As the Government is grasping at straws, it’s if polling is to believe set
up for a record loss at the upcoming election, remarkable considering it
came in with a healthy majority! But such is politics!

But hence it’s suggesting increasing power for e bikes ie doubling from 250
to 500 watts.

It’s not been popular among the bike industry.

<https://www.globalcyclingnetwork.com/general/news/e-bike-power-limit-ba-and-act-urge-bike-industry-to-resist-500w-proposal>

The main argument is really with power will come responsibly ie legislation
ie be mopeds in all but name.

It’s probable that the government is looking at these “bikes”
<https://cyclingindustry.news/fully-charged-your-new-van-is-now-an-electric-cargo-bike/>

Ie a small van that is legally a bike, I’m not a fan from the get go as
they are large bulky things driven poorly with naff all visibility!

More bike like cargo bikes are fine still large but they have good
visibility and tend to be better ridden.

I suspect this will not happen as takes time to pass legislation and the
government has limited time.

Roger Merriman

Am Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:57:23 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
<roger@sarlet.com>:

>As the Government is grasping at straws, it’s if polling is to believe set
>up for a record loss at the upcoming election, remarkable considering it
>came in with a healthy majority! But such is politics!
>
>But hence it’s suggesting increasing power for e bikes ie doubling from 250
>to 500 watts.
>
>It’s not been popular among the bike industry.
>
><https://www.globalcyclingnetwork.com/general/news/e-bike-power-limit-ba-and-act-urge-bike-industry-to-resist-500w-proposal>
>
>The main argument is really with power will come responsibly ie legislation
>ie be mopeds in all but name.

In Germany and, AFAIK most of Europe, an bicycle powered by a motor
having a rated continuous power ("Nenndauerleistung", in German) of 250
Watt, limited to 25 km/h actually has no relevant legal power limit.
Unfortunately, it was made into a bicycle by law years ago anyway, after
selling it with the "pedal assist up to 100 percent" mantra to the
general public.

It didn't last long.

Most motor models sold by Bosch for use in those bicyles (called
"Pedelec" in Germany) are advertised with "up to additional 340 percent,
up to 600 Watt" nowadays. A rated continuous power of 250 Watt is no
real limitation, because it just means that a moving average over 30
Minutes must not exeed 250 Watt. That leaves a lot of headroom.

Even these aren't bicycles, these are low powered motorcycles, aka
mopeds. So after selling the concept that easily to the lawmakers, it
makes sense to double up again.

Problem is, low powered electrical mopeds with pedal assist could have
been a good idea, when regulated somewhat similar other motorized
vehicles*). But the general public has been made believe that so called
bicycles having more motor power and endurance than your average Tour de
France idol still _are_ bicycles. They aren't. Everybody who acutally
uses a real bicycle knows that training for just ten or twenty percent
more muscle power endurance is really HARD.

*) Similar, but different. No speed limit, but a power limit, say 100 W
and 100 Wh, for example

--
Wir danken für die Beachtung aller Sicherheitsbestimmungen

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 12:19:23 +0200, Wolfgang Strobl
<news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:

>Am Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:57:23 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
><roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>>As the Government is grasping at straws, it’s if polling is to believe set
>>up for a record loss at the upcoming election, remarkable considering it
>>came in with a healthy majority! But such is politics!
>>
>>But hence it’s suggesting increasing power for e bikes ie doubling from 250
>>to 500 watts.
>>
>>It’s not been popular among the bike industry.
>>
>><https://www.globalcyclingnetwork.com/general/news/e-bike-power-limit-ba-and-act-urge-bike-industry-to-resist-500w-proposal>
>>
>>The main argument is really with power will come responsibly ie legislation
>>ie be mopeds in all but name.
>
>In Germany and, AFAIK most of Europe, an bicycle powered by a motor
>having a rated continuous power ("Nenndauerleistung", in German) of 250
>Watt, limited to 25 km/h actually has no relevant legal power limit.
>Unfortunately, it was made into a bicycle by law years ago anyway, after
>selling it with the "pedal assist up to 100 percent" mantra to the
>general public.
>
>It didn't last long.
>
>Most motor models sold by Bosch for use in those bicyles (called
>"Pedelec" in Germany) are advertised with "up to additional 340 percent,
>up to 600 Watt" nowadays. A rated continuous power of 250 Watt is no
>real limitation, because it just means that a moving average over 30
>Minutes must not exeed 250 Watt. That leaves a lot of headroom.
>
>Even these aren't bicycles, these are low powered motorcycles, aka
>mopeds. So after selling the concept that easily to the lawmakers, it
>makes sense to double up again.
>
>Problem is, low powered electrical mopeds with pedal assist could have
>been a good idea, when regulated somewhat similar other motorized
>vehicles*). But the general public has been made believe that so called
>bicycles having more motor power and endurance than your average Tour de
>France idol still _are_ bicycles. They aren't. Everybody who acutally
>uses a real bicycle knows that training for just ten or twenty percent
>more muscle power endurance is really HARD.
>
>
>*) Similar, but different. No speed limit, but a power limit, say 100 W
>and 100 Wh, for example

In my opinion, any ebike that can apply power at speeds over 20MPH
should require a licence, registration, and insurance, and only be
allowed where other motorcycles are allowed.

Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> Am Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:57:23 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>> As the Government is grasping at straws, it’s if polling is to believe set
>> up for a record loss at the upcoming election, remarkable considering it
>> came in with a healthy majority! But such is politics!
>>
>> But hence it’s suggesting increasing power for e bikes ie doubling from 250
>> to 500 watts.
>>
>> It’s not been popular among the bike industry.
>>
>> <https://www.globalcyclingnetwork.com/general/news/e-bike-power-limit-ba-and-act-urge-bike-industry-to-resist-500w-proposal>
>>
>> The main argument is really with power will come responsibly ie legislation
>> ie be mopeds in all but name.
>
> In Germany and, AFAIK most of Europe, an bicycle powered by a motor
> having a rated continuous power ("Nenndauerleistung", in German) of 250
> Watt, limited to 25 km/h actually has no relevant legal power limit.
> Unfortunately, it was made into a bicycle by law years ago anyway, after
> selling it with the "pedal assist up to 100 percent" mantra to the
> general public.
>
> It didn't last long.
>
> Most motor models sold by Bosch for use in those bicyles (called
> "Pedelec" in Germany) are advertised with "up to additional 340 percent,
> up to 600 Watt" nowadays. A rated continuous power of 250 Watt is no
> real limitation, because it just means that a moving average over 30
> Minutes must not exeed 250 Watt. That leaves a lot of headroom.
>
> Even these aren't bicycles, these are low powered motorcycles, aka
> mopeds. So after selling the concept that easily to the lawmakers, it
> makes sense to double up again.

Who is? As Bosch and others in the industry in fact difficult to find folks
in the industry who think it’s a good idea!
>
> Problem is, low powered electrical mopeds with pedal assist could have
> been a good idea, when regulated somewhat similar other motorized
> vehicles*). But the general public has been made believe that so called
> bicycles having more motor power and endurance than your average Tour de
> France idol still _are_ bicycles. They aren't. Everybody who acutally
> uses a real bicycle knows that training for just ten or twenty percent
> more muscle power endurance is really HARD.

Maybe the higher speed limited bikes that mainland Europe and USA have but
uk bikes top out with assistance at 15mph, I’ve ridden e bikes and with
others on e bikes, motorcycles they are not, on faster roads or even mild
gravel stuff I’m above the limiter my mates have told me off before now for
holding just above the limiter!
>
>
> *) Similar, but different. No speed limit, but a power limit, say 100 W
> and 100 Wh, for example
>
Roger Merriman

Am Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:34:15 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
<roger@sarlet.com>:

>Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:

....

>> Problem is, low powered electrical mopeds with pedal assist could have
>> been a good idea, when regulated somewhat similar other motorized
>> vehicles*). But the general public has been made believe that so called
>> bicycles having more motor power and endurance than your average Tour de
>> France idol still _are_ bicycles. They aren't. Everybody who acutally
>> uses a real bicycle knows that training for just ten or twenty percent
>> more muscle power endurance is really HARD.

>Maybe the higher speed limited bikes that mainland Europe and USA have but
>uk bikes top out with assistance at 15mph,

I was contrasting "Pedelec", E-Bikes having a rated continuous power
("Nenndauerleistung", in German) of 250 Watt, limited to 25 km/h (that's
15.5 mph) to a radically different design, both technically and
regulatory different, that could have been and would have been better,
for various reasons.

>I’ve ridden e bikes and with
>others on e bikes, motorcycles they are not,

They sure are

>on faster roads or even mild
>gravel stuff I’m above the limiter my mates have told me off before now for
>holding just above the limiter!

So what. A car limited to 25 km/h / 14 mph still is a car. Going
downhill on a good road with my race bike I can outrun most people
riding mopeds limited to 25, 40 or 45 km/h, like these
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moped>. Your statement neither explains
nor proves anything.

A bicycle is a human-powered vehicle. Adding ten or twenty percent of
motor power via "motor-assist" to your own power for an indefinite long
time period would already be stretching the meaning of "human-powered"
far too much. Ask your fellow riders in a real competition. Or just
try to get that much stronger by exercising.

Doubling your own power, adding 100 % and calling that "pedal assist" is
a bad joke. But as I said, most new motors from Bosch (and others, I
presume) "assist" with up to 340 %. That isn't a joke, anymore.

--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions

Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> Am Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:34:15 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>> Problem is, low powered electrical mopeds with pedal assist could have
>>> been a good idea, when regulated somewhat similar other motorized
>>> vehicles*). But the general public has been made believe that so called
>>> bicycles having more motor power and endurance than your average Tour de
>>> France idol still _are_ bicycles. They aren't. Everybody who acutally
>>> uses a real bicycle knows that training for just ten or twenty percent
>>> more muscle power endurance is really HARD.
>
>> Maybe the higher speed limited bikes that mainland Europe and USA have but
>> uk bikes top out with assistance at 15mph,
>
> I was contrasting "Pedelec", E-Bikes having a rated continuous power
> ("Nenndauerleistung", in German) of 250 Watt, limited to 25 km/h (that's
> 15.5 mph) to a radically different design, both technically and
> regulatory different, that could have been and would have been better,
> for various reasons.
>
>
>> I’ve ridden e bikes and with
>> others on e bikes, motorcycles they are not,
>
> They sure are

E MTB are 20/25kg all in, which is a noticeable heft over a trail MTB
14/16KG and yes you do notice the weight with both the benefits ie
suspension works better ie more of the mass is sprung than unsprung for
example, but also its downsides ie less manoeuvrable needs to be muscled
though things, hence some E lite MTB are available with weights between the
two.

Electric motorbikes for off road use are another 100KG on top of that, it’s
a very different experience.

Let alone that E bikes power output is still within realms of human
capacity, ie peak output is sub 1000watts ie 600 ish which is absolutely
reachable, even by club cyclists some Pros such as Chris Hoy where in the
2,500 watt range which really is unreachable for most.

E bike be they E MTB’s such as my mates or the hire bikes are very much
within the human scale, point in case as someone who is more Chris Hoy than
Chris Froome I pull away faster from the lights than the e bikes do, and
certainly in uk they will hit the limiter and are almost certainly less fit
than I so on wider more open roads such as the Embankment they are very
easy to pass.

Motorbikes unless they are too wide to filter properly are just gone, even
low powered off road Motorcycles (electric) produce 33000 watts it’s
another level all together.
>
>> on faster roads or even mild
>> gravel stuff I’m above the limiter my mates have told me off before now for
>> holding just above the limiter!
>
> So what. A car limited to 25 km/h / 14 mph still is a car. Going
> downhill on a good road with my race bike I can outrun most people
> riding mopeds limited to 25, 40 or 45 km/h, like these
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moped>. Your statement neither explains
> nor proves anything.
>
> A bicycle is a human-powered vehicle. Adding ten or twenty percent of
> motor power via "motor-assist" to your own power for an indefinite long
> time period would already be stretching the meaning of "human-powered"
> far too much. Ask your fellow riders in a real competition. Or just
> try to get that much stronger by exercising.
>
> Doubling your own power, adding 100 % and calling that "pedal assist" is
> a bad joke. But as I said, most new motors from Bosch (and others, I
> presume) "assist" with up to 340 %. That isn't a joke, anymore.
>
>
Have you either ridden E bikes or with friends who have them? Personally
it’s like riding with very fit club mates which I also have.

Roger Merriman

On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 21:33:59 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

>Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>> Am Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:34:15 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>
>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> Problem is, low powered electrical mopeds with pedal assist could have
>>>> been a good idea, when regulated somewhat similar other motorized
>>>> vehicles*). But the general public has been made believe that so called
>>>> bicycles having more motor power and endurance than your average Tour de
>>>> France idol still _are_ bicycles. They aren't. Everybody who acutally
>>>> uses a real bicycle knows that training for just ten or twenty percent
>>>> more muscle power endurance is really HARD.
>>
>>> Maybe the higher speed limited bikes that mainland Europe and USA have but
>>> uk bikes top out with assistance at 15mph,
>>
>> I was contrasting "Pedelec", E-Bikes having a rated continuous power
>> ("Nenndauerleistung", in German) of 250 Watt, limited to 25 km/h (that's
>> 15.5 mph) to a radically different design, both technically and
>> regulatory different, that could have been and would have been better,
>> for various reasons.
>>
>>
>>> I’ve ridden e bikes and with
>>> others on e bikes, motorcycles they are not,
>>
>> They sure are
>
>E MTB are 20/25kg all in, which is a noticeable heft over a trail MTB
>14/16KG and yes you do notice the weight with both the benefits ie
>suspension works better ie more of the mass is sprung than unsprung for
>example, but also its downsides ie less manoeuvrable needs to be muscled
>though things, hence some E lite MTB are available with weights between the
>two.
>
>Electric motorbikes for off road use are another 100KG on top of that, it’s
>a very different experience.
>
>Let alone that E bikes power output is still within realms of human
>capacity, ie peak output is sub 1000watts ie 600 ish which is absolutely
>reachable, even by club cyclists some Pros such as Chris Hoy where in the
>2,500 watt range which really is unreachable for most.
>
>E bike be they E MTB’s such as my mates or the hire bikes are very much
>within the human scale, point in case as someone who is more Chris Hoy than
>Chris Froome I pull away faster from the lights than the e bikes do, and
>certainly in uk they will hit the limiter and are almost certainly less fit
>than I so on wider more open roads such as the Embankment they are very
>easy to pass.
>
>Motorbikes unless they are too wide to filter properly are just gone, even
>low powered off road Motorcycles (electric) produce 33000 watts it’s
>another level all together.
>>
>>> on faster roads or even mild
>>> gravel stuff I’m above the limiter my mates have told me off before now for
>>> holding just above the limiter!
>>
>> So what. A car limited to 25 km/h / 14 mph still is a car. Going
>> downhill on a good road with my race bike I can outrun most people
>> riding mopeds limited to 25, 40 or 45 km/h, like these
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moped>. Your statement neither explains
>> nor proves anything.
>>
>> A bicycle is a human-powered vehicle. Adding ten or twenty percent of
>> motor power via "motor-assist" to your own power for an indefinite long
>> time period would already be stretching the meaning of "human-powered"
>> far too much. Ask your fellow riders in a real competition. Or just
>> try to get that much stronger by exercising.
>>
>> Doubling your own power, adding 100 % and calling that "pedal assist" is
>> a bad joke. But as I said, most new motors from Bosch (and others, I
>> presume) "assist" with up to 340 %. That isn't a joke, anymore.
>>
>>
>Have you either ridden E bikes or with friends who have them? Personally
>it’s like riding with very fit club mates which I also have.
>
>Roger Merriman

I don't ride with anyone, let alone with someone on a motorbike.

