Forum Index > Trail Talk > Electric bikes soon to be humming along national park trails
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
MultiUser
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 190 | TRs
Location: United States
MultiUser
  Top

Member
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 5:53 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom wrote:
Out of all the designated non-motorized trails that allow bikes, how many do you feel might be suitable for class 1 ebikes?

Of all the trails you feel might be suitable for Class 1, why would you not allow Class 2 or 3?  Or beyond?  Surely if 250W/750W/20mph is ok, than 300W/800W/22mph is a tiny difference.

How much power is acceptable before nonmotorized becomes motorized?

The real problem here is trying to use nonmotorized vs motorized as trail designations, when it should be more based on criteria like impact to the trail, or speed of travel vs other uses.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Oct 2017
Posts: 563 | TRs

Pahoehoe
  Top

Member
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 5:56 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom wrote:
Out of all the designated non-motorized trails that allow bikes, how many do you feel might be suitable for class 1 ebikes?

I'm not sure.

I think access needs to be offered slowly as we see what their impact is, how technology developes and how the ebike community developes and what their cultural values are.

Currently I think they should be allowed on most double track/fire roads and i do not have a problem with them on shuttle trails.

If I thought they would follow rules I would suggest opening a few trails in areas such as tiger, galby, raging river to see how it plays out.

Users have displayed an inability to follow rules so I'm in favor of waiting and seeing.

I would definitely support allowing the ebike community to build some trails in established areas.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
MultiUser
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 190 | TRs
Location: United States
MultiUser
  Top

Member
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 6:01 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe wrote:
If I thought they were follow rules I would suggest opening a few trails in areas such as tiger, galby, raging river to see how it plays out.

Galby is also private land, though subject to a publicly owned recreation easement, where the owners have chosen not allow ebikes.  It is also widely disregarded from what I have heard from Bellingham riders.

Some good listens:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/12-eric-brown/id1457798782?i=1000444807344

http://frontlinesmtb.com/2018/04/13/ep-39-the-emtb-part-4-panel-discussion/
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 6:06 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe wrote:
I'm not.  I'm invested in not having ebikes lumped into the same category as human powered bikes.

Ebikes are motorized no matter how you try to say they arent, they are.

They are their own user group and need to be treated as such when access decisions are made.

I haven't seen a single person in this discussion claim ebikes are not motorized, so I'm wondering who you're referring to.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 11139 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
  Top

><((((>
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 6:10 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
RodF wrote:
https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2019/12/peer-sues-overturn-expanded-e-bike-access-national-parks

rumpelstiltskin, commenting on the article cited above by Rod wrote:
The problem with this decision on E-Bikes is not whether it is or is not a good decision on E-Bikes.  This problem is far more important than that.  The problem here is that the manner in which this decision was made circumvented key elements of due process and the rule of law and circumventing key elements of due process or the rule of law sets a precedent that educated, literate, civilized Americans cannot afford to allow.

(* emphasis added *)

And therein lies the real issue: Decisions like this benefit only the lawyers who will do battle over this kind of stuff for the next decade at the US taxpayers expense.
Whether or not, in the end, ebikes are allowed or not allowed, is a minor issue when viewed in the larger context of what the current administration in Washington DC has managed to create in terms of administrative chaos and endless legal battles that will drag on for years.

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 11139 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
  Top

><((((>
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 6:18 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Mike Murray, commenting on the article cited above by Rod wrote:
36 CFR Section 1.4 of the NPS general regulations states: "Bicycle means every device propelled solely by human power upon which a person or persons may ride on land, having one, two, or more wheels, except a manual wheelchair."

In other words:
The "governing by executive fiat" move on this was done in violation of the NPS's own regulations.

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 16501 | TRs

Tom
  Top

Admin
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 6:45 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MultiUser wrote:
Tom wrote:
Out of all the designated non-motorized trails that allow bikes, how many do you feel might be suitable for class 1 ebikes?

Of all the trails you feel might be suitable for Class 1, why would you not allow Class 2 or 3?  Or beyond?  Surely if 250W/750W/20mph is ok, than 300W/800W/22mph is a tiny difference.

How much power is acceptable before nonmotorized becomes motorized?

The real problem here is trying to use nonmotorized vs motorized as trail designations, when it should be more based on criteria like impact to the trail, or speed of travel vs other uses.

