means ebikers don't get as much access as mtbr's, but it also means mtbr's don't lose access.

I also believe California's class 1 designation leaves a lot to be desired in regards to shared trails. We have existing issues with riders that don't have pro level power output. Do we need riders on the trail that can put down more power than a pro? Double the power? Turning fast rollers into jumps?


----------



## Flamingtaco (Mar 12, 2012)

rider95 said:


> Have you seen all the new e bikes coming out? all for the trail use ??


What is being produced is of no consequence as the the tail does not wag the dog here. Access will not be granted just because more eBikers show up to the trailheads. In fact, it will go very differently in many places, with motorized not permitted signs going up and higher enforcement levels to get ebikes off the trails. When people plunk down thousands of dollars on a toy, only to find out they have limited or no place to play, they dump their new trail toy on the used marked, driving used prices way down, killing new sales. If trail access does not come, the eMTB industry will die off, and you'll be left with a handful of compromise eTrailbikes as dedicated eMTB hardware will not be profitable.

As long as it takes to get trail access in the US, I expect we'll see a major slump in the coming years as this niche and the used ebike market saturates. If most eBikers are of the mind that they deserve to be on non-motorized trails and don't bother exploring motorized trails, I don't see any other way this can go unless ebikers can get wilderness access. Good luck with that.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

The more Ebikes that hit the ground and are sold are going to create more ebike poaching on illegal trails. With no enforcement, where does this lead? I think ebike parks would be a great place to ride them. Ebike parks, "SPONSORED BY SPECIALIZED, TREK ETC" would and should be the responsible thing to do. If LM allow them on certain trails, great. If not, go rip ebike parks along with the downhill shuttle scene.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> . Ebike parks, "SPONSORED BY SPECIALIZED, TREK ETC" would and should be the responsible thing to do.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!

Now that's funny stuff! You see these guys building MTB parks, even with the number of MTBs they've sold?

Sorry to bring up reality again, but anyone looking to 'the industry' for answers is in for a long lonely wait. E-bikers need to get organized and learn lessons for MTB advocacy. Want to grow this forum? Start coming at things from that angle. Guarantee it'll work better than bitching about how mountain bikers aren't lining up to fight your battles for you.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

^i got no dog in the fight. I said "should" not they're gonna. To be quite honest, I really don't care how any of this shakes out. It's dumb talking about any of this.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

slapheadmofo said:


> Sorry to bring up reality again, but anyone looking to 'the industry' for answers is in for a long lonely wait. E-bikers need to get organized and learn lessons for MTB advocacy. Want to grow this forum? Start coming at things from that angle. Guarantee it'll work better than bitching about how mountain bikers aren't lining up to fight your battles for you.


Yep, we get support from the industry, but only those companies who have a presence here, SRAM, Rotor, SRM and a few others. Bike companies primarily only cut checks much farther up the food chain, like to lobbyists or IMBA. With a few exceptions that I can think of, like Bell grants, they aren't involved with anything on the ground.

While ebikes will continue to be popular in Europe, with our more problematic regulations here, unless the USFS/BLM changes their stance, I think it'll be an uphill battle to get enough access to make spending the $ on one worth it. I'd have concerns spending that kind of money on a bike that I could only ride here and there.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Gutch said:


> ^i got no dog in the fight. I said "should" not they're gonna. To be quite honest, I really don't care how any of this shakes out. It's dumb talking about any of this.


Dig it...I was using 'you' collectively, not aiming my comments specifically at any yourself.


----------



## kitejumping (Sep 3, 2010)

Where is the mtbr sub forum for off road scooters and mountainboards? At least those aren't motorized.


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

Gutch said:


> It's dumb talking about any of this.


True. Yet my drivetrain and suspension are sorted, so I just wandered in here again.


----------



## Marion Delgado (Nov 1, 2011)

fos'l said:


> Don't allow any negative comments about e-bikes unless you've ridden one or have had an issue with someone riding one. Most of the BS negativity here is all made up on the couch.


Hell yeah, bruh!!! Could not agree more. You are a freakin GENIUS.

And now that I cogitate upon it, I realize that no one should be allowed to make negative comments about murder unless they've killed someone, either.

Gotta end _all _the made-up-on-the-couch BS negativity!


----------



## eFat (Jun 14, 2017)

Marion Delgado said:


> Hell yeah, bruh!!! Could not agree more. You are a freakin GENIUS.
> 
> And now that I cogitate upon it, I realize that no one should be allowed to make negative comments about murder unless they've killed someone, either.
> 
> Gotta end _all _the made-up-on-the-couch BS negativity!


You're a good example of "How can we NOT grow this forum".


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Nothing good has come from here just read the reply's got a positive story about e bikes and puppy dogs?? got a story about a e biker stopping a crime on a bike path you will just get hate. This site shows a small but some of the worst of Mt biking name calling from the elitist who don't want to sure our public trails , I am embarrassed by the hate from other so called MT bikers that is spewed on here every post turns in to a not on my trail rant . I encourage my fellow E bikers to prove the haters wrong every time we ride what ever trail we ride never allow the hate from here to keep you from enjoying Mt biking with other Mt bikers .


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

rider95 said:


> Mt biking with other Mt bikers .


E-bikes aren't mountain bikes.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

rider95 said:


> This site shows a small but some of the worst of Mt biking name calling from the elitist who don't want to share our public trails


I don't see much 'hate', unless you define hate in the same way as Lefties do, that is, anyone who disagrees with you? What I do see are people fed up with ebiker intransigence over issues that could have serious ramifications for all two-wheeled adventurers.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

I can call bull$hit on delusional people all day long without hate ever coming into the equation, and it doesn't even take an elitist stance to do it.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

rider95 said:


> This site shows a small but some of the worst of Mt biking name calling from the elitist


Irony

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

rider95 said:


> This site shows a small but some of the worst of Mt biking name calling from the elitist


I think you mean "Purists", and if not wanting motorized vehicles on the trails makes me one so be it.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

rider95 said:


> Nothing good has come from here just read the reply's got a positive story about e bikes and puppy dogs?? got a story about a e biker stopping a crime on a bike path you will just get hate. This site shows a small but some of the worst of Mt biking name calling from the elitist who don't want to sure our public trails , I am embarrassed by the hate from other so called MT bikers that is spewed on here every post turns in to a not on my trail rant . I encourage my fellow E bikers to prove the haters wrong every time we ride what ever trail we ride never allow the hate from here to keep you from enjoying Mt biking with other Mt bikers .


 Grow the forum? Start with " Bikes don't have motors"


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

This thread had actually hit a good stretch of discussion on the subject matter until your post. If you want to grow the forum, find some ebikers who can articulate their viewpoint and discuss, I've only seen a couple with that capability. Most just want to rant against "haters" when a post isn't on their side.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

leeboh said:


> Grow the forum? Start with " Bikes don't have motors"


intel you can get over this the forum will never grow


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Mr Pig said:


> I don't see much 'hate', unless you define hate in the same way as Lefties do, that is, anyone who disagrees with you? What I do see are people fed up with ebiker intransigence over issues that could have serious ramifications for all two-wheeled adventurers.


Jesus, "righties" are the e-bikers of the political world. You guys are so freaking fragile. You cry haters whenever anyone doesn't agree with your views, sounds familiar.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Jesus, "righties" are the e-bikers of the political world. You guys are so freaking fragile. You cry haters whenever anyone doesn't agree with your views, sounds familiar.


What??


----------



## kitejumping (Sep 3, 2010)

Anyone use the new ebike specific 27.5 ikons on their trail bike? Seems like they might hold up better than the normal mtb version.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

kitejumping said:


> Anyone use the new ebike specific 27.5 ikons on their trail bike? Seems like they might hold up better than the normal mtb version.


Why would they hold up better? ebikes are essentially the same as pedal mountain bikes so why would they need tougher tyres?

You do realise that if you admit that ebikes need tougher tyres it proves that all the bleating about them not delivering more torque to the dirt is total lies?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Mr Pig said:


> Why would they hold up better? ebikes are essentially the same as pedal mountain bikes so why would they need tougher tyres?
> 
> You do realise that if you admit that ebikes need tougher tyres it proves that all the bleating about them not delivering more torque to the dirt is total lies?


They have heavier casings.

Manufacturers are producing burlier wheels, tires, drivetrains, forks, and even seats to deal with the higher speeds, weight and torque of ebikes. I know people in the industry who just laugh when you ask them about drivetrain longevity when using bike components on an emtb, especially with 750w. They're just bikes right? ?


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

Mr Pig said:


> What??


Don't worry about it. Neither of you made any sense with your statements.

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk


----------



## kitejumping (Sep 3, 2010)

Harryman said:


> They have heavier casings.
> 
> Manufacturers are producing burlier wheels, tires, drivetrains, forks, and even seats to deal with the higher speeds, weight and torque of ebikes. I know people in the industry who just laugh when you ask them about drivetrain longevity when using bike components on an emtb, especially with 750w. They're just bikes right? 


E bikes are good for the aggressive mtber because they are forcing manufactures to create stronger components. The Guide RE brakes look pretty awesome too. I might try an ebike ikon on my non motorized trail bike, its a lot lighter than a double down aggressor and maybe there is a chance it will hold up better than an exo casing.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

kitejumping said:


> E bikes are good for the aggressive mtber because they are forcing manufactures to create stronger components. The Guide RE brakes look pretty awesome too. I might try an ebike ikon on my non motorized trail bike, its a lot lighter than a double down aggressor and maybe there is a chance it will hold up better than an exo casing.


Wow. So, had we never had ebikes, we would never have thought to seek out stronger casings with lighter weight.

There's no shortage of components across the spectrum of light to beefy, depending on the application. If you want DH brakes, you can buy DH brakes. If you want all mountain brakes, you can buy all mountain brakes. If you want beefier casings, get beefier casings.

Ebike specific tires, brakes, and other components are more marketing opportunism than emerging technology.

How about ebike specific.... grips! For the extra... demands... I guess?

Show me an actual component breakthrough driven by ebikes that wasn't known / available anyways.


----------



## kitejumping (Sep 3, 2010)

Procter said:


> Wow. So, had we never had ebikes, we would never have thought to seek out stronger casings with lighter weight.
> 
> There's no shortage of components across the spectrum of light to beefy, depending on the application. If you want DH brakes, you can buy DH brakes. If you want all mountain brakes, you can buy all mountain brakes. If you want beefier casings, get beefier casings.
> 
> ...


Where can I buy a double down maxxis ikon? I've only seen enduro and downhill casings with slower rolling tread patterns.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

kitejumping said:


> Where can I buy a double down maxxis ikon? I've only seen enduro and downhill casings with slower rolling tread patterns.


If you consider yourself an aggressive MTBer (and based on your profile pics it looks like you are), you probably don't want Ikons. Its an XC racing tire.


----------



## kitejumping (Sep 3, 2010)

Procter said:


> If you consider yourself an aggressive MTBer (and based on your profile pics it looks like you are), you probably don't want Ikons. Its an XC racing tire.


For when the uphill times matter as much as not flatting on the downhills, DD aggressors are awesome downhill but slow climbers.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

procter said:


> wow. So, had we never had ebikes, we would never have thought to seek out stronger casings with lighter weight.
> 
> There's no shortage of components across the spectrum of light to beefy, depending on the application. If you want dh brakes, you can buy dh brakes. If you want all mountain brakes, you can buy all mountain brakes. If you want beefier casings, get beefier casings.
> 
> ...


sram ex1


----------



## kitejumping (Sep 3, 2010)

Gutch said:


> sram ex1


A durable 11-48 8 speed? Seems perfect for anyone that is constantly snapping narrow 11 speed chains.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

Well, I've used it on my Levo and it works well. I've only snapped one 11spd chain on my mtb though, but I guess others have more? I can't put as much stress under load on my mtb as I could my Levo.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

Not buying it. If there was demand for that in regular mtbs, they would have built it anyways. Who is breaking lots of x01 or x1 chains? Haven't heard that but if they were, it's an obvious invention, not something that would only arise from ebikes. 

Let's see, our chains are too narrow and fragile... What should we do? Maybe, beef them up?


----------



## Flamingtaco (Mar 12, 2012)

kitejumping said:


> Where is the mtbr sub forum for off road scooters and mountainboards? At least those aren't motorized.


Too late...









...on both accounts.


----------



## kitejumping (Sep 3, 2010)

Procter said:


> Not buying it. If there was demand for that in regular mtbs, they would have built it anyways. Who is breaking lots of x01 or x1 chains? Haven't heard that but if they were, it's an obvious invention, not something that would only arise from ebikes.
> 
> Let's see, our chains are too narrow and fragile... What should we do? Maybe, beef them up?


Most people don't, which is why strength is getting replaced with more gears. I can snap them fairly quickly if I start doing a ton of larger rear wheel pedal kick gaps on my mtb, but that isnt a problem for many riders or people riding under normal xc / am usage.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Been riding my e bike with the same chain for 5 yrs but I go through tires fast and spend a lot more on travel and staying in new places riding. Just bought a pull behind trailer for my bike to pull my grand kids around and to help with trail work.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Procter said:


> Not buying it. If there was demand for that in regular mtbs, they would have built it anyways. Who is breaking lots of x01 or x1 chains? Haven't heard that but if they were, it's an obvious invention, not something that would only arise from ebikes.
> 
> Let's see, our chains are too narrow and fragile... What should we do? Maybe, beef them up?


Yep, who needs a lightweight, fragile drivetrain anyway when you have a motor to drive it?

World Premiere: Conti - NuVinci Integrated Mid-Motor

UPDATED: Rohloff Embraces E-Bike Market With E-14 | Singletrack Magazine


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Saving my money to buy my first store bought e bike to take back west CO , moab , next spring so many new cool bikes n stuff for the e biker .


----------