Am Wed, 17 Apr 2024 21:33:59 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
<roger@sarlet.com>:

>Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>> Am Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:34:15 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>
>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:

[... some aspects you didn't respond to, deleted for brevity]

>>
>>
>>> I’ve ridden e bikes and with
>>> others on e bikes, motorcycles they are not,
>>
>> They sure are
>
>E MTB are 20/25kg all in, which is a noticeable heft over a trail MTB
>14/16KG and yes you do notice the weight with both the benefits ie
>suspension works better ie more of the mass is sprung than unsprung for
>example, but also its downsides ie less manoeuvrable needs to be muscled
>though things, hence some E lite MTB are available with weights between the
>two.

Adding a motor and an electronic controller simulating the behaviour of
a bicycle is what defines the current generation of 25 km/h e-bikes:
these are motorcycles, but give the illusion of a human powered vehicle.
Of course you rarely notice the additional mass caused by motor,
battery, suspension and perhaps a heavier frame. That's the very point
of that concept!

My current bicycle is based on a gravel bike/randonneur frame and
somewhat on the heavy side for a bike with drop bars, but still weights
less than 10 kg. Adding fenders and a rack using the available mounting
points on the frame, or choosing a suspension fork wouldn't have made it
that much heavier. But as a low powered human with limited endurance, I
rather be able to ride up hills a little steeper, be able to ride a
little faster on flat ground and do it for a few more kilometers. So
even half a kg counts.

With most of the motors that Bosch offers for 25 km/h e-bikes, I
wouldn't have any of these concerns. I could ride up and down Mont
Ventoux a few times without breaking a sweat.

In short: those e-bikes aren't just somewhat motorized, they are
_heavily_ motorized, a lot more motorized than necessary to give an
noticable advantage over a a person riding a human powered bicycle.

>
>Electric motorbikes for off road use are another 100KG on top of that, it’s
>a very different experience.

Motorcycles do indeed come in a wide range of power and sizes. However,
this does not turn low-powered motorcycles into bicycles.

>
>Let alone that E bikes power output is still within realms of human
>capacity, ie peak output is sub 1000watts ie 600 ish which is absolutely
>reachable, even by club cyclists some Pros such as Chris Hoy where in the
>2,500 watt range which really is unreachable for most.

That isn't really the case, see below.

But thats beside the point. The point being, giving a weak person the
peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy way
of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.

Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle simulation
done by its controller. And you convently ignore that most humans
aren't professional competetive cyclists.

I am, at least according to Garmins profiling, in the best 5 percent of
my age class wrt VO2max, I'm still able to ride 100 km / 1000 m
cumulative altitude gain
<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pluspora/plainpostings/20240315t0923-2024_03_14_bonn_effelsberg.html>
(German language article)
<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pluspora/plainpostings/20240213t1101-2022_08_08_bonn_effelsberg_willerscheid_by_racing_bike_https_diasp.html>
(English)
but I'm unable to produce more than about 90-100 W of sustained power
and ride faster than about 20 km/h on average, for distances and
altitudes like that.

But consider my power curve. I too could do a measured peak power of
~1000W - once, in July 2018, for one second. I even could do a peak of
400 W - during the last three months, for twenty seconds. Even almost
250 W peak power (232 W, in fact) was doable over 30 seconds - once, in
spring 2017. But I barely reached 250 W during the last four weeks,
once, for 20 seconds.

On the other hand, if I wouldn't mind carrying a spare battery in the
panniers of an e-bike, I could ride the whole day and a night on flat
ground, without needing more power than just walking around slowly.
Assuming the lowest non-eco "assist" modes of just doubling your power,
you'll need only about 50 W of your own power for that, on a bicyle much
heavier than necessary. You wouldn't even need a spare battery, that
way, there are e-bikes with two standard packs a 500 Wh builtin, that's
good for 20 hours, then.

Of course, I could choose one of the turbo+ modes, say, 340 Percent,
select one of the more "sporty" E-Bikes, less weight, better
aerodynamics, ride 22 km/h, and use even less of my own power. Even
better, from the point of view of a motorized bicycle, I now could use
that turbo mode for doing those pesky six percent ascents much faster.
Needing about 120 W, I can do these with about 6-8 km/h. Doing these
with 22 km/h, and acounting for the weight of motor and battery, needs
about 407 W, with only 92 W of my own muscle power, using that turbo
mode. Perfect!

But not so fast ;-), 309 W > 250 W, this might run into the one half
hour limitation. Could that become a problem? Nah, not for me. That
cumulative altitude gain of 500-2000 m at max doesn't contain any
continous ascents of more than 300 m, in fact it is going up and down
between 60 m above Nn and ~600 m at max from here.

So there is no need not to use that 340 Percent turbo mode all the time
for riding up those hills at max speed, just like with any motorized
vehicle. Neither is there a need to spend those 90-100 W on those
hills, not even when going up some which are twice or trice as steep. 15
km/h is good enough and still twice as fast as doing it with muscle
power. Using turbo mode, I could do that with while spending only about
55 W of my own power. Same with 12 % with an easily done 8 km/h.

The latter example is interesting insofar, as I regularely ride up a
steep 12 % hill nearby, for fun and excercise. About 50 m of altitude
gain, done about ten times. It is difficult because it needs (and
trains) both strengh and coordination. Strength, because riding uphill
on broken asphalt at a low speed of about 4 km/h still needs more power
than I can sustain for a long time, coordination, because at that speed
riding around obstacles without slowing down even more, needs some
skill. On the positive side, it not only needs these capabilities, it
creates these capabilities, over time. An e-bike used as intended, like
most, does not.

I used an opportunity to try an 25 km/h e-bike on a steep hill over a
day during our vacation last year, because our host gave it to us as
part of the rent. Riding up to a small village on top op a nearby
hill, a gradient between 8 % in the lower and 11 percent in the upper
part, riding a few times up and down there allowed me to assess that old
e-bike from AFAIR 2016.

Riding up such a hill by e-bike is at least as easy as using a gas
powered moped from the sixties, and a lot easier than, say, riding a
Velo Solex there, which nobody who isn't out of his mind would call a
bicycle. Modern e-bikes became much better during the last decade, from
the point of view of people selling that stuff. Turbo modes got some
percent points more and more customization, the additional modes make it
difficult to estimate the actuall proportion. The simulation has been
smoothed and the illusion has been perfected.

For reference

<http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm>

"Roadster" as a bicycle type in the english version is called
"Hollandrad" (dutch type bicycle) in the orignal German language
version. Select roadster, metric units, add 10 kg to the bicyle weight,
clear power, type "20" into the speed field, hit calculate.

[repetionions, omitted]

>> Doubling your own power, adding 100 % and calling that "pedal assist" is
>> a bad joke. But as I said, most new motors from Bosch (and others, I
>> presume) "assist" with up to 340 %. That isn't a joke, anymore.
>>
>>

>Have you either ridden E bikes or with friends who have them?

For what purpose?

I have, for the latest event see above. I don't need friends with
e-bikes to ride with, in order to watch, measure and assess the
behaviour of e-bikers. While doing my tours through the region, I have
to ride up to and cross a highland about 100 m above where I live. It is
a forest called "Kottenforst", which serves as a local recreational area
for my home town, too. On that way and while crossing that area I have
seen enough behaviours to recognize a collection of types.

Even better, my bicycle is equipped with a powermeter, so I have a
continuous display (and a log) of how much power I use, plus additional
relevant data, like speed, gradient and distance. Riding behind somebody
at the same speed gives a quite good estimate of the lower bound of the
necessary power of a clumsy e-bike. Estimating the real power,
considering the type of bicycle and rider isn't that difficult, either.