I mentioned class 1 just because people get their knickers in a bunch re. throttle or higher speed limiters. Personally, I don't see much difference between class 1 and  2. One allows for throttle but I wouldn't say throttle makes class 2 any less suitable knowing how throttle is typically used on an e-bike.  And class 3 really isn't materially different than class 1 other than a speed limiter that kicks in at 28 mph. On trail I'm not sure the speed limiter really makes that much difference because you're not going to be wanting that assistance beyond 20 mph assuming you even get there. The key is the 750 watt limit which I think is reasonable - beyond that I think you get into a gray area. That's one thing I like about the NP memorandum is they didn't get too caught up in class 1 vs 3 and relied on the legal definition of ebike and the 750 watt limit. I understand why they mandated no throttle because they want to avoid bikes that are more akin to motorcycles than real bikes.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MultiUser
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 190 | TRs
Location: United States
MultiUser
  Top

Member
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 6:47 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom wrote:
MultiUser wrote:
Tom wrote:
Out of all the designated non-motorized trails that allow bikes, how many do you feel might be suitable for class 1 ebikes?

Of all the trails you feel might be suitable for Class 1, why would you not allow Class 2 or 3?  Or beyond?  Surely if 250W/750W/20mph is ok, than 300W/800W/22mph is a tiny difference.

How much power is acceptable before nonmotorized becomes motorized?

The real problem here is trying to use nonmotorized vs motorized as trail designations, when it should be more based on criteria like impact to the trail, or speed of travel vs other uses.

I mentioned class 1 just because people get their knickers in a bunch re. throttle or higher speed limiters. Personally, I don't see much difference between class 1 and  2. One allows for throttle but I wouldn't say throttle makes class 2 any less suitable knowing how throttle is typically used on an e-bike.  And class 3 really isn't materially different than class 1 other than a speed limiter that kicks in at 28 mph. On trail I'm not sure the speed limiter really makes that much difference because you're not going to be wanting that assistance beyond 20 mph. The key is the 750 watt limit which I think is reasonable - beyond that I think you get into a gray area. That's one thing I like about the national Parks memorandum is they didn't get to caught up in class 1 vs 3 and relied on the legal definition of ebike. I understand why they mandated no throttle because they want to avoid bikes that are more akin to motorcycles than real bikes.

Put another way - since impacts are similar, which trails currently open to hikers but not bikes would you open to bikes?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 4321 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
  Top

Faster than light
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 6:52 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe wrote:
Tom wrote:
Pahoehoe wrote:
treeswarper wrote:
Anybody got an answer? Or is this in the same category as those mysterious ebikes that can go 35mph uphills on trails? I did hit 7mph up the steep hill today. Only need 18mph improvement and by golly, I'll be ready for trails! biggrin.gif

If you don't think this can go 35 mph uphill there is no hope for you...


https://hpcbikes.com/collections/electric-bikes/products/scout-pro

You can get 3000w of power.

Looks no different than a class 1.  I know a guy that can make you any sticker you need to appear legal.

Nobody is going to get that bike to poach your precious MTB trails. It's for people with small appendages that want to go fast on pavement.  If they have $6K to blow on an eMTB they're going to invest in a legit name brand bike which is going to have a 250W nominal motor or they're going to get something like the Luna X1 which is also focused on being a legit eMTB with good geometry and lighter weight taking precedence over heavier bike with more powerful motor.  My X1 could barely hit 25 MPH on pavement.  Even if I had gotten the ludi controller for double the power it's just going to provide more low speed torque, not speed.  It's geared for trail use not for going fast.  Sure, you could gear it faster, but people aren't buying that bike to tweak it to go fast on MTB trails.

How do you know this?  Mountain bikers like to go fast.  Many mountain bikers also ride motos.  They like to go fast, too.  In Western Washington there isnt much for legal moto trails.

A fast ebike bridges a gap.  You might not like to go fast, but people like to go fast.  Plenty would spend the money for a real fast bike.

Also that fast bike I posted has good geometry and modern high end parts.   No reason not to choose it if you want more power.

Plenty of people have money to burn and want speed and power.

That's not a pavement bike, look at the tires.  Those knobs are made for dirt and mud.  Also look at the geometry of the bike itself, again, designed for trails.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 4321 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
  Top

Faster than light
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 6:53 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski wrote:
(a) Some people just can't find enough stuff to complain about.

I know, right?  "There are non-motorized places I can't take my motorized vehicle to!!"
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 16501 | TRs

Tom
  Top

Admin
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 6:55 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
When I think of typical hiking trails I can't think of many that would be suitable for mountain bikes. Just too steep and rocky. I don't think it's as giant as a leap of faith to identify bike trails might be suitable for e-bikes.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 16501 | TRs

Tom
  Top

Admin
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 7:16 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Cyclopath wrote:
Pahoehoe wrote:
Tom wrote:
Pahoehoe wrote:
treeswarper wrote:
Anybody got an answer? Or is this in the same category as those mysterious ebikes that can go 35mph uphills on trails? I did hit 7mph up the steep hill today. Only need 18mph improvement and by golly, I'll be ready for trails! biggrin.gif

If you don't think this can go 35 mph uphill there is no hope for you...


https://hpcbikes.com/collections/electric-bikes/products/scout-pro

You can get 3000w of power.

Looks no different than a class 1.  I know a guy that can make you any sticker you need to appear legal.

Nobody is going to get that bike to poach your precious MTB trails. It's for people with small appendages that want to go fast on pavement.  If they have $6K to blow on an eMTB they're going to invest in a legit name brand bike which is going to have a 250W nominal motor or they're going to get something like the Luna X1 which is also focused on being a legit eMTB with good geometry and lighter weight taking precedence over heavier bike with more powerful motor.  My X1 could barely hit 25 MPH on pavement.  Even if I had gotten the ludi controller for double the power it's just going to provide more low speed torque, not speed.  It's geared for trail use not for going fast.  Sure, you could gear it faster, but people aren't buying that bike to tweak it to go fast on MTB trails.

How do you know this?  Mountain bikers like to go fast.  Many mountain bikers also ride motos.  They like to go fast, too.  In Western Washington there isnt much for legal moto trails.

A fast ebike bridges a gap.  You might not like to go fast, but people like to go fast.  Plenty would spend the money for a real fast bike.

Also that fast bike I posted has good geometry and modern high end parts.   No reason not to choose it if you want more power.

Plenty of people have money to burn and want speed and power.

That's not a pavement bike, look at the tires.  Those knobs are made for dirt and mud.  Also look at the geometry of the bike itself, again, designed for trails.

No it is not really designed for trails at least not in the sense you guys are talking about it being 3,000 watt, 45 mph, blazing up trails, weighing less than 50 lb and passing as a legit e-bike although there's no reason it couldn't pass if you put a limiter on it.  Go ahead and google their speed test video.  The video I found needed a fairly large battery pack on the 2000 watt test bike. The 3000 watt version would probably require a larger pack to accommodate 72 volts.  On the 2000 watt bike their 145 pound rider hit 40 miles an hour on flat pavement ducking down to minimize wind resistance. A legit eMTB with full suspension is going to run circles around that thing on trail. Just because you put mountain bike tires on a hardtail bike does not make it a mountain bike any more than a rad rover. But it makes for good fodder for people who have no clue about e-bikes. Pull up the comments at elektrek for that bike as well. Most consider that thing to be a joke.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 7351 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
  Top

Snarky Member
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 7:16 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom wrote:
When I think of typical hiking trails I can't think of many that would be suitable for mountain bikes. Just too steep and rocky. I don't think it's as giant as a leap of faith to identify bike trails might be suitable for e-bikes.

Looping around to the OP -- the two trails within Mt Rainier NP that were opened to eBike usage by this order are the abandoned Carbon river road and the abandoned West Side road that had previously been open to automobile traffic in past decades until repeated storm/flood damage resulted in the NPS "converting" the road to a cyclist and hiker "trail" by not repairing it.

Anywho -- there are several USFS trails in and around Cle Elum that are open to both hikers and cyclists -- but the Cle Elum ranger district so far has not opened to eBikes  -- in fact the Okanagan-Wenatchee web page for mountain biking contains the following text:

Quote:
E-Bikes (with full electric motor power or pedal assist) are not allowed on trails designated non-motorized

So at least in these examples -- it doesn't seem to me that the NPS or USFS managers have acted particularly rashly to expand eBike usage wiley-nily.

Whether the Wilderness Watch lawsuit finds fault in the NPS process will be interesting -- it will also be interesting to see how effective this lawsuit is for WW in generating additional donations to support their mission -- controversy is usual is good for fund raising.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 11139 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
  Top

><((((>
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 7:26 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Randy wrote:
"...it doesn't seem to me that the NPS or USFS managers have acted particularly rashly to expand eBike usage wiley-nily..."

No, they did not.
And why would they?
They are working at the local level and hear the local noise. They're not in the bubble of Washington DC, completely disconnected from the reality of the real world.

I cannot imagine the current Superintendents at either Olympic or Mt. Rainier National Parks going any farther than they have already by allowing ebikes anywhere but where they've already allowed bicycles - the other trails within those two parks are, for the most part, simply not suitable for wheeled vehicles.

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 4321 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
  Top

Faster than light
PostTue Dec 10, 2019 7:32 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom wrote:
When I think of typical hiking trails I can't think of many that would be suitable for mountain bikes. Just too steep and rocky. I don't think it's as giant as a leap of faith to identify bike trails might be suitable for e-bikes.

Are you familiar with the Cutthroat Pass and Angles Staircase trails?  Those are both great fun on MTBs and cherished by cyclists.  They're steep and rocky, that doesn't make trails unsuitable, it just requires care.  I've hiked on a lot of trails that would be great fun on a bike, except that bikes aren't allowed.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Trail Talk > Electric bikes soon to be humming along national park trails
  Happy Birthday DayveeB, Movenhike, clerr!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy