lee flythe wrote on 08/03/17 at 1:43pm:
I don't want to own an e-bike, but most of the concerns people who haven't ridden them throw around are complete non-issues. Your speed is still largely defined by the trail and your fitness..
Then what is the benefit for the OP? Other than enabling him to ride trails that he lacks the skill and fitness to ride without an e-bike. As I pointed out, peddling the bike is one skill that is needed. There are many others.
So, thinking about the future, where do you draw the line?
In 5 years when the technology is developed to the point where Tesla e-bike version will give a motocross bike today a run for its money?
lee flythe wrote on 08/03/17 at 1:43pm:
, and they do not damage trails in any way beyond a typical mtb.
Heavier bikes don't damage trails more than lighter bikes?
This sounds a little nonsensical to me.
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links) lee flythe wrote on 08/03/17 at 1:43pm:
The only difference is that you can climb a trail like Goat Hill without being out of breath at the top. I never felt like I was even riding that much faster than I normally would.....it just felt easier.
Oh, so it's a little like having gears (see comment above about the future)?
lee flythe wrote on 08/03/17 at 1:43pm:
So, once Cyclofest came to be, we saw hordes of people riding multitudes of e-bikes all over usnwc, and there were no issues that I was ever made aware of.
I think they're really dorky, and I currently have no need for one, but they do not present the problems that everyone typically attributes to them.
I think you guys should consider widening the trails and increasing sight distance if this is the direction mountain bike technology and marketing is heading. The day will be coming when the Strava KOM is riding an e-bike. I think we can expect trail times to decrease significantly.