On 4/18/2024 7:43 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
> Am Wed, 17 Apr 2024 21:33:59 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>> Am Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:34:15 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>
>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>
> [... some aspects you didn't respond to, deleted for brevity]
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I’ve ridden e bikes and with
>>>> others on e bikes, motorcycles they are not,
>>>
>>> They sure are
>>
>> E MTB are 20/25kg all in, which is a noticeable heft over a trail MTB
>> 14/16KG and yes you do notice the weight with both the benefits ie
>> suspension works better ie more of the mass is sprung than unsprung for
>> example, but also its downsides ie less manoeuvrable needs to be muscled
>> though things, hence some E lite MTB are available with weights between the
>> two.
>
> Adding a motor and an electronic controller simulating the behaviour of
> a bicycle is what defines the current generation of 25 km/h e-bikes:
> these are motorcycles, but give the illusion of a human powered vehicle.
> Of course you rarely notice the additional mass caused by motor,
> battery, suspension and perhaps a heavier frame. That's the very point
> of that concept!
>
> My current bicycle is based on a gravel bike/randonneur frame and
> somewhat on the heavy side for a bike with drop bars, but still weights
> less than 10 kg. Adding fenders and a rack using the available mounting
> points on the frame, or choosing a suspension fork wouldn't have made it
> that much heavier. But as a low powered human with limited endurance, I
> rather be able to ride up hills a little steeper, be able to ride a
> little faster on flat ground and do it for a few more kilometers. So
> even half a kg counts.
>
> With most of the motors that Bosch offers for 25 km/h e-bikes, I
> wouldn't have any of these concerns. I could ride up and down Mont
> Ventoux a few times without breaking a sweat.
>
> In short: those e-bikes aren't just somewhat motorized, they are
> _heavily_ motorized, a lot more motorized than necessary to give an
> noticable advantage over a a person riding a human powered bicycle.
>
>>
>> Electric motorbikes for off road use are another 100KG on top of that, it’s
>> a very different experience.
>
> Motorcycles do indeed come in a wide range of power and sizes. However,
> this does not turn low-powered motorcycles into bicycles.
>
>
>>
>> Let alone that E bikes power output is still within realms of human
>> capacity, ie peak output is sub 1000watts ie 600 ish which is absolutely
>> reachable, even by club cyclists some Pros such as Chris Hoy where in the
>> 2,500 watt range which really is unreachable for most.
>
> That isn't really the case, see below.
>
> But thats beside the point. The point being, giving a weak person the
> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy way
> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.
>
> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
> different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle simulation
> done by its controller. And you convently ignore that most humans
> aren't professional competetive cyclists.
>
> I am, at least according to Garmins profiling, in the best 5 percent of
> my age class wrt VO2max, I'm still able to ride 100 km / 1000 m
> cumulative altitude gain
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pluspora/plainpostings/20240315t0923-2024_03_14_bonn_effelsberg.html>
> (German language article)
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pluspora/plainpostings/20240213t1101-2022_08_08_bonn_effelsberg_willerscheid_by_racing_bike_https_diasp.html>
> (English)
> but I'm unable to produce more than about 90-100 W of sustained power
> and ride faster than about 20 km/h on average, for distances and
> altitudes like that.
>
> But consider my power curve. I too could do a measured peak power of
> ~1000W - once, in July 2018, for one second. I even could do a peak of
> 400 W - during the last three months, for twenty seconds. Even almost
> 250 W peak power (232 W, in fact) was doable over 30 seconds - once, in
> spring 2017. But I barely reached 250 W during the last four weeks,
> once, for 20 seconds.
>
> On the other hand, if I wouldn't mind carrying a spare battery in the
> panniers of an e-bike, I could ride the whole day and a night on flat
> ground, without needing more power than just walking around slowly.
> Assuming the lowest non-eco "assist" modes of just doubling your power,
> you'll need only about 50 W of your own power for that, on a bicyle much
> heavier than necessary. You wouldn't even need a spare battery, that
> way, there are e-bikes with two standard packs a 500 Wh builtin, that's
> good for 20 hours, then.
>
> Of course, I could choose one of the turbo+ modes, say, 340 Percent,
> select one of the more "sporty" E-Bikes, less weight, better
> aerodynamics, ride 22 km/h, and use even less of my own power. Even
> better, from the point of view of a motorized bicycle, I now could use
> that turbo mode for doing those pesky six percent ascents much faster.
> Needing about 120 W, I can do these with about 6-8 km/h. Doing these
> with 22 km/h, and acounting for the weight of motor and battery, needs
> about 407 W, with only 92 W of my own muscle power, using that turbo
> mode. Perfect!
>
> But not so fast ;-), 309 W > 250 W, this might run into the one half
> hour limitation. Could that become a problem? Nah, not for me. That
> cumulative altitude gain of 500-2000 m at max doesn't contain any
> continous ascents of more than 300 m, in fact it is going up and down
> between 60 m above Nn and ~600 m at max from here.
>
> So there is no need not to use that 340 Percent turbo mode all the time
> for riding up those hills at max speed, just like with any motorized
> vehicle. Neither is there a need to spend those 90-100 W on those
> hills, not even when going up some which are twice or trice as steep. 15
> km/h is good enough and still twice as fast as doing it with muscle
> power. Using turbo mode, I could do that with while spending only about
> 55 W of my own power. Same with 12 % with an easily done 8 km/h.
>
> The latter example is interesting insofar, as I regularely ride up a
> steep 12 % hill nearby, for fun and excercise. About 50 m of altitude
> gain, done about ten times. It is difficult because it needs (and
> trains) both strengh and coordination. Strength, because riding uphill
> on broken asphalt at a low speed of about 4 km/h still needs more power
> than I can sustain for a long time, coordination, because at that speed
> riding around obstacles without slowing down even more, needs some
> skill. On the positive side, it not only needs these capabilities, it
> creates these capabilities, over time. An e-bike used as intended, like
> most, does not.
>
> I used an opportunity to try an 25 km/h e-bike on a steep hill over a
> day during our vacation last year, because our host gave it to us as
> part of the rent. Riding up to a small village on top op a nearby
> hill, a gradient between 8 % in the lower and 11 percent in the upper
> part, riding a few times up and down there allowed me to assess that old
> e-bike from AFAIR 2016.
>
> Riding up such a hill by e-bike is at least as easy as using a gas
> powered moped from the sixties, and a lot easier than, say, riding a
> Velo Solex there, which nobody who isn't out of his mind would call a
> bicycle. Modern e-bikes became much better during the last decade, from
> the point of view of people selling that stuff. Turbo modes got some
> percent points more and more customization, the additional modes make it
> difficult to estimate the actuall proportion. The simulation has been
> smoothed and the illusion has been perfected.
>
> For reference
>
> <http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm>
>
> "Roadster" as a bicycle type in the english version is called
> "Hollandrad" (dutch type bicycle) in the orignal German language
> version. Select roadster, metric units, add 10 kg to the bicyle weight,
> clear power, type "20" into the speed field, hit calculate.
>
> [repetionions, omitted]
>
>
>>> Doubling your own power, adding 100 % and calling that "pedal assist" is
>>> a bad joke. But as I said, most new motors from Bosch (and others, I
>>> presume) "assist" with up to 340 %. That isn't a joke, anymore.
>>>
>>>
>
>> Have you either ridden E bikes or with friends who have them?
>
> For what purpose?
>
> I have, for the latest event see above. I don't need friends with
> e-bikes to ride with, in order to watch, measure and assess the
> behaviour of e-bikers. While doing my tours through the region, I have
> to ride up to and cross a highland about 100 m above where I live. It is
> a forest called "Kottenforst", which serves as a local recreational area
> for my home town, too. On that way and while crossing that area I have
> seen enough behaviours to recognize a collection of types.
>
> Even better, my bicycle is equipped with a powermeter, so I have a
> continuous display (and a log) of how much power I use, plus additional
> relevant data, like speed, gradient and distance. Riding behind somebody
> at the same speed gives a quite good estimate of the lower bound of the
> necessary power of a clumsy e-bike. Estimating the real power,
> considering the type of bicycle and rider isn't that difficult, either.
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kottenforst>
>
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20240101/bilanz2023b4.jpg>
>
>
>
>> Personally
>> it’s like riding with very fit club mates which I also have.
>
>
> Sure. Just like those very fit TdF professionals, who like to be filmed
> by camera operators on motorcycles riding with them.
>
> Alas, it's not about what you like, but about what makes a bicycle a
> bicycle.
>
> Personally, I like to stay fit enough to get around on a bicycle as long
> as possible. Staying away from e-bikes is part of the strategy, just
> like staying away from junk food made with lots of sugar, fat and salt
> is part of a strategy not to get obese.
>
>
>

Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> Am Wed, 17 Apr 2024 21:33:59 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>> Am Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:34:15 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>
>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>
> [... some aspects you didn't respond to, deleted for brevity]
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I’ve ridden e bikes and with
>>>> others on e bikes, motorcycles they are not,
>>>
>>> They sure are
>>
>> E MTB are 20/25kg all in, which is a noticeable heft over a trail MTB
>> 14/16KG and yes you do notice the weight with both the benefits ie
>> suspension works better ie more of the mass is sprung than unsprung for
>> example, but also its downsides ie less manoeuvrable needs to be muscled
>> though things, hence some E lite MTB are available with weights between the
>> two.
>
> Adding a motor and an electronic controller simulating the behaviour of
> a bicycle is what defines the current generation of 25 km/h e-bikes:
> these are motorcycles, but give the illusion of a human powered vehicle.
> Of course you rarely notice the additional mass caused by motor,
> battery, suspension and perhaps a heavier frame. That's the very point
> of that concept!
>
> My current bicycle is based on a gravel bike/randonneur frame and
> somewhat on the heavy side for a bike with drop bars, but still weights
> less than 10 kg. Adding fenders and a rack using the available mounting
> points on the frame, or choosing a suspension fork wouldn't have made it
> that much heavier. But as a low powered human with limited endurance, I
> rather be able to ride up hills a little steeper, be able to ride a
> little faster on flat ground and do it for a few more kilometers. So
> even half a kg counts.
>
> With most of the motors that Bosch offers for 25 km/h e-bikes, I
> wouldn't have any of these concerns. I could ride up and down Mont
> Ventoux a few times without breaking a sweat.
>
> In short: those e-bikes aren't just somewhat motorized, they are
> _heavily_ motorized, a lot more motorized than necessary to give an
> noticable advantage over a a person riding a human powered bicycle.
>
>>
>> Electric motorbikes for off road use are another 100KG on top of that, it’s
>> a very different experience.
>
> Motorcycles do indeed come in a wide range of power and sizes. However,
> this does not turn low-powered motorcycles into bicycles.
>
>
>>
>> Let alone that E bikes power output is still within realms of human
>> capacity, ie peak output is sub 1000watts ie 600 ish which is absolutely
>> reachable, even by club cyclists some Pros such as Chris Hoy where in the
>> 2,500 watt range which really is unreachable for most.
>
> That isn't really the case, see below.
>
> But thats beside the point. The point being, giving a weak person the
> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy way
> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.
>
> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
> different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle simulation
> done by its controller. And you convently ignore that most humans
> aren't professional competetive cyclists.

No I didn’t professional cyclists produce way more power both peak and
continuous, some beyond 2000 watts some just under, which is comfortably
above what a E bike can produce.

Even non professional can get to E bike levels ie sub 1000, and this
clearly evident commuting and hire bikes which are reasonable quick off the
mark, but certainly not motorbike quick!

Yes they are quicker than the average roadie in particular who tend to be
rather sluggish off the mark, combo of needing to clip in and taller
gearing, but they it is absolutely possible to pull away from them at the
lights, unlike Motorbikes which essentially are just gone.
>
> I am, at least according to Garmins profiling, in the best 5 percent of
> my age class wrt VO2max, I'm still able to ride 100 km / 1000 m
> cumulative altitude gain
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pluspora/plainpostings/20240315t0923-2024_03_14_bonn_effelsberg.html>
> (German language article)
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pluspora/plainpostings/20240213t1101-2022_08_08_bonn_effelsberg_willerscheid_by_racing_bike_https_diasp.html>
> (English)
> but I'm unable to produce more than about 90-100 W of sustained power
> and ride faster than about 20 km/h on average, for distances and
> altitudes like that.
>
> But consider my power curve. I too could do a measured peak power of
> ~1000W - once, in July 2018, for one second. I even could do a peak of
> 400 W - during the last three months, for twenty seconds. Even almost
> 250 W peak power (232 W, in fact) was doable over 30 seconds - once, in
> spring 2017. But I barely reached 250 W during the last four weeks,
> once, for 20 seconds.
>
> On the other hand, if I wouldn't mind carrying a spare battery in the
> panniers of an e-bike, I could ride the whole day and a night on flat
> ground, without needing more power than just walking around slowly.
> Assuming the lowest non-eco "assist" modes of just doubling your power,
> you'll need only about 50 W of your own power for that, on a bicyle much
> heavier than necessary. You wouldn't even need a spare battery, that
> way, there are e-bikes with two standard packs a 500 Wh builtin, that's
> good for 20 hours, then.
>
> Of course, I could choose one of the turbo+ modes, say, 340 Percent,
> select one of the more "sporty" E-Bikes, less weight, better
> aerodynamics, ride 22 km/h, and use even less of my own power. Even
> better, from the point of view of a motorized bicycle, I now could use
> that turbo mode for doing those pesky six percent ascents much faster.
> Needing about 120 W, I can do these with about 6-8 km/h. Doing these
> with 22 km/h, and acounting for the weight of motor and battery, needs
> about 407 W, with only 92 W of my own muscle power, using that turbo
> mode. Perfect!
>
> But not so fast ;-), 309 W > 250 W, this might run into the one half
> hour limitation. Could that become a problem? Nah, not for me. That
> cumulative altitude gain of 500-2000 m at max doesn't contain any
> continous ascents of more than 300 m, in fact it is going up and down
> between 60 m above Nn and ~600 m at max from here.
>
> So there is no need not to use that 340 Percent turbo mode all the time
> for riding up those hills at max speed, just like with any motorized
> vehicle. Neither is there a need to spend those 90-100 W on those
> hills, not even when going up some which are twice or trice as steep. 15
> km/h is good enough and still twice as fast as doing it with muscle
> power. Using turbo mode, I could do that with while spending only about
> 55 W of my own power. Same with 12 % with an easily done 8 km/h.
>
> The latter example is interesting insofar, as I regularely ride up a
> steep 12 % hill nearby, for fun and excercise. About 50 m of altitude
> gain, done about ten times. It is difficult because it needs (and
> trains) both strengh and coordination. Strength, because riding uphill
> on broken asphalt at a low speed of about 4 km/h still needs more power
> than I can sustain for a long time, coordination, because at that speed
> riding around obstacles without slowing down even more, needs some
> skill. On the positive side, it not only needs these capabilities, it
> creates these capabilities, over time. An e-bike used as intended, like
> most, does not.
>
> I used an opportunity to try an 25 km/h e-bike on a steep hill over a
> day during our vacation last year, because our host gave it to us as
> part of the rent. Riding up to a small village on top op a nearby
> hill, a gradient between 8 % in the lower and 11 percent in the upper
> part, riding a few times up and down there allowed me to assess that old
> e-bike from AFAIR 2016.
>
> Riding up such a hill by e-bike is at least as easy as using a gas
> powered moped from the sixties, and a lot easier than, say, riding a
> Velo Solex there, which nobody who isn't out of his mind would call a
> bicycle. Modern e-bikes became much better during the last decade, from
> the point of view of people selling that stuff. Turbo modes got some
> percent points more and more customization, the additional modes make it
> difficult to estimate the actuall proportion. The simulation has been
> smoothed and the illusion has been perfected.

Am Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:42 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
<roger@sarlet.com>:

>Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
....
>> But thats beside the point. The point being, giving a weak person the
>> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy way
>> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.
>>
>> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
>> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
>> different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle simulation
>> done by its controller. And you convently ignore that most humans
>> aren't professional competetive cyclists.

>No I didn’t professional cyclists produce way more power both peak and
>continuous,

So you are doing it again: you conveniently ignore that most humans
aren't top level professional competive cyclists, by talking about what
professional cyclists do and by ignoring what ordinary people can do and
what these people do with e-bikes on the one hand, and with real
bicycles, on the other hand. But let's talk about that distraction, for
a moment and lets mention in passing that some competetive professional
offroad motorcyclists need more strength and endurance than your average
cyclist on his bike.

<https://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/steve-mcqueen-husqvarna-011.jpg>

>some beyond 2000 watts some just under, which is comfortably
>above what a E bike can produce.

So now you are not only equating your average cyclist to word class
athletes, you are now cherry picking the best of the best in that group?
"`Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice."

But perhaps you are just confused about what a human power curve tells
about how much power ordinary people can deliver over what time span.

In reality, a TdF athlete only spends about 140 W while riding in the
peleton. Event the leader at the front rarely exceeds 245 W there.

Source:
<https://www.tour-magazin.de/profi-radsport/tour-de-france/tour-de-france-verstehen-wattleistungen-im-check-welche-leistung-bringen-die-profis-aufs-pedal/>

| During a normal stage of the Tour de France, pro riders can
| pump out around 230-250 watts on average, which equates to
| burning about 900 calories per hour. But on some of the
| harder stages they can average over 300 watts, or 1,100
| calories per hour. Tadej Pogacar has a Functional Threshold
| Power – an estimate of the power he can sustain for around
| one hour – of around 415 watts. But for explosive one-hour
| attacks on big climbs, some Tour riders have been known to
| exceed an average of 500 watts. And in the final stages of a
| sprint finish, sprinters can hit maximal efforts of over
| 1,500 watts.

from
<https://www.alpecincycling.com/en/pro-peloton/from-body-fat-to-power-output-anatomy-of-a-tour-de-france-rider/>

Sprinters sometimes accelerate to 65-70 km/h - once, in the final
sprint, after they had saved their strength for most of the time with
the support of helpers. 600 W in addition to your own 136 W (plus 340
percent, remember?) is more than enough to accelerate an e-bike in no
time to 25 km/h.

My back-of-the-envelope calculation using 136 W and +600W shows an about
fivefold power advantage for the e-bike. Not much, you think, cars come
with 50 to 250 hp, making not that much difference on the road? Think
again.

When I look at my power curve over the the past 12 months, that roughly
amounts to sustained power over five seconds vs. sustained power over
one hour, a factor of 720!
A 70 kg cyclist on a 10 kg bicycle needs about 14 seconds in order to
accelerate to 25 km/h. Adding a generous 10 kg for motor and batteries
reduces that to less than three seconds, the actual quotient is <21%.
percent.

To conclude this observation, which distracts from the actual point,
even old and weak, but healthy cyclists are able to produce 140 W or,
say, 2.2 W/kg for less than a half a minute, but people rarely do more,
when it isn't necessary.

You don't need 250 W, even for riding a heavy dutch type bicycle, 140 W
is enough for doing 22 km/h.

But what do I notice when looking at how average people actually use
their e-bikes on flat ground? Those people ride their e-bikes with about
22 km/h, too!

Adding another 500 $ or € to the cost of a better e-bike (say, 2500 €)
is al lot more attractive than adding the same amount to a 500 €
bicycle. Now that many modern e-bikes have got more power, lighter
frames and better gears, people _still_ ride their e-bikes with about
22-23 km/h, just to not trigger the speed limiter.

Unlike cyclists, e-bikers are not motivated or forced to adapt their
speed to circumstances such as wind, incline or ground conditions. Why
should you pedal more than 70 watts at a 4% hill, going 22 km/h? Easily
done on a 25 km/h e-bike restricted to 250 W on paper. How many
ordinary people (not doing cycling as a sport) do you know who can
sustain > 304 W for hours?

Doing the same calculation on the lower end (flat ground) or the upper
end (say, 20% grades) gives similar results, less than <40 W on flat
ground, even 12 % with 22 km/h is doable, needing 175 W human power plus
600 W from the motor.

Are you able to ride longer 12 % grade uphill with a speed of 22 km/h? I
guess not.

Of course, your average utility or leisure cyclist couldn't and wouldn't
do that, either, not even when switching to an e-bike. He or she would
do what I'd do (and actually tried as an experiment, as you perhaps
remember from my previous answer to your question), I'd reduce the
120-130 W I'd need for riding 4-5 km/h uphill to those 90 W I can
sustain for hours, let the motor add 340% ~ 306 W, doing an easily
ridden 12 km/h there.

But that's me. From looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I
conclude that people are even more lazy, when given the choice they paid
real money for. They reduce their speed to what they can do without
having to learn to ride really slow, they slow down to about 8 km/h, now
needing about 230 W only for those 12 %, spending 50-60 W human power
plus 170-180 W from the motor.

Just what they spend when going for a walk, even under extreme
circumstances.

Usually, e-bikes do what people usually do with motor vehicles, their
cruising speed is limited mostly by regulations, not by the limits of
their own endurance, muscle strength or cardio fitness. Motorists use
all the power their motor and external energy source delivers, within
the regulatory limits.

Cylists, are lazy too, even more so, because they have to. Ten colories
spent on needlessly accelerating and then braking are ten calories lost
and not available when the gained speed could have been used for just
rooling with speed for a while.

Riding at your limit without overdoing is, getting strength and
endurance is an art. But even without all that sport science training
methods, just _using_ your own power when all you have is that power,
for getting around on a bicycle far and fast enough will get you more
strength and endurance, on the long run. This makes cycling more
usefull and more enjoyable, at the same time.

Adding a strong motor to a bicycle, as it is done with e-bikes limited
to 25 km/h, eliminates most of that. Arguing "but this still is
cycling!!" is like selling electric wheelchairs to healthy people and
pointing to the Paralympics to justify it.

--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions

On 4/21/2024 6:52 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
> Am Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:42 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> ...
>>> But thats beside the point. The point being, giving a weak person the
>>> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy way
>>> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.
>>>
>>> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
>>> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
>>> different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle simulation
>>> done by its controller. And you convently ignore that most humans
>>> aren't professional competetive cyclists.
>
>> No I didn’t professional cyclists produce way more power both peak and
>> continuous,
>
> So you are doing it again: you conveniently ignore that most humans
> aren't top level professional competive cyclists, by talking about what
> professional cyclists do and by ignoring what ordinary people can do and
> what these people do with e-bikes on the one hand, and with real
> bicycles, on the other hand. But let's talk about that distraction, for
> a moment and lets mention in passing that some competetive professional
> offroad motorcyclists need more strength and endurance than your average
> cyclist on his bike.
>
> <https://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/steve-mcqueen-husqvarna-011.jpg>
>
>
>> some beyond 2000 watts some just under, which is comfortably
>> above what a E bike can produce.
>
> So now you are not only equating your average cyclist to word class
> athletes, you are now cherry picking the best of the best in that group?
> "`Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice."
>
> But perhaps you are just confused about what a human power curve tells
> about how much power ordinary people can deliver over what time span.
>
> In reality, a TdF athlete only spends about 140 W while riding in the
> peleton. Event the leader at the front rarely exceeds 245 W there.
>
> Source:
> <https://www.tour-magazin.de/profi-radsport/tour-de-france/tour-de-france-verstehen-wattleistungen-im-check-welche-leistung-bringen-die-profis-aufs-pedal/>
>
>
> | During a normal stage of the Tour de France, pro riders can
> | pump out around 230-250 watts on average, which equates to
> | burning about 900 calories per hour. But on some of the
> | harder stages they can average over 300 watts, or 1,100
> | calories per hour. Tadej Pogacar has a Functional Threshold
> | Power – an estimate of the power he can sustain for around
> | one hour – of around 415 watts. But for explosive one-hour
> | attacks on big climbs, some Tour riders have been known to
> | exceed an average of 500 watts. And in the final stages of a
> | sprint finish, sprinters can hit maximal efforts of over
> | 1,500 watts.
>
> from
> <https://www.alpecincycling.com/en/pro-peloton/from-body-fat-to-power-output-anatomy-of-a-tour-de-france-rider/>
>
>
> Sprinters sometimes accelerate to 65-70 km/h - once, in the final
> sprint, after they had saved their strength for most of the time with
> the support of helpers. 600 W in addition to your own 136 W (plus 340
> percent, remember?) is more than enough to accelerate an e-bike in no
> time to 25 km/h.
>
> My back-of-the-envelope calculation using 136 W and +600W shows an about
> fivefold power advantage for the e-bike. Not much, you think, cars come
> with 50 to 250 hp, making not that much difference on the road? Think
> again.
>
> When I look at my power curve over the the past 12 months, that roughly
> amounts to sustained power over five seconds vs. sustained power over
> one hour, a factor of 720!
>
> A 70 kg cyclist on a 10 kg bicycle needs about 14 seconds in order to
> accelerate to 25 km/h. Adding a generous 10 kg for motor and batteries
> reduces that to less than three seconds, the actual quotient is <21%.
> percent.
>
> To conclude this observation, which distracts from the actual point,
> even old and weak, but healthy cyclists are able to produce 140 W or,
> say, 2.2 W/kg for less than a half a minute, but people rarely do more,
> when it isn't necessary.
>
> You don't need 250 W, even for riding a heavy dutch type bicycle, 140 W
> is enough for doing 22 km/h.
>
> But what do I notice when looking at how average people actually use
> their e-bikes on flat ground? Those people ride their e-bikes with about
> 22 km/h, too!
>
> Adding another 500 $ or € to the cost of a better e-bike (say, 2500 €)
> is al lot more attractive than adding the same amount to a 500 €
> bicycle. Now that many modern e-bikes have got more power, lighter
> frames and better gears, people _still_ ride their e-bikes with about
> 22-23 km/h, just to not trigger the speed limiter.
>
> Unlike cyclists, e-bikers are not motivated or forced to adapt their
> speed to circumstances such as wind, incline or ground conditions. Why
> should you pedal more than 70 watts at a 4% hill, going 22 km/h? Easily
> done on a 25 km/h e-bike restricted to 250 W on paper. How many
> ordinary people (not doing cycling as a sport) do you know who can
> sustain > 304 W for hours?
>
> Doing the same calculation on the lower end (flat ground) or the upper
> end (say, 20% grades) gives similar results, less than <40 W on flat
> ground, even 12 % with 22 km/h is doable, needing 175 W human power plus
> 600 W from the motor.
>
> Are you able to ride longer 12 % grade uphill with a speed of 22 km/h? I
> guess not.
>
> Of course, your average utility or leisure cyclist couldn't and wouldn't
> do that, either, not even when switching to an e-bike. He or she would
> do what I'd do (and actually tried as an experiment, as you perhaps
> remember from my previous answer to your question), I'd reduce the
> 120-130 W I'd need for riding 4-5 km/h uphill to those 90 W I can
> sustain for hours, let the motor add 340% ~ 306 W, doing an easily
> ridden 12 km/h there.
>
> But that's me. From looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I
> conclude that people are even more lazy, when given the choice they paid
> real money for. They reduce their speed to what they can do without
> having to learn to ride really slow, they slow down to about 8 km/h, now
> needing about 230 W only for those 12 %, spending 50-60 W human power
> plus 170-180 W from the motor.
>
> Just what they spend when going for a walk, even under extreme
> circumstances.
>
> Usually, e-bikes do what people usually do with motor vehicles, their
> cruising speed is limited mostly by regulations, not by the limits of
> their own endurance, muscle strength or cardio fitness. Motorists use
> all the power their motor and external energy source delivers, within
> the regulatory limits.
>
> Cylists, are lazy too, even more so, because they have to. Ten colories
> spent on needlessly accelerating and then braking are ten calories lost
> and not available when the gained speed could have been used for just
> rooling with speed for a while.
>
> Riding at your limit without overdoing is, getting strength and
> endurance is an art. But even without all that sport science training
> methods, just _using_ your own power when all you have is that power,
> for getting around on a bicycle far and fast enough will get you more
> strength and endurance, on the long run. This makes cycling more
> usefull and more enjoyable, at the same time.
>
> Adding a strong motor to a bicycle, as it is done with e-bikes limited
> to 25 km/h, eliminates most of that. Arguing "but this still is
> cycling!!" is like selling electric wheelchairs to healthy people and
> pointing to the Paralympics to justify it.
>

"looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I conclude
that people are even more lazy..."

