# Supporting Class 1 E-bikes



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

I think more people would support class 1 ebikes if they were 100% sure no other modified bikes are somehow introduced as a byproduct of letting class 1 bike access to trails. 

Here's what I think would help. (this is just my opinion)

1) Standardization of core emtb components such as batteries and controller. This would ensure batteries follow an industry standard which would be marked and sealed to prevent tampering. Batteries would be easily identifiable if inspected same with the controller module. The controller module should have an interface to easily track bike stats and settings if an impromptu inspection of the bike is needed. Also, the controller will need to be un-hackable, unmodifiable, and unremovable, by unscrupulous individuals.

2) Registration of bike models with a central agency that tracks all legal class 1 ebikes. Only models legal registered as a class 1 ebike will be allowed on accessible trails. Bikes that a legally registered will be marked with a unalterable tag on the their frame as proof. In a location where it would be easily accessible and viewable by anyone.

3) Yearly inspection of every class 1 bike and licencing. It would be the class 1 ebike owner's responsibility and requirement to have their bikes inspected yearly to verify no modification had been made. They will carry along with them on the bike proof of inspection which will prove they are in compliance and that their bike has not been modified. Licencing fee's will help offset costs associated with policing, registration, and administration costs.

4) Stiff fines for anyone who ride modified/non class 1 ebikes on trails. 

Again this is just my opinion and any additional thoughts would be welcome to discuss what would make class 1 ebikes acceptable. As I see it, if the bike industry wants regular bikers to support class 1 ebikes they need provide something more substantial than lip service about donating to bike related causes.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Inspection and registration? By who? For free? Over rides and controller mods already exist. With a switch or blue tooth setting? Seems like a big stretch, to me anyway. Going to have inspectors at every trail head? The idea seems a small step in the right direction, but the devil is n the details.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

leeboh said:


> Inspection and registration? By who? For free? Over rides and controller mods already exist. With a switch or blue tooth setting? Seems like a big stretch, to me anyway. Going to have inspectors at every trail head? The idea seems a small step in the right direction, but the devil is n the details.


I added a caveat the the fees would be offset through licensing. And possibly fees leveled on makers when registering their bikes as class 1. I would think inspections would be done at the dmv or a licenced ebike dealer. Again, I'm not advocating for emtb access but in any debate there needs to be some compromise. If I were going to compromise these would be my list of demands.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Shimano STEPS is already nigh-unhackable, right? I've heard people here mention that they won't consider STEPS bikes because they can't be derestricted. 

I think just making it really, really hard to hack the things would mostly do it. No need for fees or licenses or anything. But the majority of the stuff out there now is easily delimited, so perhaps the cat is already out of the bag.

I should mention - I'd fully support the EU class 1 (250W/15.5 mph). That lets you do anything a "normal" fit mountain biker can do, with less effort (or more range). 750W/20mph, no way - that's making things a LOT faster and more powerful than even the fastest pros.

-Walt


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Walt said:


> Shimano STEPS is already nigh-unhackable, right? I've heard people here mention that they won't consider STEPS bikes because they can't be derestricted.
> 
> I think just making it really, really hard to hack the things would mostly do it. No need for fees or licenses or anything. But the majority of the stuff out there now is easily delimited, so perhaps the cat is already out of the bag.
> 
> ...


The problem with just making the controller unhackable there's still no way of distinguishing a class 1 ebike from any other ebike without active enforcement. The measures I proposed with make it cheaper and easier than having a cop sitting at every trailhead checking every bike that passes through and will allow other trail users to help in the enforcement process making it easier to spot class 1 ebikes.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Lemonaid said:


> I think more people would support class 1 ebikes if they were 100% sure no other modified bikes are somehow introduced as a byproduct of letting class 1 bike access to trails.
> 
> Here's what I think would help. (this is just my opinion)
> 
> ...


Dream on.

You wouldn't want to live in a country where such limits are enforceable.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Moe Ped said:


> Dream on.
> 
> You wouldn't want to live in a country where such limits are enforceable.


We do that with cars... just saying.


----------



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

Lemonaid said:


> We do that with cars... just saying.


Only smog tests in the US, and not in every state. No power limits or inspections. To me what you're suggesting sounds like bureaucratic clusterfork that would mostly consume money.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Moe Ped said:


> Dream on.
> 
> You wouldn't want to live in a country where such limits are enforceable.


Yep.

The only things that keep people from breaking rules on public land are steep fines, and a combination of education/peer pressure. I doubt we'll ever see laws as restrictive, and fines as high as what is in place in the for selling or riding out of compliance ebikes in the EU. Plus, little to no enforcement makes it easy to ignore. For anyone here wishing to do so, a rarely given small fine will just be the cost of riding, no big deal.

The major manufacturers of ebike motors are actually working to make derestricting more painful, and trackable, but all of their motors, including Shimano's, are easy to derstrict. I really don't think it'll stop anyone who wants to do it.

https://ebike-mtb.com/en/ebike-motor-tuning/

While the conversation is always focused on ebikes coming from the bike industry, I expect the next wave we'll see will be from China through non tradition channels, where they really don't give af about any regulations here in the US. They'll look identical to a Class 1 ebike, but will have power levels in the 750w-2500w range, and throttles.

https://electricbike-blog.com/2017/...g-the-bafang-ultra-max-mid-drive-ebike-drive/

https://freyebikes.en.alibaba.com/

https://voltonbicycles.com/2018/01/19/volton-a-trail-emtb-bafang-ultra-ebike-motor/

https://electricitycycles.com/produ...EuhGv6rCn_FpLu_eMuN9df5qA5WP3FpxoCYIIQAvD_BwE

Add in diy ebikes that pretend to be Class 1.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/BBS02-BBSH...ail-Kit-Emblem-/263727491047?oid=263720753361

I'd support EU spec Pedelecs on trails, but I'm not going to pretend that our situation is the same as theirs. If emtb proponents are willing to push though new regs for 250w emtbs, funding mechanisms for enforcement, and stiffer penalties for violations, I'd be happy to see it. Non of those things would affect a responsible ebike rider, and would only increase their chances of more access. Otherwise, I'm not looking forward to idiots on higher powered ebikes making a mess of things for all of us.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

I might just add that one take a look at how long VW got away with their Diesel emissions cheat. And that there were those in the company that thought the risk of getting caught was worth it.

And who made the ECU's that contained the cheat software?

Bosch.

Does that name ring a bell in regards to e-bikes?

