>prove me wrong /n/
>>953927
Is that your own opinion, or are you looking for someone to convince you that they're good?
As someone that owns one I think they can be rather good, very fun and they can make it possible to ride stuff that would otherwise be very difficult if possible at all. I wouldn't say they completely replace unassisted bikes, the weight can be a hindrance especially when the battery runs out or they're just low powered. The prices on most pre-builts are also prohibitively high and for the same price you can get a bike that weighs nearly half as much.
OP's dad fucking OP's mom was a horrible idea. Prove me wrong.
Protip: You can't.
I'm all for e-bikes if they encourage more people to commute and ride around towns, and e-MTBs are fine on trails that are already open to dirtbike motorcycles or ATVs, but e-MTBs on actual MTB trails are a terrible idea. I don't care whether it's gasoline powered or battery powered: motorized vehicles don't belong on mountain bike trails.
>>953927
I have a knee injury that prevents me from lifting more than 20 kilograms doctors orders, my cannondale that i assembled on a pedelec assist system affords me to enjoy biking for work and pleasure again. sure I got to make sure I bring the charger with me in case I climb too much and eat away too much of the battery but it is better than being forced to get a full on knee replacement and never ride again under (some of) my own power.
it is definitely an investment onto of just the bike but it is still my bike.
ebikes on anything they already don't allow motorcycles on is a crap idea
>>953934 here, disregard my post, I just realized that OP said 'moutain ebikes' not 'mountain bikes'.
I agree, mountain Ebikes are a horrible idea.
>>953927
All e-bikes are trash.
>>953954
Most legal e-bikes can't do shit to a trail that a skilled biker can't already do, unless of course you live in a place with no limits on e-bike power.
Shimano takes eBikes off-road with XT level STePS MTB
Its happening
They're just something that isn't a mountain bike anymore.
I'm okay with them for disabled people (being fat isn't being disabled) and making them much more powerful for people that want something closer to motocross but with electric engines only. I'd understand that: I think the mess and noise from motorbike engines could take away from the experience for some people, and it's a real pain in the ass for people that are just enjoying the wilderness.
>>954075
>They're just something that isn't a mountain bike anymore.
How so? All it's doing is giving you a bit of extra power. Something like OP's image is completely different to something that weighs the same as a large child and has tens of killowatts.
>>954084
Also pic related is giving you a bit of extra power.
When you bring your physical fitness out of the equation, it's not mountain biking anymore.
You're cheating yourself out of the fun and experience. It's fine if you're disabled, it's fine if it's a race for electronically assisted bikes, but if you're doing it for fun... that's not good for you. Go to motocross, that's where it belongs, not easy mode MTB. Half the fun of MTB is conquering personal objectives, getting up to a steep climb with yout body is going to feel awesome, pushing a button and just getting to the top sweat free is stupid and useless.
>>954086
>Also pic related is giving you a bit of extra power.
That's neither a bit nor extra, as the power is coming only form the engine and not from your legs.
>When you bring your physical fitness out of the equation, it's not mountain biking anymore.
It doesn't eliminate fitness at all. Not only does fitness play a factor in areas other than pedalling the extra power from the motor is supplementing the power of your legs, not replacing it. Most pre-built bikes are 250w, the average rider can easily exceed that and if they relied on just the motor they'd get stuck often.
>You're cheating yourself out of the fun and experience.
I have just as much fun on my assisted bike as I do on my unassisted ones. Fun is subjective.
>getting up to a steep climb with yout body is going to feel awesome, pushing a button and just getting to the top sweat free is stupid and useless.
Says you. Some people don't find killing themselves on a climb fun. I find going fast fun, the motor gives me the extra power to go even faster. It also allows me to ride stuff that would otherwise be impossible or very hard (if you've never ridden one you wouldn't really understand).
You enjoy what you want, I'll enjoy what I want.
>>954094
tl;dr: I'm a lazy fuck that is too poor for a motorbike so I think my assisted bike is fine
>>954107
I could've got a motorbike for the same price as my electrically assisted bike and I also have enough money in the bank to buy one, so no I'm not too poor. A motorbike cannot be ridden where my bike can.
Whilst I am quite lazy (not a fat fuck but not super fit) that's not why I got an assisted bike, I still pedal it just as hard as an unassisted bike. The motor is supplementary, not a replacement for my legs. I can get just as good a workout as a regular bike, I'll just be going faster and having more fun.
For anyone that still didnt know.
There are electric bikes on the market too.
yeah nah they're fuckin gay af m8
>>954171
I actually didn't know this, I went to their page to check it out and
>The flat KTM PowerPack is completely recharged in only 80 minutes (80% in 50 minutes), so nothing stands in the way of up to an hour of riding fun, depending on terrain and riding style.
This made me chuckle, I don't think that "nothing stands in the way" is a suitable frase for that kind of sentece :D
An interesting idea nonetheless.
>>953927
Of course they are. Batteries are shit and always will be.
Extended range electric transport has always been the only solution. EREV Mountain motorbikes would not trash.
>>954255
>always will be
I dunno, seems like they've come a pretty long way in the past 20 years or so.
>>954159
>A motorbike cannot be ridden where my bike can.
And thus we see the true purpose of mopeds vs motorbikes: regulatory (sort of) compliance. If motoring on the mup is the design goal, those vestigial pedals make a lot of sense even if they are functionally useless. My municipality (Calgary) does not put up with it; a vehicle with a motor is a motor vehicle and the only exception is actual wheelchairs for the actually handicapped.
>OTOH, a true electric dirt bike with all wheel drive would be easy to do and possibly really fun...
>>954303
I honestly have no idea what you're saying. No petrol powered bike, regardless of whether it has pedals or not, cannot be ridden off road (unless I owned the land or had permission from the land owner) in the UK which is where I live. That includes the vast majority of where people ride mountain bikes.
Even if I did have some land to ride on I'd need a van to transport the bike or it would have to be road legal, either case would involve significant costs to do.
>>954303
I've been blasting all over Calgary on my 55 kph 4 kW "ebike" for a year and a half now, including all winter and no issues yet. Very fun, never sit in traffic commuting anymore, yet get there in the same or less time as driving. Pathways aren't even busy during commute hours. I every type of terrain on it, sidewalks, fields etc. though ride very slowly when near any pedestrians and around blind spots.
Of course I always try to ride courteously and safely, have excellent handling skills and good brakes.
Pedals are not vestigial at all even at top speeds, though it requires a very high cadence to keep up with the motor on my 48tx16t gearing. (probably 200+ which is a good workout) due to gearing... need a planetary gear crank.
Done plenty of city trail riding on it too, but it's just too heavy to be a lot of fun for that. Off-roading is best to me just on human powered bikes for a number of reasons.
>>954646
I highly doubt you're doing 200rpm+, that'd be over 75km/h. I can pedal pretty damn fast but even I top out around 120rpm (51km/h with my 48:14 gearing). Even with your larger tyres you aren't going to be pedalling much more than 48km/h, any faster and it's all motor.
I'm guessing you're running a 4 bolt crankset, you should look at getting a 5 bolt to go larger than 48t. Maybe even a double or triple if you still want a gear low enough to haul that thing around if the battery dies. I'm also guessing you have a single speed freewheel, can your hub not take a 6-7 speed?
>>953927
>>954653
Just an estimate, but I can pedal pretty fast. I use a 24" rear wheel with a 2.8" tire. I can tell when I'm adding power, and I can do it up to 57 kph max. Usually tho I'm lazy during commutes and just ghost pedalling as I do a ton of intense mountain biking (non electric).
4 Bolt, yes. Think you can get up to a 50 or 52t but they're rare and not sure my frame would clear any bigger even with a 5 bolt desu. Rear hub is very wide, and as far as I can tell it may only fit the single speed, and potentially up to 3sp max but haven't tried. I run a "tringle" though, 3 speeds up front for when I need to limp home (very rare).
>>954094
>I have just as much fun on my assisted bike as I do on my unassisted ones
>Not liking exercise
Spotted the fatty
>>954679
>I can do it up to 57 kph max
That's about 140rpm, fairly impressive with flat pedals (that's what prevents me from going over about 120rpm, things get too bumpy and my feet would probably come off the pedals). A little tip, if you ever want to use an online calculator 24x2.8 is pretty much the same diameter as 700c 38mm).
>>954717
If only you knew. I'm far from fat (about 178cm and 65kg). I get plenty of exercise from work and working out and recently started commuting to work unassisted. If I really wanted I could get just as much exercise on my assisted bike by putting in the same amount of effort, I'd just be going much faster
San Francisco Bay area
I think we're saturated with MTB but eBikes are attractive to bike shops as a potential new market
Problem is that virtually all public land available for mountain biking is forbidden to motorized vehicles.
The status of many trails, i.e. whether bicycles are allowed, is constantly being challenged by hikers groups, sierra club, nature groups, even equestrian groups, who want to exclude bicycles. Their arguments are well known, some of them are true, i.e. poor mix of high speed bicycles and people on trails, some of them are BS, i.e. bicycles causing excessive trail damage.
One of the ways that groups try to ban legal MTB access is argue about certain 1960s land deed language about excluding mechanized vehicles. MTB advocacy groups need to argue that meant motorized vehicles.
Making the case to keep human powered bicycles on public lands is hard enough. Selling eBikes with the false hope of riding them legally on bike trails is wrong and invites illegal activity which will ruin things for all bicyclists.
>>954094
>Most pre-built bikes are 250w
What?
>>957209
Go have a look, they are. Especially in countries where 250w is the legal limit (which is most). Not many places sell bikes above the limit and a lot of the people that spending a grand or two on one don't want something they can't ride in the street without the risk or losing it.
>>957212
>Especially in countries where 250w is the legal limit (which is most).
Limit of what?
>>957224
Of donuts per day.
What do you think? Power, genius.
>>957225
I don't know of any unit of power which has the symbol of 'w'. Which are you referring to?
>>957229
It's the SI-approved unit for "lols", comes from the Japanese. Didn't you know that? Better get to re-reading.
>>957229
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt
You retard.
And don't tell me "you have to write it W" because it makes you look like a smelly autist, and that's not what you want, right?
>>954763
Oh man, the idea of horse riders complaining about literally anyone else causing trail erosion is hilarious. They're easily the worst things for trails, especially if it's in an area that gets a lot of rain. If anything should be banned from trails for that reason, it's animals with hooves.
>>957287
Not to mention the big piles of poop they leave. Fucking degenerates.
