REVIEW
2026 Rocky Mountain Instinct Powerplay SL
It’s not often that we get to test a product that is so different than what we are used to. And this bike is different. It has less travel than I’m used to running, lighter weight tires, a cable-less drivetrain, aluminum wheels and a medium high pivot suspension system. I’m sure I’m missing a few other things, but put it together and it’s a bit outside of my wheelhouse. So, I think a different kind of bike deserves a subtly different kind of bike review.
For pricing and geometry details, please see the first look article, or the Rocky Mountain website.
At the top of climbs everybody always seemed to want to point out the 700 peak watts I had at my disposal. "Actually, this is the SL and it's only 550." That made me feel better about myself.
It does cut a slimmer profile than the Altitude Powerplay, but it's still got a few bulges that make it clear you're riding an e-bike.
Motor-y bits
It still boggles my mind that Rocky Mountain decided to build their own e-bike motor. Let’s not get too pedantic about what’s off the shelf and what isn’t, or which arm of the corporation owns which patents. By the definitions of most, Rocky built their own e-bike motor! This is an amazing technical achievement and the major feature you’re buying into if you buy this bike, and seems crazy to me that Rocky Mountain hides behind the Dyname name with their motors.
We talked a bit about how this system works in the first look. Key things I would take away:
- 65 Nm max torque
- 550w peak power
- 480 Wh battery
- The system spins on a standard bottom bracket and cranks, and the clutch is in a form of a ratcheting chainring
- Power is applied via an upper pulley wheel
- Pedaling power is sensed via a mechanical torque arm
In the first look I used the word “intuitive” and I’m standing by that. In all the time with the bike, I never experienced the motor doing anything weird, feeling strange or putting out power any way other than what felt entirely natural. The Dyname/Rocky Mountain folks suggested a lot of this is down to how they are able to control things using the mechanical torque arm. It all just works. Step on the pedals move forward. Stop pedaling, power stops. Simple. Intuitive. Easy.
The result is an e-bike that feels a lot like a regular bike, but just with more power. Overall I wound up knocking less time off my climbs than I anticipated. My best measured time up Good Sir Martin from the bottom of C-Buster to the intersection of Baden Powell is just under 14 minutes. On the Rocky, with a reasonable effort and the bike at Level 3 I was around 12 minutes. 14 minutes on my regular bike leaves me gasping, with my eyes bulging out, though. Sticking with Good Sir Martin, my final ride on this bike was with Deniz and Cooper, getting all of the photos that grace this article. With the bike set at Level 3 and a medium effort I was climbing at about the same pace as Deniz and Cooper. I would have been left in the dust on a regular bike and I could have made it more interesting if I put the hammer down. I found the same thing happening, but with the roles reversed, the few times I rode with people on full powered e-bikes.
The motor is well sealed, but the bearing peaking out from between the cranks and the chainring might need some attention.
I found that the display was easy to read and told me what I needed to know. Unfortunately, with my headset cap mount it was often hidden beneath my Wahoo computer.
I seldom worried too much about full power and rode it in a way that split the difference between a regular bike and a full powered e-bike. A typical ride would see me doing a lap-and-a-half on Seymour (~5-600 m of climbing) in an hour-and-a-half or so, and would leave the bike with 50-60% charge remaining. I only used the max power setting on paved roads or on wide, gravel climbs, with most of my time spent in Level 3. There is room on the bike to boost power levels, but it seems to me if you’re looking to maximize your electronic power, this probably isn’t the bike you’re going to purchase. As well, if you’re looking to cover huge miles, or have really long days, you’ll either need to keep your power low or buy a range extender. I found myself able to not worry about battery range as long as my rides were less than 3-4 hours (which they almost always were).
My test of this bike corresponded with the most horrendous of Vancouver weather. Nearly every ride I completed was wet and muddy and resulted in a hose off after the ride. I had zero problems with the electronics and I can’t imagine subjecting the bike to worse conditions. The one hiccup was that right at the end of my test, the ratcheting spider seized up solid. This came after a period of not riding the bike for a month. I was in a bit of a rush getting ready for my ride and decided to just go with it after it didn’t free up after tugging on a few things. What was interesting was how noticeable motor feedback became without the ratchet working. Whenever I would stop pedaling I could really feel the motor doing things as it came to a stop. After riding a kilometer the bearing had developed a bit of play, and I was able to get it spinning smoothly again with a few hard tugs. It wasn’t a problem after that, but at the very least it needs a disassembly and re-grease, or potentially a new bearing.
