New posts

ebikes on the Shore

Nov. 3, 2019, 9:55 a.m.
Posts: 980
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: RAHrider

Syncro, I agree with most of what you post here but I cannot get on board with luxury taxes for mtb. The government spends tons of money on things for the health of our population. Swimming pools, tennis courts, beaches etc. Volunteer built and maintained trails on vacant land is far from a luxury activity. Sure, I have some nice bikes but that doesn't mean I'm rich. Many mountain bikers arrive with bikes on their trailer hitch that are worth more than the car carrying them.

Mountain biking is a decent tourist draw for BC. It has literally transformed towns like squamish and Cumberland. In Cumberland, there are more people in the Forrest than in the community centre any night of the week. In my opinion the government should be spending more on mountain biking. Creating access to quality trails is good for the health of our population and the economy. 

I pay way more taxes than I would prefer and aside from streets and sewage, use very little our government provides. I don't see Mountain biking as a luxury activity, save that monicker for golf or something like that. That being said, I do believe everyone should be contributing through donations, trail passes and participating in maintenance

Fair point and I would like to see more govt funding for mtn biking too. But compared to things like say swimming,  I'd guess that mtb participation numbers pale in total province wide. And something like tennis differs in that it is basically a one time capital investment that needs little to no maintenance. I think a better comparison would be something like playing fields, where regular maintenance is required. As for the luxury moniker I'm looking at the cost of new bikes these days as well as upkeep, mtbing is not exactly a cheap sport to participate in.  I get your point here though as I am all about the min-max idea and try to ride on the cheap, but even at that it's still an expensive activity.

Nov. 3, 2019, 2:45 p.m.
Posts: 1159
Joined: March 18, 2017

^ Looks like a new low spec’ed FS complete on a proper frame is in the $3500-4000 range. An ebike is $5000+

Biking is an expensive sport. Especially once you add in a new Tacoma TRD and roof top tent

Nov. 3, 2019, 8:49 p.m.
Posts: 2919
Joined: May 23, 2006

Posted by: Endur-Bro

^ Looks like a new low spec’ed FS complete on a proper frame is in the $3500-4000 range. An ebike is $5000+

Biking is an expensive sport. Especially once you add in a new Tacoma TRD and roof top tent and 

fyp

Nov. 23, 2019, 3:58 p.m.
Posts: 80
Joined: Aug. 11, 2015

https://electrek.co/2019/11/23/drycycle-electric-bicycle-quadricycle/

Nov. 23, 2019, 10:17 p.m.
Posts: 1145
Joined: Nov. 6, 2006

?

Nov. 26, 2019, 6:43 p.m.
Posts: 734
Joined: Aug. 14, 2003

Not the shore, but just another indication of where this is leading: https://www.pinkbike.com/news/us-forest-service-sued-over-ebikes-in-tahoe-national-forest.html 

Nov. 26, 2019, 11:05 p.m.
Posts: 2919
Joined: May 23, 2006

far out!

Nov. 27, 2019, 6:44 a.m.
Posts: 18
Joined: Dec. 16, 2018

Sounds to good to be true, but here it is ...

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/study-suggests-e-bikes-provide-a-similar-workout-to-regular-bikes.html

Nov. 27, 2019, 8:35 a.m.
Posts: 1780
Joined: Feb. 26, 2015

Posted by: E-wok

Sounds to good to be true, but here it is ...

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/study-suggests-e-bikes-provide-a-similar-workout-to-regular-bikes.html

I'm sorry riding a bicycle is too uncomfortable for you. I'm glad you have a motorbike so you can keep up to your friends.

Nov. 27, 2019, 2:55 p.m.
Posts: 2919
Joined: May 23, 2006

Pinkbike is a whore for industry.

Nov. 27, 2019, 4:13 p.m.
Posts: 57
Joined: May 11, 2017

That study is so flawed I don't even know where to begin...

The riders achieved the same intensity but on average the duration was 12 minutes shorter. So they did not get the same workout at all....

They should have compared the same duration of effort. Both 2 hour rides, similar wattage; how much further do you need to go to achieve the same amount of exercise...

Nov. 27, 2019, 4:48 p.m.
Posts: 980
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

To be fair the study itself notes that it is a pilot study right in the title and they do talk about the limitations of the study.  From a science perspective it serves as a good jumping off point for more thorough examination. The disappointment is how some people are parading this around as gospel truth the back up their claims of ebikes being as good or better than pedal bikes and then refusing to consider critical view points that use sound theory to address the faults in this particular study.

Nov. 27, 2019, 6 p.m.
Posts: 1603
Joined: July 11, 2014

Posted by: cerealkilla_

Not the shore, but just another indication of where this is leading: https://www.pinkbike.com/news/us-forest-service-sued-over-ebikes-in-tahoe-national-forest.html 

But.... but.. the ebike advocates claimed this would never happen! I'm sure we will see some ebike specific advocacy groups stepping up (industry supported) to address this right?

Nov. 27, 2019, 8:47 p.m.
Posts: 734
Joined: Aug. 14, 2003

Posted by: MaxRockatansky

That study is so flawed I don't even know where to begin...

The riders achieved the same intensity but on average the duration was 12 minutes shorter. So they did not get the same workout at all....

They should have compared the same duration of effort. Both 2 hour rides, similar wattage; how much further do you need to go to achieve the same amount of exercise...

That's only half of the problem here. The main thing is that these are two entirely different forms of technology, and they will be used in very different ways.

To suggest they provide similar workouts means under controlled circumstances they CAN provide similar workouts. However, in practice, things may be entirely different.

Personally, I don't think it matters. I don't really care how hard someone is working. The whole "cheater" argument is a dead horse, and quite honestly it never held value in meaningful discussions IMHO. There are far more important things to consider, such as recent lawsuits by hikers and horseback riders for permitting Ebike access to trail networks.

However, if we must go down this road I ask this.....will the expanded sale of ebikes for off-road use (in their current formats) lead to riders working harder or less hard on their rides? 

1) For certain, there will be some who will now get a better workout (than none at all) because they will get out and ride when injuries or limits may otherwise keep them home.  Awesome. This is great.

2) There will also be some that will legitimately push ebikes in a manner that they get as good (and sometimes even better) of a workout than on a MTB.  Okay.  

3) Then there are those that will stop pedaling very hard at all, because now they have an engine doing the work for them. Okay.  

Overall, I would suggest that the main marketing thrust of ebikes is focused at people that will likely end up in category #3, and in sum this will not in any way enhance the average (across all riders) fitness of the ridership. It will just give an easy way out for those that don't really like pedaling. 

Fine, who cares? I don't. Some will get fitter and some will get fatter.

It's not a matter of whether not not an ebike gives a comparable workout.....it's how they are used by different people.  And as goes for fitness so will go for trail access and trail impacts. If ebikes are brought forward responsibly with proactive engagement by those that promote them, and with a clear effort to contribute to harmonious trail management systems, all should be fine. However, if they are just pushed pushed pushed, with no consideration or efforts to understand potential impacts on existing trail traffic patterns, we will have more needless messes like we are seeing in Tahoe.

Nov. 27, 2019, 11:21 p.m.
Posts: 33566
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

Sounds exactly like the MTB complaints of 15 to 20 years ago.

Forum jump: