Not sure if Cam is still monitoring these comments, but after his time on the EXe, I'd be very interested in his thoughts on the proper limitations on watts and torque for e-mtbs.
It seems to me that while the mtb world is smuggly proclaiming to have freed itself from all of the ideas about geometry, rim width, bar width, etc. that were ported over from road bikes, with respect to the biggest development of the past decade, e-bikes (for better or worse), the mtb world is unquestioningly accepting the Class 1 parameters, which were absolutely developed for riding pavement with zero thought of recreational mountain biking.
My opinion is bikes that give you 700 extra watts have no place on the trails, but I'd be curious to hear other takes. While the cats almost certainly not going back in the bag as far as laws and regulations, choosing a mid-powered e-mtb over a full powered one can still be encouraged on grounds of user conflict, impact to trails, access, etc.
June 22, 2023, 11:11 a.m. - DancingWithMyself
Not sure if Cam is still monitoring these comments, but after his time on the EXe, I'd be very interested in his thoughts on the proper limitations on watts and torque for e-mtbs. It seems to me that while the mtb world is smuggly proclaiming to have freed itself from all of the ideas about geometry, rim width, bar width, etc. that were ported over from road bikes, with respect to the biggest development of the past decade, e-bikes (for better or worse), the mtb world is unquestioningly accepting the Class 1 parameters, which were absolutely developed for riding pavement with zero thought of recreational mountain biking. My opinion is bikes that give you 700 extra watts have no place on the trails, but I'd be curious to hear other takes. While the cats almost certainly not going back in the bag as far as laws and regulations, choosing a mid-powered e-mtb over a full powered one can still be encouraged on grounds of user conflict, impact to trails, access, etc.