The only other thing that could use some improvement is the handlebar mode switch. The mount is too large, for one, and doesn’t clear the reservoir on the brake lever, so had to be run outboard of the brake lever. I felt like this made it easy to access, but it was also quite easy to accidentally switch modes. Quite often I would bump myself down a mode. I was able to adjust it enough to cut down on the number of accidental mode changes, but I’d like a few more options.
Noise from the motor was acceptable. As many others have pointed out, it’s less a high frequency whine, and more a suggestion of extra noise coming from the chain and idler. It never bothered me all that much, but it is louder than a normal bike.
My final note on the motor is just how different it is to ride this bike on steep and technical things. I was often surprised just how tired I would get while climbing, primarily because I was climbing up things that I normally wouldn’t. I was pushing myself anaerobically more than I normally do, and this would leave me gassed. When things get steep you really have to keep your legs spinning, and there’s a lot of movement required to maintain traction. Long, steady climbs would put far less strain on your body than a normal bike, but keeping things going past the point where I would normally hop off kept me honest about my fitness level.
You always think you're looking up and ahead more than you are.
Fit, Geometry and Frame-y Details
Geometry on the Instinct is fairly neutral. The angles aren’t overly slack (64 degree head angle) and the sizing isn’t overly long (510mm reach on the XL). This all suited the intentions fine, but stack is the one place where I was hoping for something a bit more aggressive. The 135mm head tube/641mm stack felt a bit low, and I struggled to get enough height in the handlebars. I wound up swapping in a slightly taller bar, a 10mm longer stem (just because that’s what I had) and a cheater spacer in under the stem. This got things closer to my liking, but I would have been happy with a bit more stack height.
The adjustments available on the Instinct proved to be a nice feature. Rocky includes a second set of headset cups that allow you to lengthen or shorten reach by 5mm in either direction. I stuck with the stock non-offset version. As well, the Ride 4 system allows you to adjust your angles and suspension. I switched to the Ride-3 position, which Rocky Mountain describes as “Neutral”. Other options steepen/slacken the angles somewhat, and decrease/increase the progression of the suspension.
There are some size-specific adjustments to each size of bike. XS gets a 430mm rear centre, Small and Medium both get 436mm, while Large and XL grow to 447mm. Droppers grow in range from 120mm on the smallest bikes, up to 210mm on the XL. Handlebars are 760mm wide on the XS, and 780mm wide on all other sizes. All models get a 40mm stem and 165mm cranks. The XS bike also gets 650b wheels (and doesn’t show up on the geometry chart) compared to the 29er wheels on all other sizes, which are also mulletable with a link swap (there’s actually 3 different links listed in their small part documents, if you’re really interested in doing some off menu tinkering). Find out this (and more) from the top notch support documents.
Paint was excellent. I kept expecting to see nasty things emerge under the mud and grime that I ground into the frame with each ride but the finish held up really well.
Our conversation soon turned to all of the wheels we'd blown up on this section of trail. The fork worked really well through the chunder of Neds.
I didn't really feel anything in the way of "high pivot characteristics," but the bike was very quiet under foot.
Every fork should have a way to mount an integrated fender, and should come with one stock. Until then, this Syncros one was money well spent, and I'd recommend it to anybody running a 36 or 38.
New damper, same old lowers. Wonder if there's anything new in the pipe...
I'm less in tune with fine discrepancies in the rear of the bike than in the front. I didn't deviate much from stock settings in the rear, running a smidge less rebound damping but not much else.
Suspension-y bits
There is nothing overly exotic about the suspension on the Rocky Mountain. It’s an evolution of what they have been doing for years, with their smoothlink suspension and RIDE-4 adjustment system. I spoke with the Rocky team to get some insight on the specifics, but our conversation was interrupted by unforeseen circumstances. What I got from them:
- They confirmed a fairly progressive rate curve, achieved with a 57.5mm stroke shock to bump the overall leverage ratio down a bit compared to the regular Instinct
- Tune is similar to that on the regular Instinct, although slightly lighter on rebound – Here it’s a CS40 RL40, where the regular Instinct is CS40 RL50 – The lower leverage ratio means that the shock will offer more damping support compared to the regular Instinct
- Anti-squat is said to be quite aggressive, from 130% at top out to 115% at sag and dropping all the way to 75% at bottom out – not sure what cog that’s in though
After a few rides, I arrived at my settings in the rear and I didn’t change them. I found something that was supportive yet active, and didn’t feel much of a need to mess around too much. I would be curious to try a coil shock on this bike, and I’m not sure why more e-bikes don’t come with a coil. The weight penalty is negligible compared to all that other stuff you added, and who cares if things bob a bit while pedaling?
One thing that was noticeable was just how quiet under the feet this bike is. I’m not sure if it’s the idler, or the ratcheting chainring (it’s like half an O-chain down there), but my feet always felt very quiet.
I didn’t worry too much about what was happening in the back because I felt like I spent most of the test chasing settings up front. I’ve spent a lot of time on Fox 36’s and I was excited to try their new damper. I wasn’t prepared for how different it was going to feel, and I didn’t feel like Fox’s literature was super helpful in allowing me to find my way. This fork is a very different beast.
Where this fork excels is on fast trails with lots of small and medium sized hits. With the spring rate set a bit softer, and lots of HSC, I really started to feel what Fox was getting at by pushing a more damping forward setup. It’s hard to put it exactly into words, but once I embraced the HSC dial it was a feeling of energy dissipation without using a lot of travel.
The challenge came from trying to achieve that with enough support at full travel. An extra token or two may have helped here, but it felt like everything that I did to increase support deep in travel, had an impact on the small and medium end. I think balance is achievable and I was really hoping to spend some time with the Motion Instruments system on this fork, but I never had a weather window cooperate to allow me to go full data acquisition.
My big challenge though is just how far off the current setup guide is for this fork. With all the talk of new dampers, nobody talked about any changes to the air spring. Indeed, if you look at a setup guide for a Grip2 Fox 36, it has the same pressure settings as you’ll find for the GripX and GripX2 Fox 36 – both recommend starting with 94psi (I wound up at 105 psi). I was struggling to figure out why I kept needing to add pressure and tokens to get the support I wanted from the front end. I eventually reached out to Fox and was surprised when they said:
I am not surprised you're finding use of full travel easier with the new 36. While the Grip X is still developed on the architecture of the previous gen Grip 2, the Grip X has a pressure balance tune which works very differently from previous year forks.
I mean… it’s not their fault that everybody was so excited about new dampers nobody mentioned this. But you’d think you’d update your tuning guide if settings need to be dramatically different? Compared to my 2023 36, I had 9 psi more air pressure (8% higher) and 2 additional tokens, and I still didn’t have the deep travel support that I was used to. I did clarify with Rocky Mountain that this was the "regular" (i.e. non e-bike) version of the fork, and the settings on the back of the fork matched what I saw in the tuning guide. I clanged this fork hard off the stops many times as I worked my way up to these settings and I was very consistently using most of the travel of this fork. As I said before, I think the right settings are hiding somewhere in this fork, but the current Fox setup guide isn’t going to help you find them.
Cable routing was a bit busy, even with the wireless shift bits
Everything worked fine throughout the test, but I'm sure glad I had a spare battery available!
Shift-y bits
As the last person on the new bike list, it’s taken me a while to get experience on a Transmission bike. The GX version here largely went as advertised. Shifts were easy, crisp and precise. I like the new shifter pod and it’s very easy to put it in a place, right where you want it to be.
What wasn’t as advertised was the battery life. My first dead battery occurred after the second ride, when I learned that the answer to my question “They probably charged this thing up before giving it to me, right?” was actually a “No. No they didn’t.” Pete will point out that this was down to user error, as the derailleur probably spent a long ship ride over from Taiwan working itself into a frenzy getting ready to hit the trails.
After that, I got a bit smarter and never left home without a spare battery. I had it die one more time on me (after less than 10 hours of riding time), but my spare rescued me. I definitely do not feel like I was getting 25 hours of riding time between charges and I got pretty aggressive with my charging schedule. Even if you account for the derailleur waking up while on the back of my car, it still feels like my real world battery life was much, much shorter than expected.
Even if they're targeting pedal-ability, I think this bike needs Double Downs and a Maxx Grip up front.
So many spacers, so little height. This SQLab bar offers a smidge more rise than stock, but I had to buy a closeout stem to make it work.
This is a weird one, but I always found this tire made the bike really challenging to remove from my 1up bike rack.
Brake-y bits
I was always wishing for more brakes. Not that I think an extra 10 pounds of bike demands more brakes, but if you’ve got a motor pushing you along, why wouldn’t you opt for a few hundred grams more in the braking department? I never felt like I was coming to a stop fast enough.
Tire-y bits
The tires were another area where I wanted a bit more. I think a lot of this was mental though. They never did let me down and the Maxx Terra EXO+ performed better than I expected, but I always felt myself holding back a tiny bit on wet rocks. Something with a bit more grip and a bit more support would have given me a bit more confidence on gnarly things. If I was keeping the bike for the long term I would have thrown some inserts in, and then would be looking at something Double-Down-ish as a replacement.
On a regular bike I would never take this route, just to avoid humping it over technical roots and rocks like this.
Overall-ish Conclusions
Now that I’ve had a bit of time aboard an e-bike, I’m going to write (soon) about that experience and what I think about the whole thing. This isn’t really the place for that, though. I will say that while I had possession of this bike, my regular bike didn’t leave the garage. The e-bike made it far easier to keep riding through a winter of bad weather.
In a world of XC bikes descending like DH bikes and DH bikes climbing like XC bikes, this is decidedly a trail bike. It didn’t punch above its weight class on gnarly trails. It didn’t put me in a mindset to aggressively attack moves. But I did find myself heartily enjoying things when trails were smoother, faster and turnier.
I think there is more to be unleashed from this chassis though. A brake and tire swap would help, as would a bit more fork travel and a coil shock. In the discussions that I had with Rocky Mountain, that wasn’t the intention they had for this bike. They aimed to keep the weight down and the parts choices were all made for a specific purpose. They have created the BC Edition, with a bit more travel (150 rear/160 front), cushcore trail inserts and…well…still Codes, if you’re thinking you want something further towards the gnarly end of the spectrum.
This is still a segment that manufacturers are figuring out and it feels like there isn’t a consistent use case yet for bikes like this. The few times I found myself able to explore, I really appreciated this bike. Our Sunshine Coast mushroom adventure is the absolute wheelhouse for a bike like this. If I lived in the Interior, this would be the perfect tool for long self shuttles and exploring unknown singletrack. The motor system feels like an extension of your own power, and if you want to cover some miles (not too many though) and carve smoother singletrack, this would be a solid choice. For those looking for more power or capability on heavier terrain, there are other options (even from Rocky Mountain), but this is a pretty solid choice if you want to explore ribbons of classic singletrack. Hopefully Rocky Mountain can get its business issues sorted out in short order so that they can capitalize on the current buy Canadian momentum and expand on this motor platform.
Comments
4Runner1
1 week, 4 days ago
Maybe “SL” branding needs to be reconsidered. The BC edition is 22 kg / 48.4 lbs per Rocky. How is that SL?
Reply
Deniz Merdano
1 week, 4 days ago
Sort of Light?
Reply
Ryan
1 week, 4 days ago
Semi-light?
Reply
Shoreboy
1 week, 4 days ago
This comment has been removed.
Dave Tolnai
1 week, 4 days ago
It's not a light bike, but it's not that bad, either, and it's all somewhat relative. It never felt heavy while riding. It only seemed like an issue when you had to lift it over something.
Reply
4Runner1
1 week, 4 days ago
I ride a full power bike so, no, 48 lbs isn’t bad…until you factor in the SL branding. That’s all I’m saying.
Thanks for the review. All the best to Rocky.
Reply
Onawalk
1 week, 3 days ago
I mean if you compare it to a Norco Sight VLT (56ish) or a Commencal (58ish) 48 is Sorta Light for sure. Its all relative....
Reply
XXX_er
1 week, 3 days ago
Altho they claimed 49-ish My full power 4 yr old SC is 52 lbs on my bathroom scale so while 48 lbs is lighter I would not call it light. IME one gets used to the weight
Reply
Cory
1 week, 4 days ago
Wait a tick... I've seen this batch of photos before... https://nsmb.com/articles/2020-rocky-mountain-element/
Reply
Deniz Merdano
1 week, 4 days ago
I only batch shoot... Neeeext..
Reply
earle.b
1 week, 4 days ago
At least it's the same brand? hahhaha
Reply
Dave Tolnai
1 week, 4 days ago
We laughed a bit about this as we were taking the photos.