As sure as the sun rises there will be cheat Class 1 e-bikes. (Euro std. will be pushed to USA std. and USA std. will be in the kWatt range)


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Moe Ped said:


> I might just add that one take a look at how long VW got away with their Diesel emissions cheat. And that there were those in the company that thought the risk of getting caught was worth it.
> 
> And who made the ECU's that contained the cheat software?
> 
> ...


Well, they still got in trouble eventually.

Put the laws in place and let the legal system take care of the offenders. Make examples out of the early offenders.

It'll only take a few lawsuits where the bike manufacturers get dragged in before the software becomes much more difficult to hack and the frankenbikes disappear from the market.

One lawsuit could put a small company like Luna out of business.


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

The guys at Spec claim that they can detect if a motor's been derestricted, as if it has a black box of some sort. Waiting for someone to challenge it in court for denied warranty service. It'll likely won't get to that, unless the ebike owner is truly innocent of derestricting or if the plantiff is extremely convinced that it's a bluff and won't take a settlement.

Regarding flashing US firmware on EU ebikes: I researched this and found that a motor has a license on it or something, and that it may not be possible. In the case of Shimano, a STEPs motor owner needs a shop with a special Di2 laptop or something, requiring the IBD to call Shimano HQ to send specific firmware to the laptop that's connected to the motor, to do something like recalibrate a wheel's circumference and measure speed accurately.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

karmaphi said:


> ...In the case of Shimano, a STEPs motor owner needs a shop with a special Di2 laptop or something, requiring the IBD to call Shimano HQ to send specific firmware to the laptop that's connected to the motor, to do something like recalibrate a wheel's circumference and measure speed accurately.


Or https://www.ebiketuning.com/comparison/shimano-tuning.html

And as you could tell it's called "ebike tuning" not deristricting or whatever. Quick google search on ebike tuning shows it's popular and diy.


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

tahoebeau said:


> Or https://www.ebiketuning.com/comparison/shimano-tuning.html
> 
> And as you could tell it's called "ebike tuning" not deristricting or whatever. Quick google search on ebike tuning shows it's popular and diy.


Interesting. They mod the speed sensor signal. Halve the signal coming from the speed sensor, and essentially get 2x the max speed before cut-off. Amusing legal info at the bottom:

- must not be used on public roads or in areas subject to the application of the Highway Code! 
- Use is restricted to private land, with the owners permission.
- We will never fit the device for you.
- installation can lead to loss of warranty of the e-bike.
- The use of this product may legally invalidate any safety certifications of the bike and by using it you accept liability for your safety and those around you.
- used at your own risk. Warning, risk of injury.
- assumes no liability for any damage to property and / or injury to persons caused by improper use of the product.

The way I speculate that Spec detects "derestriction" is by recording data on how much load the motor sees. Putting such a mod on a motor and having it fail prematurely to heat-related issues can be a pattern that I presume can be detected. They can compare to an extreme case of an obese man hauling cargo, while going the legit cut-off speed.

Tried to find leads on people getting caught by officials doing noteworthy trouble with derestricted ebikes, but can't get the search terms to narrow down on anything relevant. Should have already happened if it's popular and is viewed as such a huge problem, right?


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

should look to the euro situation then. With the deep penetration of eMTB into the scene over there for a decade now, has there been been a problem with rogue-modification of the bikes? Or an invasion of high power DIY EMTB kits? 

I don't know but I doubt it.

reason is, to justify an EMTB in my mind, the terrain has got to be pretty hilly and technically demanding, imho. and that means the drive system has to be sophisticated pedelec-multiplying. None of the chinese kits or bikes have usable pedelec-multiplying tech in them, nor do they have good geometry suspension and components. MTB enthusiasts seek the good stuff and largely buy into the off the shelf, proven Class 1 bikes on the market. and at the high prices they command, modifying and killing the warranty seems like something only a few weirdos would do. Further, any modding to get more power just robs from your range - big time - making the bike less versatile. The guys I know who have used eMTB tend to ride around in low-power mode to get a lot of range, and that is on 250W-max systems.

now, I've never even ridden an E MTB on the trail yet .. but I just bought one for 9g lol. after 33 years of MTBing sans motor (riding, racing, trail access seeking, club organizing and MTB event organizing), I have been diagnosed with a bad heart valve and the doc says no more race-pace riding. Which means I have to walk the steep long climbs which gets my heart over that threshold. I'd rather pedal them ... though I'm def not ditching my non motor MTBs. look fwd to seeing what these things are good for.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

BCsaltchucker said:


> ....Emtb enthusiasts seek the good stuff and largely buy into the off the shelf, proven Class 1 bikes on the market. and at the high prices they command, modifying and killing the warranty seems like something only a few weirdos would do. Further, any modding to get more power just robs from your range - big time - making the bike less versatile.


Actually, tuning the ebike will make it more versatile. You don't have to use all the power if you want to save range, or you can have more speed and power if you want, making it then, by definition, more versatile.

There are so many companies out there making tuning kits for every type of ebike, especially the high end, embt specific ones. There would not be this many options from this many companies being sold by so many retailers unless there was a good market for it.

Try typing in "ebike tuning" on google before just speculating, because it is obvious that you really don't have much knowledge on this. There are countless ebike tuning options out there for every type of ebike that are very easy to find along with endless professional articles and forum threads on how to "tune" your ebike.


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

I would like to tune mine so it would go 50 miles! I think range is the key, especially with other Trail users. Exploration is fun.


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

i checked the 'ebiketuning site' ww I never knew they'd hacked so many ebike systems.

but still, your battery is the battery you got, and it has specific limitations, including amps draw efficiency curve and specific capacity. the more you burn that fuel with more power, worse the range and battery life get. plus you do void the warranty. I guess for just dyno moves over short rock gardens, the burst of power isn't going to affect the range too much, within reason

fwiw the bike I ordered is the new Rocky Powerplay 70, so I doubt there are any modification options for it to date. It's very proprietary and new. I might use level 2 (of 3) for fire road climbing and level 1 for the very techy trails here, I anticipate. Won't be dropping anyone on non-ebike at my age lol. to date I probably average 6kph on the trail here and I don't expect that to change much with using an ebike.

I also have a Bafang 750W mid kit on a road bike (I hardly ever use it. prefer non motor road biking). That thing needs no modding. plenty fast at 45kph, over the 32kph legal limit here. But the range is horrible if I go over 25kph, even in pedelec - I have it set it up for pedelec only. The Bafang is not a smart multipliying system, no good for real MTB imho


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

BCsaltchucker said:


> i
> fwiw the bike I ordered is the new Rocky Powerplay 70, so I doubt there are any modification options for it to date. It's very proprietary and new.


That's a beautiful design. Friggin easy hack due to layout. If I bought one I'd have it running @ 750W in less than a week.


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

ohh I have to eat my words again. The hacks DO have a hacking unit on sale for the Powerplay. wow. I am not a buyer though. I think. they offer 10% more power

but I am feeling that the 48V system of the Powerplay should be more robust for high watts draw than 36v system. not that I know for sure


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

BCsaltchucker said:


> ohh I have to eat my words again. The hacks DO have a hacking unit on sale for the Powerplay. wow. I am not a buyer though. I think. they offer 10% more power
> 
> but I am feeling that the 48V system of the Powerplay should be more robust for high watts draw than 36v system. not that I know for sure


Tuning just raises the speed limit at which the motor cuts out, so, it'll only affect your range if you spend a bunch of time pedaling above 20mph.

If you want more power, you'd have to be able to reprogram the software/controller, which is probably possible, but not by most people or outside of a shop.


----------



## Whiptastic (Mar 14, 2016)

I like my “Class-1, 2 or 3 Compatible” BBS02B. I’ve got to get that sticker made up...

Variety is the spice of life!


----------



## homeslice (Jun 3, 2008)

Lemonaid said:


> I think more people would support class 1 ebikes if they were 100% sure no other modified bikes are somehow introduced as a byproduct of letting class 1 bike access to trails.
> 
> Here's what I think would help. (this is just my opinion)
> 
> ...


Aaaaand none of this sh!t's ever going to happen. Wishful thinking.


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

well hopefully freedom will carry the day and intrusions into freedom will be reasonable and minimal. No one has really established that the EMTB are having any negative affect on trails, users, anything other than theoretical speculation and hurt feelings on climbs.

Though have to admit, I've never come upon an eMTB owner riding on a trail and I've not even ridden one myself. Just seen them at demo days, and my wife tried one last week and went giggly-insane for the thing.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

BCsaltchucker said:


> well hopefully freedom will carry the day and intrusions into freedom will be reasonable and minimal. No one has really established that the EMTB are having any negative affect on trails, users, anything other than theoretical speculation and hurt feelings on climbs.
> 
> Though have to admit, I've never come upon an eMTB owner riding on a trail and I've not even ridden one myself. Just seen them at demo days, and my wife tried one last week and went giggly-insane for the thing.


Other user groups pointing to e-bikes and using them in their efforts to ban bicycles is pretty negative. And yes, that is actually happening.


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

life behind bars said:


> Other user groups pointing to e-bikes and using them in their efforts to ban bicycles is pretty negative. And yes, that is actually happening.


so it's a rhetorical problem, not an actual problem based on real world usage/encounters. so fight rhetoric with better rhetoric/reason

like I remember the hysteria over snowboards trying to get access to ski hills. laughable today


----------



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

BCsaltchucker said:


> like I remember the hysteria over snowboards trying to get access to ski hills. laughable today


completely different deal


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Walt said:


> Shimano STEPS is already nigh-unhackable, right?


Yet. If any particular system became popular a smart enough person will figure out how to hack them and make some money. So whatever "unhackable" system got selected it would get hacked sooner or later.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

So much for any classes or limits.


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> completely different deal


it's different yes, as in the eMTB are MUCH more similar to regular MTB than ski:snowboards. And further the emnity between the two groups of users is similar, though I think on average there are faintingly few MTBers who dislike EMTB unlike the old days where a signif percent of skiers were annoyed by snowboarders.

and it's different because the access at ski hills involves a different kind of entity, I agree. Ski hills are owned by large for profit corporations, while MTB trail land is owned and managed by governments/bureaucrats and ranch owners. But then, it is just people dealing with people, and the EU regions seems to have carved out a good deal for EMTB using reason and logic


----------



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

BCsaltchucker said:


> and it's different because the access at ski hills involves a different kind of entity, I agree. Ski hills are owned by large for profit corporations, while MTB trail land is owned and managed by governments/bureaucrats and ranch owners. But then, it is just people dealing with people, and the EU regions seems to have carved out a good deal for EMTB using reason and logic


Yes, for profit corporations operating a business on privatized land is a different deal than public lands serving multiple users. The ski/snowboard example would be the same as a ceo of a bike park deciding to allow electric bikes, that's their decision, based on projected profits and the only people affected are the shareholders and the people paying to go there. No different than any other business.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

BCsaltchucker said:


> it's different yes, as in the eMTB are MUCH more similar to regular MTB than ski:snowboards. And further the emnity between the two groups of users is similar, though I think on average there are faintingly few MTBers who dislike EMTB unlike the old days where a signif percent of skiers were annoyed by snowboarders.
> 
> and it's different because the access at ski hills involves a different kind of entity, I agree. Ski hills are owned by large for profit corporations, while MTB trail land is owned and managed by governments/bureaucrats and ranch owners. But then, it is just people dealing with people, and the EU regions seems to have carved out a good deal for EMTB using reason and logic


Missed one: skis, snowboards and bicycles don't have motors; ebikes do. That makes bikes and ebikes a lot MORE different than skis and snowboards.


----------



## BCsaltchucker (Jan 16, 2014)

except you're wrong, of course. ebike:non-ebike is a fairly trivial difference. the way a snowboard goes down a hill is dramatically different than a skier, while an eMTB goes down a hill EXACTLY the same as a non-motor MTB. a few extra watts is so trivial, you'll find that kind of difference between two non-eMTB bikers


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

BCsaltchucker said:


> except you're wrong, of course. ebike:non-ebike is a fairly trivial difference. the way a snowboard goes down a hill is dramatically different than a skier, while an eMTB goes down a hill EXACTLY the same as a non-motor MTB. a few extra watts is so trivial, you'll find that kind of difference between two non-eMTB bikers


But a ski and a snowboard get up the hill pretty much the same; a bicycle and an ebike go up much differently. If you don't think so, why would anyone bother riding an ebike?


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

chazpat said:


> But a ski and a snowboard get up the hill pretty much the same; a bicycle and an ebike go up much differently. If you don't think so, why would anyone bother riding an ebike?


And you know what the Ski, Snowboard and a good chunk of the MTB riders have in common when riding in the mountains?

They use a chairlift to get to the top. An ebike will not. I was in the Italian alps last summer, and they are no longer offering chairlift shuttling for bikes, since everyone over there rides ebikes.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

BCsaltchucker said:


> except you're wrong, of course. ebike:non-ebike is a fairly trivial difference. the way a snowboard goes down a hill is dramatically different than a skier, while an eMTB goes down a hill EXACTLY the same as a non-motor MTB. a few extra watts is so trivial, you'll find that kind of difference between two non-eMTB bikers


 That would be a motor. And the reason all land agencies have rules in place regarding motorized use is? It's trivial? Hmmm.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ruthabagah said:


> And you know what the Ski, Snowboard and a good chunk of the MTB riders have in common when riding in the mountains?
> 
> They use a chairlift to get to the top. An ebike will not. I was in the Italian alps last summer, and they are no longer offering chairlift shuttling for bikes, since everyone over there rides ebikes.


Hey, if the lift serviced downhill parks want to allow ebikes, have at it. A much bigger chunk of MTB riders pedal up the hills.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Can someone clarify something for me? If a class 1 eBike is limited to 750W (I believe that's continuous power, not peak power), is there really any incentive to hack that? Delivering more than 750W continuous power will suck your batteries dry in short order. Also, for those who have a lot of riding experience on class 1 eBikes, would the bike even be reasonably controllable with more than 750W continuous pedal assist power on anything but a non-technical flat trail? I have only ridden a class 1 eBike once (Turbo Levo) and I felt that the high setting (which is well below 750W) would be difficult to handle on trails with any level of technical difficulty. 

No leading questions here. I really want to know what people think about class 1 eBikes that exceed 750W continuous... are they really even practical? If not, are we making a mountain out of a molehill being concerned about the hacks?


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Lemonaid said:


> I think more people would support class 1 ebikes if they were 100% sure no other modified bikes are somehow introduced as a byproduct of letting class 1 bike access to trails.
> 
> Here's what I think would help. (this is just my opinion)
> 
> ...


I like your creativity, but I don't like your execution.

Everything that is registered/regulated/licensed can be hacked out of compliance. I had a diesel pickup truck and was looking at a "cat-delete" pipe which could be bolted up in place of a catalytic converter in just a few minutes (I never bought it). Many semi-automatic rifles can be hacked into full auto. You can even overfish your fishing license. So, is the solution to provide hyper regulation and over enforcement? I say no. California's idea of requiring manufacturers to clearly mark the class of bike seems to be reasonable. Some people may hack that, but the detriment for over enforcement far outweighs the detriment for hacking.

Simply make hacking illegal on non-motorized trails and just leave it at that. The majority of people will voluntarily comply, just like the majority of riders stick to marked trails and don't go "trailblazing". We don't have to over-enforce to regulate trailblazers, and we don't need to over-enforce class 1 hackers.


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

Jim_bo said:


> Can someone clarify something for me? If a class 1 eBike is limited to 750W (I believe that's continuous power, not peak power), is there really any incentive to hack that? Delivering more than 750W continuous power will suck your batteries dry in short order. Also, for those who have a lot of riding experience on class 1 eBikes, would the bike even be reasonably controllable with more than 750W continuous pedal assist power on anything but a non-technical flat trail? I have only ridden a class 1 eBike once (Turbo Levo) and I felt that the high setting (which is well below 750W) would be difficult to handle on trails with any level of technical difficulty.
> 
> No leading questions here. I really want to know what people think about class 1 eBikes that exceed 750W continuous... are they really even practical? If not, are we making a mountain out of a molehill being concerned about the hacks?


Yes, you are right, it's a stupid debate.... In real life, more power doesn't equal to more speed on most trails. The way my levo is setup, I have learned to use the least amount of assist to take some trails. why? Because too much assist could make the bike hard to control. Until all detractors actually try these "evil machines", there will be a lot of debates and misunderstanding about them.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

BCsaltchucker said:


> so it's a rhetorical problem, not an actual problem based on real world usage/encounters. so fight rhetoric with better rhetoric/reason
> 
> like I remember the hysteria over snowboards trying to get access to ski hills. laughable today


It's not rhetorical if it's happening.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

I believe the hack is often to raise the ceiling of assist level; so that it does not cut off at 20mph.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

ruthabagah said:


> Yes, you are right, it's a stupid debate.... In real life, more power doesn't equal to more speed on most trails. The way my levo is setup, I have learned to use the least amount of assist to take some trails. why? Because too much assist could make the bike hard to control. Until all detractors actually try these "evil machines", there will be a lot of debates and misunderstanding about them.


Power is most definitely the limiter on the vast majority of climbs I've done in CO, VA, UT, OR, WA, NY, and CA.

More power = more speed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## homeslice (Jun 3, 2008)

J.B. Weld said:


> completely different deal


Exactly. Snowboards aren't motorized. Ad a motor and things are very different.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Jim_bo said:


> Can someone clarify something for me? If a class 1 eBike is limited to 750W (I believe that's continuous power, not peak power), is there really any incentive to hack that? Delivering more than 750W continuous power will suck your batteries dry in short order. Also, for those who have a lot of riding experience on class 1 eBikes, would the bike even be reasonably controllable with more than 750W continuous pedal assist power on anything but a non-technical flat trail? I have only ridden a class 1 eBike once (Turbo Levo) and I felt that the high setting (which is well below 750W) would be difficult to handle on trails with any level of technical difficulty.
> 
> No leading questions here. I really want to know what people think about class 1 eBikes that exceed 750W continuous... are they really even practical? If not, are we making a mountain out of a molehill being concerned about the hacks?


I've ridden 50,000W motos on singletrack VERY fast. Sure, there are some trails where a moto is no faster than a bike - but in most cases you can in fact learn to control all that extra power to haul ass. That's why you descend faster than you climb, of course.

I've ridden a LEVO and you can haul mail on even fairly techy ST once you get used to it. There are places where it's a bit of a cumbersome bike (super tight stuff) but it's going to be a lot faster for most riders on 95% of the terrain they ride.

-Walt


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

ruthabagah said:


> Yes, you are right, it's a stupid debate.... In real life, more power doesn't equal to more speed on most trails. The way my levo is setup, I have learned to use the least amount of assist to take some trails. why? Because too much assist could make the bike hard to control. Until all detractors actually try these "evil machines", there will be a lot of debates and misunderstanding about them.


This is exactly what I suspected.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

Jim_bo said:


> Can someone clarify something for me? If a class 1 eBike is limited to 750W (I believe that's continuous power, not peak power), is there really any incentive to hack that? Delivering more than 750W continuous power will suck your batteries dry in short order. Also, for those who have a lot of riding experience on class 1 eBikes, would the bike even be reasonably controllable with more than 750W continuous pedal assist power on anything but a non-technical flat trail? I have only ridden a class 1 eBike once (Turbo Levo) and I felt that the high setting (which is well below 750W) would be difficult to handle on trails with any level of technical difficulty.
> 
> No leading questions here. I really want to know what people think about class 1 eBikes that exceed 750W continuous... are they really even practical? If not, are we making a mountain out of a molehill being concerned about the hacks?


So I have about 500 miles on my Class 1 bike (some of that is riding the road to the trail head but I figure I'm well over 350 miles of trail usage) and I do find it hard to control the bike in high assist mode depending on the trail. I actually mostly use the lowest assist (Eco mode) when on the trail uphill as I don't want too much assist and I find myself out of position often if I'm in higher assist modes. Having said that and being a huge fan of the Class 1 e bike I can recognize that there will always be a subset of riders who want more speed or torque or whatever they can get out of an e bike. Those are the riders who will do the most damage to gaining acceptance and access to trails on the side of the ebike riders, the "never a motor, never ever" side of the debate have their own arguments on why this is a mountain and not a molehill. Just because it may be impractical to hack your bike to make it more powerful doesn't mean that it won't happen, heck isn't FLV (or whatever the company is called) already selling bikes with more than 750w motors? Does not matter that they place a "not legal for road/trail usage" warning on their webpage, people will buy the most bang for the buck if they aren't aware of the underlying issues involved. Doing any sort of hack to a Class 1 e bike makes it no longer a Class 1.


----------



## nilswalk (Nov 26, 2014)

I believe that the whole "oh but people will hack it and get a hundred million watts!" argument is completely bogus. The number of people who are actually going to do that to their bikes, no matter how easy, is vanishingly small. It's just a non-issue. Same as the number of people who are going to go modify their new vehicle with aftermarket parts and be non-CARB compliant so they can get a few extra HP. Proverbial drop in the proverbial bucket.

And also, yeah: max boost on a class 1 e-bike is already too much most of the time anyway!


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Zinfan said:


> ... heck isn't FLV (or whatever the company is called) already selling bikes with more than 750w motors? Does not matter that they place a "not legal for road/trail usage" warning on their webpage, people will buy the most bang for the buck...


There are a lot of companies making ebikes with more than 750 watts, because at the end of the day, there is no practical way to regulate motor power. This goes for all motors whether that be how much hp a car has or how many watts an electric motor has. This is why so many different companies sell ebikes with more than 750watts. It doesn't matter and power sells.

As for FLX, I haven't seen them call out anything specific about bikes like the blade not being legal on the their website, but maybe just didn't see it.

They do say the bike is *"adjustable to your local regulations"*. Sooooo, sounds like if you want to hit up a class 1 only embt trail all you need to do is adjust the settings... or forget to...or do whatever the F you want to do because it doesn't matter and just tell anyone who asks you adjusted the settings to the local regulations


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

tahoebeau said:


> There are a lot of companies making ebikes with more than 750 watts, because at the end of the day, there is no practical way to regulate motor power. This goes for all motors whether that be how much hp a car has or how many watts an electric motor has. This is why so many different companies sell ebikes with more than 750watts. It doesn't matter and power sells.
> 
> As for FLX, I haven't seen them call out anything specific about bikes like the blade not being legal on the their website, but maybe just didn't see it.
> 
> ...


I believe that is, by definition, not a class 1 eBike.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

nilswalk said:


> I believe that the whole "oh but people will *hack* it and get a hundred million watts!" argument is completely bogus....


What you believe doesn't always represent reality. Also, to catch you up with the thread, it's called "tuning", not hacking. And to say that people wouldn't bother to "tune" their ebike is like saying they wouldn't bother to "tune" their suspension or any other part of their mtb. It's just flat out false.

To help give you some perspective on the reality of ebike tuning, try typing "ebike tuning" into your google search box. Have a look around. What you said you believe is not the reality of what ebikers are doing and it is definitely not what the industry is promoting. There is a lot of money to be made with aftermarket tuning options for ebikes.


----------



## tahoebeau (May 11, 2014)

Jim_bo said:


> I believe that is, by definition, not a class 1 eBike.


Like I pointed out, it doesn't matter. The only thing that can be regulated is speed. Braaap!!!


----------



## Turd (Jul 21, 2005)

I don't know much about bosch-shat, but most of the other middrives, rpm is the same as what you get with everydat crank/chainring interface. You can "manipulate" tourqu with smaller ring but lose speed. If you want a rideable ebike that hits high speed you would need to 2x it after the hack. 2x is not cool anymore, so no problem.
I've only done a handful of mtb riding on "mtb" trails at night, and IMO you can rip a class-1 faster then is reasonable if you want on tipicle watered down flow crap trails of today. It basically comes down to the nature of the human driving it. In the end, it's driving resosibility, not the machine. I know that's hard to swallow in the depressed Trump nation, but things will get better e-bike or not. Over grown ATV trails on a fat ebike is like drinking smooth-move tea after a dehydrated 12hr flight, Kind of the Squatty Potty of mtb, if you go e, go fat and reap the "trendy" in the ass. Drink the cool aid and get off the atrocities of modern bike trails/paths festering what mtb has become.(Internet debate, overbuilt trails/bikes and underbuilt riders. Strangely ebikes+ underbuilt rider on what was, is about the same as underbuilt rider on overbuilt trails/bike.
kim Jong Un blundering around Stratford VT, drinking wisky and consuming swiss cheese. Fack the syrup.


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

nilswalk said:


> I believe that the whole "oh but people will hack it and get a hundred million watts!" argument is completely bogus. The number of people who are actually going to do that to their bikes, no matter how easy, is vanishingly small. It's just a non-issue. Same as the number of people who are going to go modify their new vehicle with aftermarket parts and be non-CARB compliant so they can get a few extra HP. Proverbial drop in the proverbial bucket.
> 
> And also, yeah: max boost on a class 1 e-bike is already too much most of the time anyway!


Absolutely right! 99% won't be modding their bikes. Dwelling on that lonely 1% is quite silly. A levo expert is 7500. Most folks spending that kind of cash are happy with the bike as is or they wouldn't have spent that kind of cash


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

leeboh said:


> That would be a motor. And the reason all land agencies have rules in place regarding motorized use is? It's trivial? Hmmm.





BCsaltchucker said:


> except you're wrong, of course. ebike:non-ebike is a fairly trivial difference. the way a snowboard goes down a hill is dramatically different than a skier, while an eMTB goes down a hill EXACTLY the same as a non-motor MTB. a few extra watts is so trivial, you'll find that kind of difference between two non-eMTB bikers


Snowboarding and skiing are not dramatically different, that is ridiculous. The difference that makes sense is smowmobiles on ski runs. You don't see that allowed because closing speeds, same thing with mopeds on trails.


