Secretary of the Interior allows E-bike access on BLM lands

[Nameless Range]

I did some looking into contemporary tech on e bikes. I have never ridden one.

There are many YouTube videos out there of guys using them on mountain trails.


I found this to be a pretty interesting paper regarding their efficiency and output. It’s true that the slower one pedals the less the output of the motor. From the paper, the number 2 reason folks get ebikes other than for commuting is to ride hills.

https://www.efficiencyvermont.com/Media/Default/docs/white-papers/efficiency-vermont-electric-bike-white-paper.pdf

I took this screenshot. This fellow does hill climb competitions. The top time is his hillclimb time on a bike. The latter is his time on an ebike. That’s a 30%ish improvement. To me that’s significant, and crosses a threshold. Also, this was on a Class 1 bike.

 

[Keeptrying]

Nope. Nowhere in this thread have I endorsed ebikes or the decision by the Secretary of the Interior. I don't own one and likely never will. Several mountain biking groups lobbied against this decision. I'm personally not a huge fan of the order. All I've done in this thread is challenge misinformation about the bikes and the order.

As for the enforcement, the bike industry made the 750 Watt limit pretty standard well before this decision. The manufacturers make bikes that they can actually sell which means they will compliant with the order.

The link to the Rambo bikes I posted are already well above that limit. Not sure what you are arguing for here, but the technology already surpasses the regulation.

 

[rwc101]

The link to the Rambo bikes I posted are already well above that limit. Not sure what you are arguing for here, but the technology already surpasses the regulation.

Fair enough. Rambo is a small manufacturer, and they will have to adjust their product if they want to continue selling them. Mainstream manufacturers like Trek and Specialized are already producing bikes well under the limit. 250 Watts is typical.

 

[MTGomer]

Mountain bikes have increased in price over time not decreased even compensating for inflation. $400 will never buy you a trail worthy bike with electric assist or without it. Sure, the tech will drop to slightly lower price points, but the idea that it will cost "half the price of a new bow" is ridiculous. I am not aware of a Class II bike (with throttle) that is made for trails. They are geared towards city riding. Anyway, a bike that can do 20mph on level pavement will not be able to do so on a trail with any gradient. Just more falsehoods about ebikes but people want what they want and will rationalize it through any means necessary.

No, $3000 today will buy you 20 times the mountain bike the $3000 equivalent in 1985 would get you.

You continue to belabor the topic of what is available right now.

 

[rwc101]

You continue to belabor the topic of what is available right now.

You continue to belabor things that don't exist.

Anyway, I have much better things to do. I'll never make inroads with the "$400" ebike that can go 100 miles crowd.

 

[MTGomer]

Here’s some 21 year old hikes that retailed new at $600

Blast From the Past: Five Freeride Fork Reviews From 1998 · Dirt Rag

Editor’s note: This “shootout” style product review first appeared in Dirt Rag Issue #66, published in July 1998—back when 100 mm of travel was considered “freeride” territory. This look back offers perspective on how far mountain biking, and suspension technology, has evolved since then. These...

dirtragmag.com

Compare to what $600 can get you today. Or 940 in today’s dollars

 

[Keeptrying]

Fair enough. Rambo is a small manufacturer, and they will have to adjust their product if they want to continue selling them. Mainstream manufacturers like Trek and Specialized are already producing bikes well under the limit. 250 Watts is typical.

Or start selling 750watt emblems on eBay. Hey, now! Might have my new retirement plan.

 

[MTGomer]

You continue to belabor things that don't exist.

Continue to hold the belief that technology does not evolve, and that everything is static.
The things I mention will readily exist, and if you believe otherwise you are ignorant of what is going on with battery technology.

 

[MTGomer]

Anyway, I have much better things to do. I'll never make inroads with the "$400" ebike that can go 100 miles crowd.

You probably never made them with the “used, 7 year old, $40,000 electric car will be faster than a new Ferrari” crowd either.

 

[RobG]

Today I found an illegal mountain bike trail south of Bozeman. It was complete with wooden jumps and banked slalom courses down gullies. I only followed it 1/2 mile but I'm sure it is a couple miles long.

The trail density is already getting out of hand without the adrenaline crowd adding to it. It doesn't really matter if the bikes have motors or not, it's becoming clear mountain bikes need to be managed like motorized vehicles because they create the same problems.

So in that respect I think I agree with the Trump Administration on this one...

 

[Sytes]

Backcountry cycling is far, far different than trail slalom activity.

Backcountry leisure horse travel is far, far different than CTR's, such as the Tevis Cup...

It's a matter of regulating, "Public Hands" use of our, "Public Lands".

You start to pile one with the other, you create twice the enemy and two times more challenge to find mutually valued use of our public lands.
Some of the extremes need to pull the, "boots only" mentality out of their ass and endorse the true basis of, "Public Lands in Public Hands". Embrace reasonable dialogue based on wildlife, trail maintenance, trail type use, etc.

The future is and has always been a chess match of adaptation.

 

[RobG]

Sytes, unfortunately slalom and backcountry biking go hand in hand because you get all these spur trails wherever you allow them. In any population there are a few bad ones who don’t follow the rules.

 

[davinski]

I think Americans are smart enough to figure it out, but it won't happen without adult conversation and adapting the rules to modern times and tech. Anyone else wondering if some, or a lot, of the motivation for various rules is simply to divide the users and keep them/us yelling at each other while other, larger, wheels are in motion?

FWIW, I find I use an atv a lot less now that I use an e-bike. Yesterday while out being an a-hole riding mine on USFS atv trails, I saw trucks, motorcycles, atv's, bicycles, horses, and hikers all on areas and trails appropriate for their use. Law-breakers are out there, but it seems you hear about them way more on the internet than you actually encounter them in real life. And my legs are still smoked!

 

[Sytes]

Sytes, unfortunately slalom and backcountry biking go hand in hand because you get all these spur trails wherever you allow them. In any population there are a few bad ones who don’t follow the rules.

This is where you and I disagree, somewhat. Case in point: All but one of my fellow backcountry cyclist friends have absolutely no interest in racing our cycles. Zero. The one who digs the hell out of racing legally should be sponsored with some of his race scores meanwhile, he's also 100% public lands in all public hands. Die hard hunter, volunteer trail maintenance, etc...

I believe your bias has you believe they are one and the same... Far from it.
As above... There are casual horse riders and there are casual cyclists.
There are horse endurance race members and there are casual riders.

Beyond the arm chair internet opinions, there are notable published / peer reviewed research documents that have shown horses cause more erosion than bicycles, in fact, one of the main cited studies is from Montana State University.

Being this is about electric motor assisted cycles, I believe we both agree "motorized" should catagorize as just that, "motorized" and remain off non-"motorized" trails / roads, etc.
Actually, reading above... Maybe you support the new classification for BLM grounds. If so, I respectfully disagree. Cheers, Rob.

 

[RobG]

Continue to hold the belief that technology does not evolve, and that everything is static.
The things I mention will readily exist, and if you believe otherwise you are ignorant of what is going on with battery technology.

I agree with this. There is a ton of research into batteries with the emphasis on making them lighter and cheaper. While the cutting edge will get more expensive, the previous generations will go down in price. It happens everywhere.

 

[RobG]

Sytes - the attitudes of a few of your friends aren't a good measure, in part because I'm sure you don't hang around with idiots. Let's assume the responsible rider to irresponsible riders ratio around Bozeman is one hundred to one. We have over 100,000 people in Gallatin county, so even if only 10% of those mountain bike that means 100 of them don't give a hoot about caring for our wild lands. That assumption is only 0.1% of the population so that is probably a large underestimation. That number will go way up in the future too as population grows simultaneously with easier access to mountain biking. It actually doesn't matter if the real number of bikers who don't care is 10 or 1000, it is enough that we are already seeing their effects.

 

[JLS]

It actually doesn't matter if the real number of bikers who don't care is 10 or 1000, it is enough that we are already seeing their effects.

All of which reinforces a point I made in a similar thread that the most critical aspect of all of this is recognizing the impacts and finding a funding mechanism for more law enforcement. Without that, any attempted regulation is useless.

 

[shootbrownelk]

Fair enough. Rambo is a small manufacturer, and they will have to adjust their product if they want to continue selling them. Mainstream manufacturers like Trek and Specialized are already producing bikes well under the limit. 250 Watts is typical.

Time to print new stickers with lower wattage figures.....instantly legal.

 

[dan.kirkpatrick]

i dont see anything wrong with this myself,,what very few people out there that can afford them,,good for them.i dont see it tearing things up or emitting polution,,its gonna be a very small percentage of the crowd i think.

 

[Mudranger1]

No, $3000 today will buy you 20 times the mountain bike the $3000 equivalent in 1985 would get you.

You continue to belabor the topic of what is available right now.

I sure am glad that the prices of trucks is going down with the advancement of cheap electronics and technology....oh wait