Reply
Cory
1 week, 4 days ago
They were good shots the first time they'll be good shots the second time :P
They are still good shots, now I need to find me that rock roll...
Reply
Pete Roggeman
1 week, 3 days ago
Im pretty sure that's on Cambodia, Cory ;)
Reply
Cooper Quinn
1 week, 2 days ago
Correct.
Reply
canterbury
1 week, 4 days ago
What’s the latest with RM?
I couldn’t buy an RM at the moment not knowing future.
Reply
Dave Smith
1 week, 4 days ago
News releases will probably start flying around the time of Sea Otter.
Reply
canterbury
1 week, 4 days ago
Guessing you can’t elaborate?
Reply
Pete Roggeman
1 week, 3 days ago
Dave doesn't know, because nobody knows right now, exactly. Sea Otter timing might be a tad early, but... what little we do know is happening right now is that the administrator (Ernst & Young) is accepting sealed bids. I think there was a March deadline for those and then it got pushed back into April. I'm not sure how long it will take them to pick a winning bid, but there are bids being submitted, so it sounds likely - or at least possible - that someone will come out the other end as the owner of Rocky Mountain Bikes. If none of the bids are good enough, I think E&Y will then kick the co. into the next phase, which would be bankruptcy from what I've been told. What that means for things like service and warranty is a bit unclear, however at worst you're gambling on the frame's longevity, whereas all other parts on there are covered by their respective manufacturers. Only you can decide if there's a deal on a bike out there that makes that risk seem worthwhile.
People I've spoken to with knowledge of the matter feel strongly that one of the bids will get accepted, however it's worth noting that those people are all biased and hopeful because at least some of them would like to go back to working for Rocky.
We'll try to stay on top of it but Rocky's notoriously tight-lipped about this kind of thing. As it was we never received a release about the layoffs or filing for protection - we had to dig the info up ourselves.
Reply
Jotegir
1 week, 2 days ago
In this case it's potentially much worse than "frame longevity" as this is an ebike with a proprietary system made by a different company (one which may no longer share an ownership group) that is not subject to bankruptcy proceedings. What happens when the new buyer says fuck it and just wants to go Bosch or whatever? I can't imagine Dyname will survive on service parts alone and they have yet to successfully sell the system to anyone else.
Reply
Pete Roggeman
1 week, 2 days ago
That is a very legitimate concern, but if Dyname stays in operation, they'll have to service that unit if it has problems.
Dave Tolnai
1 week, 4 days ago
I didn't want to make this a discussion about the business future of Rocky Mountain, but I also didn't want to totally gloss over the fact that there is some uncertainty. The general vibe out there in the world seems pretty positive on some sort of future for Rocky Mountain, but your general level of risk tolerance will dictate if postive vibes are enough to commit to spending $10,000+ on an electric motored bicycle.
Reply
Skooks
1 week, 3 days ago
No way I would consider buying a rocky right now without knowing for sure what their future as a viable business is and what the implications are for warranty coverage.
Reply
Jotegir
1 week, 2 days ago
A 50% off slayer is one thing, if it breaks, well, you have the other half of the price you didn't pay to pick up a different frame. At- or near- full price stuff? not a chance.
Reply
Morgan Heater
1 week, 1 day ago
I think anyone attempting to use fiscal logic in the purchase of an electric bicycle with a max two year warranty on the battery and motor is, perhaps, a little bit delusional.
Reply
jdt
1 week, 4 days ago
"The e-bike made it far easier to keep riding through a winter of bad weather." This is not necessarily a good thing.
I have always considered this to be one of the potential problems with ebikes- that people will reach for them in bad weather, especially when fenders and raingear may weigh you down. Add the increased bike weight, and this only adds to trail impacts.
I tend to avoid riding my ebike in bad weather as it reduces potential damage to the mechanisms from water ingress. If I'm that desperate to ride, I'll probably hit something easy or gravelly. I think the majority of riders avoid hitting loamers during the atmospheric river, and perhaps the few riders who are swayed to ride in the slop amounts to a limited impact. However, I still don't think this is a great mentality to promote.
Like you, hoping for a positive outcome to this Rocky Mountain thing. Long time love affair with this brand.
Reply
Dave Tolnai
1 week, 4 days ago
If I owned the bike I'd probably be more careful about when and where I rode it, as far as moisture is concerned.
As for your riding in winter comments:
It rains in Vancouver. It's generally wet from some time in October to some time in March. Hanging up the bike through the winter is certainly a viable strategy (and one I've taken on certain years), but the trails have existed with people riding on them in winter for a long time. Certainly, trail choice becomes important. I hardly rode any unsanctioned trails on this bike at all, and certainly wasn't hunting for loamers.
Does an e-bike make riding in the wet weather easier or worse? Does an extra 10 pounds of gear and 5 pounds of clothing make it worse? If this wasn't a test bike I'm not sure if I would have ridden it as much as I did. It was a bit easier to throw on an extra layer, but it's not like the degree of sweat generated was all that much less. There was a mental aspect of the suffering being just a bit less (faster to the top, less time in the rain if you choose). But it's not like the trail was over-run with other e-bikers doing the same thing.
At the end of the day, I probably rode 20%-30% more than I would have if I hadn't had this bike. There was a day or two that I talked myself into it...but half of that was also just down to putting some mileage on a test bike. And when I did ride it, I usually rode a bit further than I would have on a regular bike. I don't think that this extra bit of mileage added all that much to my impact on the trails. Not nothing, certainly. Really, this was a factor that made it slightly easier for me to ride through the winter, one day per week. I don't feel guilty about that.
Reply
jdt
1 week, 4 days ago
And you're probably one of the more committed and conscientious riders out there.
I'm not suggesting you feel guilty about it. I just don't favor promoting the idea that ebikes are great for getting out in bad weather, when we may otherwise let the trails rest.
The problem with ebikes is not ebikes. It is whether or not we promote responsible usage....,like not riding up downhills, and being careful as we pass other riders. This message has been somewhat lost on the primary promoters of the product, leaving people to argue about it, instead of go directly to talking about responsible integration.
Reply
Mark
1 week, 4 days ago
The weight thing is a red herring, as are many anti-ebike arguments. So this bike is say 10-15lbs heavier than a typical enduro bike, what about the rider? Are you going to say that riders over 190lbs can't ride because they weigh too much and therefore cause a negative impact on the trails? I'm all for reasonable arguments, but that 10-15lbs is simply not enough of the factor to make it a legitimate complaint against ebikes.
I'll agree on the wet weather riding, but dollars to doughnuts there are probably a higher percentage of bike vs ebike riders in wet weather compared to dry weather. I could be wrong, but I'm thinking that part of the mindset that pushes people to ebikes is also going to push them away from riding in inclement weather. I don't have any data to back that up, but when out riding I see fewer ebikes out (as a percentage) than when the weather is good. YMMV.
Reply
jdt
1 week, 4 days ago
The weight thing has nothing to do with the riders, so don't conflate those two things. Same riders, different bike, most ebikes are closer to 20 pounds heavier. The lighter ones closer to 15 unless you carbon everything up. And this is not an "anti-ebike argument". I ride an ebike. This is about being responsible promoters of the sport. Just because someone raises a criticism, doesn't mean they're haters or trying to oppress others. It may simply mean they are thinking of the greater good of the sport, and not just about themselves.
Anyway, I'm not pinning this consideration on the weight thing (that is just a minor factor), but more upon the idea that ebikes give people ways to ride more in the rain. The author essentially said it outright, that he rode more in the rain because he had the ebike.... I'm not crucifying the guy for riding an ebike. I have one too. However, I am suggesting that this is not a helpful message to send....yeah! get an ebike, so you can get out in the bad weather!.....you see the idea? He clearly wasn't intending to promote riding in wet weather, but the point was nonetheless made. Perhaps if he also mentioned his care to avoid vulnerable trails during this time, it would sound different.
That being said, I think you raise an interesting point. Most people on this site are committed riders. A lot of us ride rain or shine. However, less committed riders who only come out in the good weather may also be the demographic more likely to ride ebikes. (Read- not saying that ebikers are less committed, but that less committed may be more likely to ride ebikes). If that is the case, and there are more fair weather ebikers than mountain bikers, then all is well and my point is moot.
Still, I think we need to be careful about the messages we sent about the product. It's really not hard. We already had one blowhard bragging about riding up the downhills as part of his product promotion....hardly thoughtful or helpful.