----------



## nilswalk (Nov 26, 2014)

tahoebeau said:


> What you believe doesn't always represent reality. Also, to catch you up with the thread, it's called "tuning", not hacking. And to say that people wouldn't bother to "tune" their ebike is like saying they wouldn't bother to "tune" their suspension or any other part of their mtb. It's just flat out false.
> 
> To help give you some perspective on the reality of ebike tuning, try typing "ebike tuning" into your google search box. Have a look around. What you said you believe is not the reality of what ebikers are doing and it is definitely not what the industry is promoting. There is a lot of money to be made with aftermarket tuning options for ebikes.


What pops up on your monitor after you google things doesn't always reflect the reality out in the world either. It's quite often a skewed perspective reinforced by the almost unimaginable quantity of data on the web and Google's excellent search algorithms. Thanks for your condescension though!

Try going out on the trails and looking around


----------



## Gutch (Dec 17, 2010)

nilswalk said:


> I believe that the whole "oh but people will hack it and get a hundred million watts!" argument is completely bogus. The number of people who are actually going to do that to their bikes, no matter how easy, is vanishingly small. It's just a non-issue. Same as the number of people who are going to go modify their new vehicle with aftermarket parts and be non-CARB compliant so they can get a few extra HP. Proverbial drop in the proverbial bucket.
> 
> And also, yeah: max boost on a class 1 e-bike is already too much most of the time anyway!


+1. Completely agree. My family rides Ebikes, we own 5. I have owned 3 Levo's in the past and have never thought of hacking them. 750w road ebike goes 28mph then the motor kicks off. It's a Turbo S and it's plenty fast. WAY too much for a mtb! IMO experience most ebikers want RELIABILITY #1 and Range. If I hacked one, I'd fear I'd goof something up and void warranty.


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

I can only speculate what I want out of an emtb, but the extra speed going up the hill is an undeniable draw. I don't expect to be halving my best record times, since another one of my desires is to not be totally exhausted. I don't want heat stroke, nor an injury due to being tired. I also want to be able to push a higher gear if I approach chunky stuff, as I find that being in too low of a gear tends to not generate enough momentum and allows the bike to pinball, making me lose my balance, esp if I'm trying not to pedal strike.

I'm expecting my "cruising" pace for climbing to increase from 6-8 mph to 10-14 mph with moderate/medium assist. 10-14 mph is like flat ground speed, and fast enough to make turns and switchbacks on climbs potentially enjoyable as "uphill flow". That might just be counteracted by my desire to use parts that are heavy duty and purpose-built, as opposed to weight weenie stuff that's hot-rod friendly. I built my current mtb to under 29 lbs as a balance between going faster uphill with no more effort, and having an acceptable impression of reliability. I rather just forget about weight and just think about capability and performance. If I did that without pedal assist... I learned quite clearly that a light bike is more fun in general than a heavy one (until the light one fails/breaks down).

I'd be willing to ditch all sorts of mtb standards, becoming more moto, with bigger thru axles, bigger chainrings and cogs, gearbox--basically ditch all of the weaknesses of the mtb. I once heard someone say that the seatstays are the testicles of a bike, in response to someone cracking their frame there from merely tipping over with a pedal propping it up against a curb. Why not reinforce it all to be "knock-rated"? I don't want to hold onto my bike if it's about to tip off the edge of the trail or rock/cliff and go down with it, but that's the habit I have since I don't want the bike to be damaged. I want seals and bearings to have at least Chris King reliability levels throughout, and tires that withstand cuts and punctures to not leave me stranded. Busted derailleurs, saddles, wheels, fasteners, and whatever else could also be addressed.

Not even sure why there's a class system for ebikes anyways. They say there's a story behind every sign/rule, but I never really heard the official ones for class 1 other than to carve out a place for ebikes before it becomes mainstream. Someone asked why motor vehicles are banned, but no one else actually answered that. I doubt the ban is based on the principle of motors not being acceptable, but because of other threats and nuisances, like pollution (noise and gasoline contaminating the water table), heavy erosion, and other things unique/specific to such vehicles. Looked up dirt bike bans and there's stories about how it's dangerous to chase them, for not only the bystanders the cops, but also the riders themselves. Like these laws, I'd rather just people hit reset on their preconceived beliefs and actually give factual reasons why things are designed as they are.


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Snowboarding and skiing are not dramatically different, that is ridiculous. The difference that makes sense is smowmobiles on ski runs. You don't see that allowed because closing speeds, same thing with mopeds on trails.


Putting aside the fact that the skiing/snowboard comparison actually isn't about the physical differences between the two but the attitude of people to something new that is coming into their space, the snowmobile is far faster than an ebike so how does it work itself into the discussion? Just because it is on snow and has an engine? For that matter have you ever seen a snowmobile on a ski slope? I have, the ski patrol routinely uses them to ferry people/items around the mountain and yet there is no carnage as a result since the snowmobile operators are not blasting around the mountain at high speed terrorizing the skiers and neither would an ebike on a trail.


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

All this talk about closing speeds and uphill speeds seems to be nothing more than counting the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.

First, if you are going to talk rationally about closing speeds, you would have to define what safe and unsafe closing speeds are. But to assume that mtbs represent the upper limit of safe closing speeds is specious. And the difference in speeds for people going downhill FAR exceeds the differences in speeds for people going uphill on an mtb and an eBike. So, if you are going to speak intelligently about closing speeds, the biggest variable is downhill speeds... not uphill speeds. And I think everyone agrees that an eBike really has little impact on downhill speeds. But when advances in geometry and suspension were taking place which allowed for much faster downhill speeds, where was the "closing speed" crowd saying that MTBs should be limited to 100mm of travel and nothing less than a 69 degree head angle?

USFS and BLM haven't said that eBikes are excluded from non-motorized trails because of environmental impact, or closing speeds or anything else that I have seen. It seems as if one day, someone asked them, "what do we do about eBikes?" And the response is, we already have a regulation for motorized vehicles (OHVs), so let's just lump them in with that category. And that seems to be the extent of the thought process. But if people here were truly concerned about closing speeds, I'd be far more concerned about the closing speed between an eBike and a quad or dirtbike than I would be about an eBike and an MTB.

