This is up there with 1x and road disc brake threads
If anything, you could argue that they're deliberately underrepresented in the mountain bike media.
I'd reckon that that is probably true. We've reviewed or featured four, perhaps five e-bikes in Singletrack Magazine in 16 year. We've reviewed and featured more 160mm+ bikes, more singlespeeds and probably more downhill bikes.
We're very aware that e-bikes annoy some readers, which is why I'm careful when we feature them. As someone has said, they're part of the mountain bike scene and just as you'll see some on the trail, so you might see some in the magazine. As for the over-promotion of them, what advertisers want to place, that's up to them - and I'd argue that Singletrack is probably a very relevant place to do that, but that's not editorial content. The e-bike manufacturers are desperate to get the word out about their (very great) bikes that they're making, but they don't really have much of an outlet, due to the aforementioned throttling of e-bike content in our (and everyone else's) magazine. Yes, we could do a separate magazine for them, like we did when some people complained about off road, drop bar bikes appearing in their magazine, but that would require more resources that we don't really have.
e-bikes do annoy some readers, as do fat bikes, singlespeeds, carbon bikes, 'cross bikes, steel bikes, women's bikes, cargo bikes, enduro bikes, pedal bikes and downhill bikes. We're careful how much we feature anything that's not in the relatively narrow bell curve of the readers' idea of what a 'normal' bike is, but I don't think that we can ignore e-bikes any more than we can ignore steel hardtails.
There will occasionally be e-bikes in the magazine in the future, but probably a lot fewer than you'll see in real life, and every mention of them will have been agonised over more than is probably necessary.
The trail erosion one always confuses me in whatever argument it is used. So what if people try to go round puddles or use a trail more, they're not gonna wear the mountain away! 3 days of very heavy rain would do more damage than a summer's worth of mtbers. Just nonsense!
proudly riding my 100% human powered bicycle
[img] 
[/img]
jekkl - not so. I have watched over the 20 years I have been riding locally paths deteriorate / widen and erode due to MTB use. One that used to be a lovely ribbon of singletrack is now a 3 m wide mud puddle - and you can see from the wear its MTBs not walkers in the main. This was after that path got publicised.
Sure paths are made by erosion but its the widening and deepening of them by use when the conditions are poor and by people riding around the puddles.
I'm honoured munrobiker - truly i am.....:)
Good to get some input from Chips
Love the sentence "The e-bike manufacturers are desperate to get the word out about their [b][i](very great)[/i][/b] bikes that they're making"
Says it all!!
EROSION?
Have you ridden Lee/Cragg Quarry? in fact pretty much anywhere in Lancashire at the very least. The whole landscape is littered and soiled with our industrial past, a few skids on the ground don't make any difference in the grand scheme of things.
Re E-bikes, Im all for them and im a fit 100% human powered bicycle-er. Bike+modern technology=ebike whether you like it or not. There are still fully mechanical bikes available for luddites.
e-bikes do annoy some readers, as do fat bikes, singlespeeds, carbon bikes, 'cross bikes, steel bikes, women's bikes, cargo bikes, enduro bikes, pedal bikes and downhill bikes.
Pedal Bikes??? Grrrr! I hate them.
Balance bikes all the way for me. I like the solitude.
jekkyl - MemberThe trail erosion one always confuses me in whatever argument it is used. So what if people try to go round puddles or use a trail more, they're not gonna wear the mountain away!
You don't need to erode a mountain away to spoil a trail.
The big brands and now the publications have been pushing particularly hard all year, plus you have new OEs launching new motors & powerpacks
Without counting every feature and working out what proportion of these feature e-bikes, I don't think either of us can comment. However I did think it was ironic that the OP said was going to unsubscribe from the magazine, given that it's practically an e-bike free zone.
[i]There's one (subtle) e-bike advert just inside the front cover (the bit that I usually flick straight past)... and literally no mention of e-bikes for the subsequent 113 pages. None at all.[/i]
Must admit, having flicked through the new issue, I had to wonder what the hell the OP was on about.
Don't agree with Chipps though - they're not part of the mountain bike scene, they're part of the eBike scene. All the other stuff he says annoy people are part of the mountain bike scene (well, apart from 'cross bikes, but that's been covered).
You may or may not agree with me, I don't give a toss. I'm not annoyed, I'm not trolling, I'm not arguing about it or trying to change your mind.
I don't think that we can ignore e-bikes any more than we can ignore steel hardtails.
Careful
3 days of very heavy rain would do more damage than a summer's worth of mtbers. Just nonsense!
Obviously depends on the location, the surface and the traffic.
During 10UtB 2015 I watched the blue descent at Fort William erode from a nice mellow blue to something quite definitely red graded - rutted with rocks jutting through all over - and this is trail centre hardpack.
Fortunately they seem really on their game repairing trails there and by Relentless at the end of the year they had fixed it up again.
Anyone denying an ebike causes more erosion than a regular MTB clearly hasn't thought too much about it - more weight and more power is always going to equal more erosion - whether its a significant amount more - well i doubt anyone has measured any data on that.
And if we are really concerned, then maybe we should ban chubby MTBers too?
Anyway, short version: Erosion argument is a storm in a teacup, but to try to pretend it doesn't exist is a bit daft.
they're not part of the mountain bike scene, they're part of the eBike scene.
Only if you exclude them.
All the experience I've had of riding them or being in their presence has been in the context of riders of ebikes and bikes being on the same rides and socialising together riding the same trails. Very much part of the exact same scene.
It's not like someone in the regular riding group buys an ebike and only rides with their ebike friends and doesn't go out riding with the other guys anymore. In the same way that someone buys a dropper post doesn't then go and join a group of riders with dropper posts at the expense of their old riding mates who don't have dropper posts.
In short... MXers don't ride with mountain bikers. But ebikers DO ride with non ebikers because they are both, fundamentally, still mountain bikers. Same trails, same times, same gear, same beer, same scene.
I hate e-ebikes for a very good reason. I'm 64 and one day I'll have give up riding my pimped up carbon Jekyll and then I'll buy an e-bike and that will be the day I think that finally I'm old.
I will get an e-bike because I'm sure they'll keep the fun coming for more years.
Anyone denying an ebike causes more erosion than a regular MTB clearly hasn't thought too much about it - more weight and more power is always going to equal more erosion
It's about 15-20lbs more weight - less difference than the variation in body weight you get in a typical riding group. The extra power of a 500W motor equates to less than 1 bhp. Plus said motor cuts out above 15 mph.
As causes of trail damage go, they are never going to figure in the top 10, or even the top 50, even if they become much more widespread.
Only if you exclude them.
Well we should, they aren't properly pedal powered and they wouldn't be allowed in a bike race of any kind I can think of.
yourguitarhero - Member
men 50+ have lots of cash to spend.
Don't know where I went wrong then..
) Electronic assistance means extra torque. Extra torque means extra erosion, and trail erosion is bad
Best be banning Jared Graves off the trails then eh......
His power meter. Yup, 1900+ W
[img] 
[/img]
mr agreeable - 250W max or its no longer and ebike its just an electric motorcycle
Best be banning Jared Graves off the trails then eh......His power meter. Yup, 1900+ W
pfft, 9.5 KMH average, pfft
proudly riding my 100% human powered bicycle"
Swoon.
[img] 
[/img]
proudly riding my 100% human powered bicycle
Most of the people I've met from Bolton don't look 100% human.
thestabiliser - Member
E-bike coverage grumble
Niche, you're well into darkweb territory therePOSTED 8 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST
Rule 34.
Wonder if a ebike could actualy cause less trail damage because of the smooth deliver of that 250w of power, as opposed to my gibbon stomping efforts?
I'd like to make one point if I may:
We're in danger of this becoming tribal. An US and THEM thing. We're already arguing and (Generally not here) there's a lot of tossers getting too shouty. This needs to be avoided. It's just people on bikes and like it or not it's happening. I've changed my mind about e-bikes and made my peace with them. I'd urge others to do the same.
Love and peace etc 😉 🙂
Hippy
e-Hippy
Hipp-E
E bikes don't really worry me to be honest.
I would be gutted if the future held *only* E bike options but I think and hope that is unlikely.
Other than that I don't think it's a big problem.
Let people ride what they like (within reason!) as long as I am afforded the same choice to ride without a motor.
One day my choice may well change. Which is fine too.
PeterPoddys post for the win
Signed. E-Trout
I'm inclined to agree with the OP, a position reinforced by these threads as the e-bike advocates appear a right nasty lot.
E-by ek
I'm inclined to agree with the OP, a position reinforced by these threads as the e-bike advocates appear a right nasty lot.
TTFN princess.
IME both sides give as good as they get, the difference being the advocates, in general, have ridden the bikes they have adopted a stance on, rather than sticking their fingers in their ears and chanting 'motors plus bikes equals motorbikes, motors plus bikes equals motorbikes...' whilst steadfastly refusing to try them.
Point proven ta
*waves*
E-bikes are coming and that's the way it is. STW etc. can just carry on and pretend that they don't exist, or acknowledge them in their content (to predictable moaning).
I'd have thought ignoring them isn't really a sensible option for an outfit that wants to, you know, stay in business, and would we really want them to anyway?
WTF, we voted against e-bikes and all the other associated euro-shite, what are they still doing in the mag?
Read the new mag in bed this morning. [b]2[/b] ads for e-bikes. My world has collapsed.
🙂
@eddiebaby, if they had eBikes on the Mont Blanc trip they might have made it... :-0