Reply
Pete Roggeman
1 week, 3 days ago
There are a lot of people out there contemplating an ebike purchase for the first time. It's completely logical that Dave included his thought process, and the fact that one thing many people notice when they get one is that it can help get you out there on a day when motivation is flagging. There's no use in hiding that information for the reason you state - that's either wishful thinking or unrealistic. As a local, you know not everyone rides in the winter, but lots of people do. It's always been that way and honestly, I don't think the numbers of winter riders have changed proportionately to the increased number of riders when the weather is good.
I hear where you're coming from, but know that it comes off as a lot of hand-wringing. Not every ski review includes a reminder about the skier's responsibility code, not every car review reminds people to use their turn signals. We can start adding asterisks and disclaimers to every single statement we make that could possibly be interpreted as promoting irresponsible behaviour, but that would make these reviews unreadable. People need to educate themselves and act like responsible adults.
Reply
XXX_er
1 week, 3 days ago
yeah folks are getting old so they are looking at an Eeb and the luddites can't stop the incoming tide, the push back is less and lessas from what i see with every Eeb artical that you guys publish, the wanabe Eeb er should try a full power and a half power to make an informed decision
Reply
Mark
1 week, 3 days ago
Of course the weight thing has something to do with the riders, the bikes aren't out riding around by themselves. The idea was put forth that the extra weight of an ebike increases the impact on the trails. However, the bike and rider are a system working together so you can't ignore the weight of the rider if the argument is going to be that the extra weight is a negative to the trails.
I agree with you on the point about increased riding in bad weather (and agree that it was an unintentional thing by the author), also your point about riding up the downhills. This is why I feel debates about ebike impact should be based on rider etiquette. This includes things like riding in inclement weather, being patient/kind with other trail users and the big one of giving back to the trails, whether that's through labour or cash to the local trail org. Re the marketing angle, unfortunately a mjority of what exists in the mtb world has an aggessive bias that is often opposed to good trail etiquette.
Reply
XXX_er
1 week, 4 days ago
" The system spins on a standard bottom bracket and cranks, and the clutch is in a form of a ratcheting chainring "
I have always thot this seemed like it was a good feature of the RM system
I still don't get the small battery/ 65 NM thing while people seem to buy it i would not
Reply
Dave Tolnai
1 week, 4 days ago
I'd love to see it mounted on a regular bike and compared to an O-chain, as well. It only ratchets backwards, where the O-chain floats in both directions (I think?) but I wonder if this is accomplishing most of what that is doing.
For small battery, I was going to write about this but didn't. It kind of gets at the whole range anxiety thing with electric cars. Some obsence % of car journeys are a very short distance. People seldom use the range that they think they need, but buy for a worst case. That was where my mind went when I first got it. But in reality, it gave me all the range that I needed, and I really only needed to stress it on a couple of adventure rides. So, should you carry around (and pay for) extra battery that you don't need on 95% of your rides, or is a plug in battery pack a better solution?
For power, I think it's going to depend on how you ride. I didn't like Max power for climbing on climbing trails. I only used it when things opened up - powerline climbs, gravel roads, pavement. Even at full power though, I would easily get dropped by full power bikes. On singletrack it felt like the right amount of power. I could see if you're really into blasting through technical climbs, maybe it's a shortcoming? But I think this is the realm I would play in if I were to buy an e-bike.
Reply
XXX_er
1 week, 4 days ago
On an Ep8/ 630 W battery Eeb I ride around for maybe 3 hrs in boost on steep uphills and go for a beer which almost always give me more than enough power but not enough to not recharge
SO I don't think 65NM or the small battery would make me happy being used to the full power
Reply
Suns_PSD
4 days, 7 hours ago
I rather like this bike and would love to build a CF, 155mm cranked, BC edition (mullet) with 150/ 160mm travel. I actually shopped pretty hard for one for a bit. I did realize it was going to take a heck of a lot of money to get it exactly how I envisioned.
Love RM bikes but will admit the BK news spooked me a bit.
The other thing, and the SLs are indeed lighter than a Full power and I don't really need a full power bike at all, but these new full power e-bikes such as the Regulator, the Vala, the VLT & soon the E-Druid, are bringing a lot of performance/ long term reliability & support/ battery size for the exact same money and only about 5#s more in most cases. I'll add that the RM is a mid high pivot and that adds value (and weight) to me.
Currently I have a Relay and it's all I need for motor and battery power, but I'm leaning more and more towards a full power e-bike next time just for the value.
Reply
Please log in to leave a comment.