All of this talk about closing speeds is just talk with nothing rational or reasonable to support it. It is an argument that is there only to support those who have an emotional bias against eBikes.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Jim_bo said:


> All this talk about closing speeds and uphill speeds seems to be nothing more than counting the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.
> 
> First, if you are going to talk rationally about closing speeds, you would have to define what safe and unsafe closing speeds are. But to assume that mtbs represent the upper limit of safe closing speeds is specious. And the difference in speeds for people going downhill FAR exceeds the differences in speeds for people going uphill on an mtb and an eBike. So, if you are going to speak intelligently about closing speeds, the biggest variable is downhill speeds... not uphill speeds. And I think everyone agrees that an eBike really has little impact on downhill speeds. But when advances in geometry and suspension were taking place which allowed for much faster downhill speeds, where was the "closing speed" crowd saying that MTBs should be limited to 100mm of travel and nothing less than a 69 degree head angle?
> 
> ...


 E bikes fall under the motorized vehicle category because ? Hmmm. Might be the motor?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Jim_bo said:


> All this talk about closing speeds and uphill speeds seems to be nothing more than counting the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.
> 
> First, if you are going to talk rationally about closing speeds, you would have to define what safe and unsafe closing speeds are. But to assume that mtbs represent the upper limit of safe closing speeds is specious. And the difference in speeds for people going downhill FAR exceeds the differences in speeds for people going uphill on an mtb and an eBike. So, if you are going to speak intelligently about closing speeds, the biggest variable is downhill speeds... not uphill speeds. And I think everyone agrees that an eBike really has little impact on downhill speeds. But when advances in geometry and suspension were taking place which allowed for much faster downhill speeds, where was the "closing speed" crowd saying that MTBs should be limited to 100mm of travel and nothing less than a 69 degree head angle?
> 
> ...


The geometry argument doesn't really make any sense, nor does the travel argument.

Unless you're going down a WC DH or actual EWS course, a 65 degree HTA, 150mm bike is only going to be a few percentage points faster than a 69 degree HTA XC bike.

Whereas an additional 250w for a small 15lb penalty will have me hitting the limiter at times on even "technical" climbs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

leeboh said:


> E bikes fall under the motorized vehicle category because ? Hmmm. Might be the motor?


Well technically, as per the law ebikes should not be considered a motorized vehicle. This is why new laws have been written to define what they are at the state level. ultimately, the federal will have to align to the majority of states. This is a matter of time.

In the US a motor vehicle is specifically defined as a contrivance used for commercial purposes. As defined in US Code 18 U.S.C. § 31 : US Code - Section 31: Definitions (6) Motor vehicle. - The term "motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.

A lot of adaptation have been written to cover additional exceptions and new design (for example, multiple addendum have been created to add EV or hybrid vehicles)


----------



## Jim_bo (Jul 31, 2011)

Le Duke said:


> The geometry argument doesn't really make any sense, nor does the travel argument.
> 
> Unless you're going down a WC DH or actual EWS course, a 65 degree HTA, 150mm bike is only going to be a few percentage points faster than a 69 degree HTA XC bike.
> 
> ...


If you are suggesting that the downhill speeds for the average riders have not significantly increased in the past twenty years due the technology increases of the bikes, then we are just not sharing the same reality and will likely never come to any agreement.


----------



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

ruthabagah said:


> Well technically, as per the law ebikes should not be considered a motorized vehicle. This is why new laws have been written to define what they are at the state level. ultimately, the federal will have to align to the majority of states. This is a matter of time.
> 
> In the US a motor vehicle is specifically defined as a contrivance used for commercial purposes. As defined in US Code 18 U.S.C. § 31 : US Code - Section 31: Definitions (6) Motor vehicle. - The term "motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.
> 
> A lot of adaptation have been written to cover additional exceptions and new design (for example, multiple addendum have been created to add EV or hybrid vehicles)


^and this is why I hate e-bikes 

jk, I don't hate them at all but the idea of sneaking motors into motor-free zones via some bs legal technicality does really bother me.


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

J.B. Weld said:


> ^and this is why I hate e-bikes
> 
> jk, I don't hate them at all but the idea of sneaking motors into motor-free zones via some bs legal technicality does really bother me.


I think we are overthinking this... See, In "over regulated" Europe, when Ebikes first arrived, people embraced them as a new type of transportation, both on the road or on trails. Why are we trying to make this so difficult? Nobody forces anyone to use an ebike... It's an option for some of us.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

ruthabagah said:


> Well technically, as per the law ebikes should not be considered a motorized vehicle. This is why new laws have been written to define what they are at the state level. ultimately, the federal will have to align to the majority of states. This is a matter of time.
> 
> In the US a motor vehicle is specifically defined as a contrivance used for commercial purposes. As defined in US Code 18 U.S.C. § 31 : US Code - Section 31: Definitions (6) Motor vehicle. - The term "motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.
> 
> A lot of adaptation have been written to cover additional exceptions and new design (for example, multiple addendum have been created to add EV or hybrid vehicles)


 That one word" highway". Great to quote a general DOT ruling. How that applies to state lands where I ride in MA? And on town and local conservation lands that, wait for it" do not allow motorized vehicles" Does not apply. Part of the issue is that there are a hodge podge of classes, rules, definitions, by laws and such, all over each town jurisdiction and state, plus Fed. Don't think it's going to smooth out very soon.


----------



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

ruthabagah said:


> I think we are overthinking this...


No, I really didn't put much thought into it, to me it just makes sense that places that were set aside to be motor-free shouldn't open their gates to little motors just because of some bs technical lawyer speak. Doesn't mean it won't happen but I happen to think it's wrong. Just my opinion.

And why do we have to be just like Europe? We exchange tourists because we both have different things to offer.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Jim_bo said:


> If you are suggesting that the downhill speeds for the average riders have not significantly increased in the past twenty years due the technology increases of the bikes, then we are just not sharing the same reality and will likely never come to any agreement.


And I'm telling you that for many people, on many trails, a dropper seatpost, big wheels, disc brakes and tubeless tires are going to make far more of a difference than a couple degrees of HTA and two inches of travel.

I mean, I'm just barely faster on many DH segments on a 140mm/140mm bike vs. a 120/100mm bike. Over a lap, I'm far faster on the shorter travel bike, with the same wattage, HR and perceived effort.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ALimon (Oct 12, 2017)

Le Duke said:


> The geometry argument doesn't really make any sense, nor does the travel argument.
> 
> Unless you're going down a WC DH or actual EWS course, a 65 degree HTA, 150mm bike is only going to be a few percentage points faster than a 69 degree HTA XC bike.
> 
> ...


So you're saying carbon wheels, larger wheel sizes, improved geometry, fork and shock technology don't increase the speed of bikes?


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

J.B. Weld said:


> No, I really didn't put much thought into it, to me it just makes sense that places that were set aside to be motor-free shouldn't open their gates to little motors just because of some bs technical lawyer speak. Doesn't mean it won't happen but I happen to think it's wrong. Just my opinion.
> 
> And why do we have to be just like Europe? We exchange tourists because we both have different things to offer.


have you thought that when these places "were set aside to be motor-free " that the "motor" was a noisy and polluting as hell, gas powered engine? Not a tiny 1/2 hp clean and quiet electric motor?

Finally, yes, we probably want to be like Europe (or China) on this one. Why? Because they understand that having more ebikes will bring more people to biking, meaning less car or motorcycles, more money for bike path. http://www.eurovelo.com/en/images/eurovelo-map


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

ruthabagah said:


> have you thought that when these places "were set aside to be motor-free " that the "motor" was a noisy and polluting as hell, gas powered engine? Not a tiny 1/2 hp clean and quiet electric motor?
> 
> Finally, yes, we probably want to be like Europe (or China) on this one. Why? Because they understand that having more ebikes will bring more people to biking, meaning less car or motorcycles, more money for bike path. http://www.eurovelo.com/en/images/eurovelo-map


The ebike was invented back in the 1800s.

And China is banning ebikes in a lot of places.

_The object of my invention is to produce a bicycle to be propelled by electricity generated by primary batteries and in motors therefor._









https://patents.google.com/patent/US596272


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

chazpat said:


> The ebike was invented back in the 1800s.
> 
> And China is banning ebikes in a lot of places.
> 
> ...


Interesting



> In addition to their social, economic, and environmental upsides, e-bikes carry some very pronounced drawbacks in China. A walk through a Chinese city that has a high prevalence of e-bikes reveals these problems clearly: electric bicycles zipping around in every direction, dominating the bike lanes, driving on the sidewalks, virtually running down pedestrians, and weaving in and out of traffic often with little heed to road rules or personal safety. It is not uncommon for two or more people to be riding on a single e-bike -- sometimes you even spot entire families packed onto one.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadesh...en-transportation-in-history-is-being-banned/

i'm open to class 1 ebikes as long as we aren't opening the door to the wild wild west in regards to motorized bikes.


----------



## ruthabagah (Jun 4, 2018)

chazpat said:


> The ebike was invented back in the 1800s.
> 
> And China is banning ebikes in a lot of places.
> 
> ...


Yes, and the helicopter was invented by Leonardo in the 1500s ... When was the first commercially available ebike released? 1992. Wilderness act (precursor of the motor vehicle ban) 1964.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

ruthabagah said:


> Well technically, as per the law ebikes should not be considered a motorized vehicle. This is why new laws have been written to define what they are at the state level. ultimately, the federal will have to align to the majority of states. This is a matter of time.
> 
> In the US a motor vehicle is specifically defined as a contrivance used for commercial purposes. As defined in US Code 18 U.S.C. § 31 : US Code - Section 31: Definitions (6) Motor vehicle. - The term "motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.
> 
> A lot of adaptation have been written to cover additional exceptions and new design (for example, multiple addendum have been created to add EV or hybrid vehicles)


The laws define an ebike as not being a Motor Vehicle, which is a specific class of vehicle, they can certainly be considered a motorized vehicle, which is any vehicle with a motor, by a local jurisdiction or as we've seen by the USFS and BLM. They can also choose to specifically exempt ebikes, or any other vehicles if they want to and can legally.

They are not interchangeable terms.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/40/85.1703


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

ALimon said:


> So you're saying carbon wheels, larger wheel sizes, improved geometry, fork and shock technology don't increase the speed of bikes?


See my edited post. Looks like I was editing while you were responding.

For most people, on most trails, a 65 degree HTA isn't making them markedly faster than a 68-69 degree HTA. On flatter, non-berm corners, that wheel being super far out there might actually require some concessions.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Zinfan (Jun 6, 2006)

Lemonaid said:


> Interesting
> 
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadesh...en-transportation-in-history-is-being-banned/
> 
> i'm open to class 1 ebikes as long as we aren't opening the door to the wild wild west in regards to motorized bikes.


The same kind of behavior as you quoted in the forbes article can also be found in regards to motorcycles and scooters, I think it is more of result that China until recently didn't have the majority of people with access to these forms of transport.

Being an owner of a Class 1 ebike I am of course hoping for more acceptance of them out and about but am pessimistic about the ability of any industry or authority being able to prevent modification. One factor that limits ebikes is the drivetrain. Ebikes still use the same chain and sprockets as regular bikes and they aren't designed to take the strain of increased torque from an ebike. I can see many broken chains in the future for any overpowered ebike.

Increasing the speed of a ebike requires a new chainring at least, I don't think my Focus could do much over 25mph if it was modd'ed due to the gearing it has. Of course you could get a larger chainring but that just makes the bike more unwieldy on the trial when you want to ride it there IMO.


----------



## karmaphi (Mar 19, 2018)

The Forbes article makes ebikes out to seem super good, but points out that due to population increase, the traffic has also increased as ebikes improved accessibility for lower income class brackets. They're $125 to $375 and look like scooters, yet fall under bicycle laws. The real reason they're banned is the traffic infringements (pic shows scooters AKA ebikes in the lanes meant for traffic going the opposite way) and the fatalities--sounds more like the dirt bike ban reasoning. If these people still need to get around, how will they do it without the ebike? Will that solve the traffic problems? Might be a regional/cultural thing if they have rush hour and lunch hour.

Zinfan brings up a good point. The bike's speed is limited by the gearing. emtbs often come with the same 1x drivetrains as normal bikes. How big of a chainring can you put on there and how fast will that get you? Perhaps approaching road bike gearing? I also wonder about cheap hubs busting under higher torque.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

karmaphi said:


> Zinfan brings up a good point. The bike's speed is limited by the gearing. emtbs often come with the same 1x drivetrains as normal bikes. How big of a chainring can you put on there and how fast will that get you? Perhaps approaching road bike gearing? I also wonder about cheap hubs busting under higher torque.


250w emtbs seem to be about at the limit to what a manufacturer will currently consider using a mtb drivetrain with, and even then, using ebike specific chains and cassettes seems wise since they're more robust. A 750w class 1 emtb is pushing it, and will fold cassette cogs and eat chains for lunch, many riders only use 3 cogs of a 5 speed cassette since the motor generates that much more power, a 11 speed cassette is simply redundant. Shimano just came out with a new ebike specific 5 speed internal hub, so I'd expect to see more 1xIGH, or gearbox emtbs coming out to deal with the additional torque. Since a little extra weight is a welcome tradeoff for a much stronger drivetrain, it only seems logical. Top speed is governed by how much power you have on tap, (legs & motor), when the motor cuts out and gearing, so it'd be up to the rider to select their chainring.


----------

