Electric Bike Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeeLau

I'm blown away you have such an attitude. I know for a fact that GCA can't get insurance if ebikes are allowed on their trails. I know for a fact that RSTBC's policy is that ebikes are prohibited. I know for a fact how the GCA has worked so hard and patiently for the biking areas you have now and the success the area has and will have. And that success is predicated on keeping land managers happy and hiking groups happy

Yet you're flapping away so hard about how ebikes are good. Good for you. Why is so hard to realize your opinion and your trolling means squat. RSTBC and the MEC goretex sombrero hiking crowd is who you're going to have to convince. And that crowd believes that a bike with a motor is motorized.

Why on earth are you trolling so hard? Is summer really that slow?

---

And your flapping away about the legalese on the books at the moment. Why would you steer the narrative there ? I never mentioned any laws. I’m not in golden btw but don’t let that stop you from quoting cycling assoc rules.
My post was pointing out the bs people on their pedestals like to spew about these bikes(they should pedal with no assist like me or they’re not mtb’s). Do you honestly think they’re not going to be all over the place? I’ve seen no proof they’ll affect my daily rides. I’d gladly have an ebike fly by me than a truck dusting me out but shuttling is good times so have at it. Id also rather pedal an ebike for dh laps than shuttle but I’m not opposed to shuttling at all. Id prefer a heli but that’s not going to happen so I’d default to pedaling the ebike. A lot of the anti ebike sentiment is ego and tiresome.
I can see the attraction of single speed fully rigid, but I’m not going to rush out and buy one, and I bet there’s more than a few of those guys that criticize lift riders, why should any other rider say how you ride if the impact is in the same ball park as the wide range of bikes we categorize as mt bikes. Active people are going to put those ebike to good use. Lazy people might get out of the house.
They’re coming and laws will adapt(to answer your narrative). It seems people would rather look for the negatives despite the overwhelming established facts in other countries

OK, let's break it down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grinch

It’s a mountain bike with an assist. The subsection of ebikes in the mountain bike category. In most cases they’re fkn identical to non assist mountain bikes in the companies line up. It’s the same fkn sport, same tires,same suspension same brakes.

Well, most of the parts now are, in fact, emotorbike specific.

The naysayers gloss over anything they can to cherry pick a negative. “They have motors so they’re a motor bike” even though laws have classified them as class1 and not a motor bike.

Yes, the laws have determined that they do, in fact, have motors, and while they are allowed on bike paths in some places, in most places they are not allowed on non-motorized trails.

They’re “pretend to pedal” even though direct comparisons have your heart rate higher over a the same time span as a reg bike.

Is there any actual proof of this? Pretty sure no one is buying these things to work harder.

“They’re going to be mass conflict” although countless other countries have proven that false.

Ummm...see this thread.

“They’re going to be detrimental to trail access” once again unfounded .

Remains to be seen, but certainly a possibility.

Hilarious listening to the so called authorities in here(newbs, been riding for 30 yrs apart from those 15 but I know what’s up, I lifted a rock and shovelled dirt, I went to a meeting with such and such, I’m sooo core I pedal a million miles up down around). They’re coming

Well, as of now they are mostly not allowed on trails in the US.

And not a damn thing you can or should do. Happy braaaaaping

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grinch

They’re coming and laws will adapt

---

Yes.
That's true...and most likely the adaptation (here) will be the wholesale closure of trails to ALL bikes.
Have you thought of that yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rideit

Yes.
That's true...and most likely the adaptation (here) will be the wholesale closure of trails to ALL bikes.
Have you thought of that yet?

---

Conjecture. I’d put money , if working together , it’d open more doors. I think there’s many more seats at the table for cycling trail advocacy now than the dark ages. It’s not going to go the other direction with more involvement, especially consider cyclists do the bulk of trail work .
Once again though, that wasn’t my point. I was facing reality in regards to the bikes aside from the laws. If you accept they’ll be everywhere than you have to accept laws will have to adapt. If laws will change , what are these bikes impact and potential conflicts? You can’t argue law if you can’t “realistically” characterize an ebike

GCA. RCA. Same scenarios.

I have 20+ years in dealing with government and hikers in advocacy. I'd put my experience up against conjecture.

BC Government says that all ebikes are treated and regulated as motorized. That's how they're defining it.

To change the government's mind will require a ton of work. That is something to which I (and many other advocates) simply are not willing to take on.

But others are more than welcome to take on the lobbying effort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grinch

And your flapping away about the legalese on the books at the moment. Why would you steer the narrative there ? I never mentioned any laws. My post was pointing out the bs people on their pedestals like to spew about these bikes(they should pedal with no assist like me or they’re not mtb’s). Do you honestly think they’re not going to be all over the place?

---

I've steered the narrative there because it's important. And for 2 reasons.

First playing the long game of having mtb sanctioned legal trails has been a pretty big positive

Second Canucks are pretty law abiding. Tell them they can't do something and many won't. RSTBC saying no ebikes on trails is going to hurt mtb ebike sales in BC.

Totally agree on the "BS" against ebikes.

I don't think they'll be all over the place in trails in the near future due to regulation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g_man80

It sounds like the problem is that the pedal assist technology has been named a motor. Therefore, not allowed on trails designated “no motorized vehicles”. What if the pedal assist bikes utilized something not called a motor? Would there be any issues? The horse folks are assisted up the hill. It’s just not called a motor. NFL scouts and analysts say that a player has a “high motor”. I guess we’re talking semantics.

Maybe it’s been mentioned, but I’m reminded of skateboards vs rollerblades. Rollerblades could ignore the “no skateboards” signs since they weren’t riding skateboards.

---

So what you’re saying is....e-bikes are like rollerblades.

I concur.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

and Lee is just talking about BC

intstead of the " e-bikes are coming so gtf out of the way " mantra, as rideit points out the hiking lobby could just use E-bikes as a lever to ban all mtn bikes

but if your really think you should be allowed to ride yer e-bike just poach them trails but don't expect any kind of special dispensation

all it really takes is for some govy type manager to decide that they will enforce the laws and you could get some fines

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TahoeBC

The land managers have decided ebikes are ok as long as there pedal assist.

---

Very cool. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeeLau

I've steered the narrative there because it's important. And for 2 reasons.

First playing the long game of having mtb sanctioned legal trails has been a pretty big positive

Second Canucks are pretty law abiding. Tell them they can't do something and many won't. RSTBC saying no ebikes on trails is going to hurt mtb ebike sales in BC.

Totally agree on the "BS" against ebikes.

I don't think they'll be all over the place in trails in the near future due to regulation

---

Fair enough. I wasnt calling on anyone to be an advocate, especially with my lack of interest
Leaving out a huge user group that wants to ride the same trails, doing the same basic activity, whether people like it or not, is not going to work. Regulation will only slow the numbers. That’s how mountain bikers got there current seat at the table. Come hell or high water we’re going to do our thing , without a fair reason why we shouldn’t. There has to be fair and just laws. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but that’s life . Current riders can pull the ostrich or they can figure the shit out . It’d be a sad state to criminalize people for riding their bike , based on current users ideology, when there’s no conflict

Just ride trails currently open to motors (I want one for that)....problem solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redsmurfer

"code relating to financial responsibility, driver’s licenses, registration, and license plate requirements, and an electric bicycle is not a motor vehicle."

illegal operation of a vehicle on trails or areas where it is prohibited is recorded under your drivers license number. The first thing they will ask you for is your drivers license, it is moving violation just like you can get a ticket for riding under the influence. Then they will run your license through the data base checking for outstanding warrants, then issue you a summons to appear in court. Also note that statue does not say anything about insurance rate impacts. Can not wait until you get your first $375 ticket and discover you have traffic school in your future.

keep telling yourself its all cool, i for one think the best way to deal with this is for MTB'ers to have solidarity against ebike access until ebikers get enough influence to change it.

---

Well in California there not considered motor vehicles so it does not go on your dmv record just like getting a ticket on a bike does not either.

AB 1096 was signed into law and it re-defines "motorized bicycles" and created 3 classes of electric bicycles that are not motorized bicycles even though they have motors. (It even states that "...an electric bicycle is not a motor vehicle") It allows Classes 1 and 2 to be operated anywhere "regular" bikes are ridden with Class 3 having some restrictions.

Well I applaud your easy going nature but I was pointing out the pressure on current trails that aren’t legal that possibly should be or atleast require a decision made taking in to concern “all” user groups and this newish user group. They’re going to question why they’re excluded if there’s no good reason

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jono

Would you though? I get a ton of what you're saying about the very American pastime of judging others for having their own tastes and desires in life. I think we're all familiar with hikers, and many have even read a little Vandeman. So it's a solid point with it's own thread. But. The trails you showed do look pretty rideable on a pretty inexpensive bicycle, whereas the same money spent on an e-bike would have crappy suspension and a cheap frame and other stuff that probably shakes apart. But you could climb a little faster in the meantime. Or you could spend more to go faster and get better suspension. Is there a difference between spending more to get lighter or a motor? If the experience is the same then all you're buying is a faster experience.

Or you could get one of those loud things you've been arguing are most different from e-bikes. Cheaper, but then it would be loud and all those other things that e-bikes aren't. So that's confusing. I got nothing against you or your points here, and I say this wishing you the best: the focus on the buying habits of your over-leveraged neighbors is really only healthy if you're watching for a market downturn so you can scoop up some of their gear on the cheap. (PM Benny Profane.)

---

The trend in these discussions is to assume my general opinion about something negative must necessarily originate from my own specific wants/needs/problems etc. Really though, my thoughts have a lot more to do with general principles than with myself specifically. I use examples from my life, my experience, amd my setting because I know those to be accurate....but thst doesn’t mean the general problem revolves around me. I can’t afford any of it...and my spine is ruined for serious riding, so if it’s all about me personally, fuck it...ban/no ban I’m still riding town bikes in town and riding two specific dh trails that really aren’t what this debate was about. I have philosophical problems with elitism, and with an elitist mtb culture that really influenced and changed my hometown for the worse imo. I have a general rhetorical, logic-and-reason problem with people saying all motors are equal. I get worn pretty thin pretty fast with explaining things clearly then having them misstated back to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TahoeBC

Well in California there not considered motor vehicles so it does not go on your dmv record just like getting a ticket on a bike does not either.

AB 1096 was signed into law and it re-defines "motorized bicycles" and created 3 classes of electric bicycles that are not motorized bicycles even though they have motors. (It even states that "...an electric bicycle is not a motor vehicle") It allows Classes 1 and 2 to be operated anywhere "regular" bikes are ridden with Class 3 having some restrictions.

---

True, but you left out one minor huge detail - this only applies to pavement, not dirt trails. Also, it's California, so the other 49 states are just gonna laugh at us and call us fruits and nuts.

wow a divisive topic. I think we need to hear from Ted Stoll and Tom McClintock experts on what users belong where.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mmmm...pow!

True, but you left out one minor huge detail - this only applies to pavement, not dirt trails. Also, it's California, so the other 49 states are just gonna laugh at us and call us fruits and nuts.

---

State of California does not see them as motor vehicles so it will not go on your dmv record period and that’s the point I’m trying to make does not matter if your on dirt or not. I’ve gotten a speeding ticket on dirt on my bike gotta love California, you go to traffic court, if you lose and pay a fine it does not go on your dmv record. Land managers can still decide to allow them or not, henry coe state park does, some state parks do not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BFD

wow a divisive topic. I think we need to hear from Ted Stoll and Tom McClintock experts on what users belong where.

---

People get quite offended that someone could pay an extra g and get 30-50% more vert every ride. Sounds like a sweet deal to me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grinch

Moron spin. What about people that shuttle on dh bikes, ride lifts , helis. What kind of bikes do you call them. Surely they have a greater level of assist, environmental impact. All the pussies that were scared to ride any technical dh trail labeled those bikers a different subsection akin to environmental terrorists. They said nobody needs to ride stuff like that. Labelled them downhill riders as a derogatory term and segregated them. Cast them aside so they could get theirs. Now as bikes are better and trails have progressed and have several different levels of trails, your average rider has developed to ride anything or atleast vision it and now it’s ok. Downhill rides aren’t the boogie man now, they know someone that does it , if they don’t, or friends of friends do it and they’re “cool” or “popular”.It’s all mountain biking. Same sport but if you want to segregate, two different riders on the same trail and identical bikes can be doing a different sport. Part of the reason the super skilled kids don’t want to ride with me ,or the other side of the coin, an old retro grouch xc’er doesn’t want to ride with me, or atleast most of the time . You do you, I do me. It’s all being out in the woods on a “mountain bike”. Some want to smash turns and others want to take pics of flowers. FU if you think you’re going to tell me what to do from your high horse. Hypocrites

---

Right on.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using TGR Forums mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theetruscan

https://m.pinkbike.com/news/Back-on-...rd-Injury.html

not trying to start a fight with the angry fanatics, just posting some ebike stoke.

---

I think this got lost in the back-and-forth. Pretty awesome. One of the local land managers allows ebikes for those with mobility disabilities (otherwise they're banned). I'm not an ebike fan but that's a policy I can support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rideit

Yes.
That's true...and most likely the adaptation (here) will be the wholesale closure of trails to ALL bikes.
Have you thought of that yet?

---

How do you come out with this?

Ebikes will be ubiquitous so the rules will change.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using TGR Forums mobile app

We also forget that nobody will have enough time or motivation to police at ridge against ebikes.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using TGR Forums mobile app

Meant to say to police why regulations against ebikes.

Same as policing illegal trails.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using TGR Forums mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rod9301

Ebikes will be ubiquitous so the rules will change.

---

The tgr forums have also taught me that 26" wheels will be making a comeback any second now.

I predict that, in the U.S., ebikes will be no more ubiquitous than fat bikes. I.e., a fad that is enjoyed by some but ultimately never gains the mainstream success that many predicted.

Fat bikes are excellent for the winter crowd, just like ebikes are excellent for the helmetless trust fund crowd.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Curmudgeon fossil isn’t taken. That’d be a good alias