That's what I see as well. Your post is well considered as
an observer of the actual situation now.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/21/2024 6:52 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>> Am Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:42 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>
>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>> ...
>>>> But thats beside the point. The point being,  giving a weak person the
>>>> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy
>>>> way
>>>> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.
>>>>
>>>> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
>>>> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
>>>> different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle
>>>> simulation
>>>> done by its controller.  And you convently ignore that most humans
>>>> aren't professional competetive cyclists.
>>
>>> No I didn’t professional cyclists produce way more power both peak and
>>> continuous,
>>
>> So you are doing it again: you conveniently ignore that most humans
>> aren't top level professional competive cyclists, by talking about what
>> professional cyclists do and by ignoring what ordinary people can do and
>> what these people do with e-bikes on the one hand, and with real
>> bicycles, on the other hand.  But let's talk about that distraction, for
>> a moment and lets mention in passing that some competetive professional
>> offroad motorcyclists need more strength and endurance than your average
>> cyclist on his bike.
>>
>> <https://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/steve-mcqueen-husqvarna-011.jpg>
>>
>>> some beyond 2000 watts some just under, which is comfortably
>>> above what a E bike can produce.
>>
>> So now you are not only equating your average cyclist to word class
>> athletes, you are now cherry picking the best of the best in that group?
>> "`Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice."
>>
>> But perhaps you are just confused about what a human power curve tells
>> about how much power ordinary people can deliver over what time  span.
>>
>> In reality, a TdF athlete only spends about 140 W while riding in the
>> peleton. Event the leader at the front rarely exceeds 245 W there.
>>
>> Source:
>> <https://www.tour-magazin.de/profi-radsport/tour-de-france/tour-de-france-verstehen-wattleistungen-im-check-welche-leistung-bringen-die-profis-aufs-pedal/>
>>
>>
>> | During a normal stage of the Tour de France, pro riders can
>> | pump out around 230-250 watts on average, which equates to
>> | burning about 900 calories per hour. But on some of the
>> | harder stages they can average over 300 watts, or 1,100
>> | calories per hour. Tadej Pogacar has a Functional Threshold
>> | Power – an estimate of the power he can sustain for around
>> | one hour – of around 415 watts. But for explosive one-hour
>> | attacks on big climbs, some Tour riders have been known to
>> | exceed an average of 500 watts. And in the final stages of a
>> | sprint finish, sprinters can hit maximal efforts of over
>> | 1,500 watts.
>>
>> from
>> <https://www.alpecincycling.com/en/pro-peloton/from-body-fat-to-power-output-anatomy-of-a-tour-de-france-rider/>
>>
>>
>> Sprinters sometimes accelerate to 65-70 km/h - once, in the final
>> sprint, after they had saved their strength for most of the time with
>> the support of helpers.  600 W in addition to your own 136 W (plus 340
>> percent, remember?) is more than enough to accelerate an e-bike in no
>> time to 25 km/h.
>>
>> My back-of-the-envelope calculation using 136 W and +600W shows an about
>> fivefold power advantage for the e-bike.  Not much, you think, cars come
>> with 50 to 250 hp, making not that much difference on the road? Think
>> again.
>>
>> When I look at my power curve over the the past 12 months, that roughly
>> amounts to sustained power over five seconds vs. sustained power over
>> one hour, a factor of 720!
>> A 70 kg cyclist on a 10 kg bicycle needs about 14 seconds in order to
>> accelerate to 25 km/h. Adding a generous 10 kg for motor and batteries
>> reduces that to less than three seconds, the actual quotient is  <21%.
>> percent.
>>
>> To conclude this observation, which distracts from the actual point,
>> even old and weak, but healthy cyclists are able to produce 140 W or,
>> say, 2.2 W/kg for less than a half a minute, but people rarely do more,
>> when it isn't necessary.
>>
>> You don't need 250 W, even for riding a heavy dutch type bicycle, 140 W
>> is enough for doing 22 km/h.
>>
>> But what do I notice when looking at how average people actually use
>> their e-bikes on flat ground? Those people ride their e-bikes with about
>> 22 km/h, too!
>>
>> Adding another 500 $ or € to the cost of a better e-bike (say, 2500 €)
>> is al lot more attractive than adding the same amount to a 500 €
>> bicycle. Now that many modern e-bikes have got more power, lighter
>> frames and better gears, people _still_ ride their e-bikes with about
>> 22-23 km/h, just to not trigger the speed limiter.
>>
>> Unlike cyclists, e-bikers are not motivated or forced to adapt their
>> speed to circumstances such as wind, incline or ground conditions. Why
>> should you pedal more than 70 watts at a 4% hill, going 22 km/h? Easily
>> done on a 25 km/h e-bike restricted to 250 W on paper.  How many
>> ordinary people (not doing cycling as a sport) do you know who can
>> sustain > 304 W for hours?
>>
>> Doing the same calculation on the lower end (flat ground) or the upper
>> end (say, 20% grades) gives similar results, less than <40 W on flat
>> ground, even 12 % with 22 km/h is doable, needing 175 W human power plus
>> 600 W from the motor.
>>
>> Are you able to ride longer 12 % grade uphill with a speed of 22 km/h? I
>> guess not.
>>
>> Of course, your average utility or leisure cyclist couldn't and wouldn't
>> do that, either, not even when switching to an e-bike. He or she would
>> do what I'd do (and actually tried as an experiment, as you perhaps
>> remember from my previous answer to your question), I'd reduce the
>> 120-130 W I'd need for riding 4-5 km/h uphill to those 90 W I can
>> sustain for hours, let the motor add 340% ~ 306 W, doing an easily
>> ridden 12 km/h there.
>>
>> But that's me. From looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I
>> conclude that people are even more lazy, when given the choice they paid
>> real money for. They reduce their speed to what they can do without
>> having to learn to ride really slow, they slow down to about 8 km/h, now
>> needing about 230 W only for those 12 %, spending  50-60 W human power
>> plus 170-180 W from the motor.
>>
>> Just what they spend when going for a walk, even under extreme
>> circumstances.
>>
>> Usually, e-bikes do what people usually do with motor vehicles, their
>> cruising speed is limited mostly by regulations, not by the limits of
>> their own endurance, muscle strength or cardio fitness. Motorists use
>> all the power their motor and external energy source delivers, within
>> the regulatory limits.
>>
>> Cylists, are lazy too, even more so, because they have to. Ten colories
>> spent on needlessly accelerating and then braking are ten calories lost
>> and not available when the gained speed could have been used for just
>> rooling with speed for a while.
>>
>> Riding at your limit without overdoing is, getting strength and
>> endurance is an art.  But even without all that sport science training
>> methods, just _using_ your own power when all you have is that power,
>> for getting around on a bicycle far and fast enough will get you more
>> strength and endurance, on the long run.  This makes cycling more
>> usefull and more enjoyable, at the same time.
>>
>> Adding a strong motor to a bicycle, as it is done with e-bikes limited
>> to 25 km/h, eliminates most of that.  Arguing "but this still is
>> cycling!!" is like selling electric wheelchairs to healthy people and
>> pointing to the Paralympics to justify it.
>>
>
> "looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I conclude that people
> are even more lazy..."
>
> That's what I see as well.  Your post is well considered as an observer
> of the actual situation now.

On 4/21/2024 10:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/21/2024 6:52 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>> Am Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:42 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>
>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>> But thats beside the point. The point being,  giving a
>>>>> weak person the
>>>>> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is
>>>>> just a fancy way
>>>>> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor
>>>>> power.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already
>>>>> mentioned that in
>>>>> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a
>>>>> power curve much
>>>>> different from a motor, even when accounting for that
>>>>> bicycle simulation
>>>>> done by its controller.  And you convently ignore that
>>>>> most humans
>>>>> aren't professional competetive cyclists.
>>>
>>>> No I didn’t professional cyclists produce way more power
>>>> both peak and
>>>> continuous,
>>>
>>> So you are doing it again: you conveniently ignore that
>>> most humans
>>> aren't top level professional competive cyclists, by
>>> talking about what
>>> professional cyclists do and by ignoring what ordinary
>>> people can do and
>>> what these people do with e-bikes on the one hand, and
>>> with real
>>> bicycles, on the other hand.  But let's talk about that
>>> distraction, for
>>> a moment and lets mention in passing that some
>>> competetive professional
>>> offroad motorcyclists need more strength and endurance
>>> than your average
>>> cyclist on his bike.
>>>
>>> <https://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/steve-mcqueen-husqvarna-011.jpg>
>>>
>>>> some beyond 2000 watts some just under, which is
>>>> comfortably
>>>> above what a E bike can produce.
>>>
>>> So now you are not only equating your average cyclist to
>>> word class
>>> athletes, you are now cherry picking the best of the best
>>> in that group?
>>> "`Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice."
>>>
>>> But perhaps you are just confused about what a human
>>> power curve tells
>>> about how much power ordinary people can deliver over
>>> what time  span.
>>>
>>> In reality, a TdF athlete only spends about 140 W while
>>> riding in the
>>> peleton. Event the leader at the front rarely exceeds 245
>>> W there.
>>>
>>> Source:
>>> <https://www.tour-magazin.de/profi-radsport/tour-de-france/tour-de-france-verstehen-wattleistungen-im-check-welche-leistung-bringen-die-profis-aufs-pedal/>
>>>
>>>
>>> | During a normal stage of the Tour de France, pro riders
>>> can
>>> | pump out around 230-250 watts on average, which equates to
>>> | burning about 900 calories per hour. But on some of the
>>> | harder stages they can average over 300 watts, or 1,100
>>> | calories per hour. Tadej Pogacar has a Functional
>>> Threshold
>>> | Power – an estimate of the power he can sustain for around
>>> | one hour – of around 415 watts. But for explosive one-hour
>>> | attacks on big climbs, some Tour riders have been known to
>>> | exceed an average of 500 watts. And in the final stages
>>> of a
>>> | sprint finish, sprinters can hit maximal efforts of over
>>> | 1,500 watts.
>>>
>>> from
>>> <https://www.alpecincycling.com/en/pro-peloton/from-body-fat-to-power-output-anatomy-of-a-tour-de-france-rider/>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sprinters sometimes accelerate to 65-70 km/h - once, in
>>> the final
>>> sprint, after they had saved their strength for most of
>>> the time with
>>> the support of helpers.  600 W in addition to your own
>>> 136 W (plus 340
>>> percent, remember?) is more than enough to accelerate an
>>> e-bike in no
>>> time to 25 km/h.
>>>
>>> My back-of-the-envelope calculation using 136 W and +600W
>>> shows an about
>>> fivefold power advantage for the e-bike.  Not much, you
>>> think, cars come
>>> with 50 to 250 hp, making not that much difference on the
>>> road? Think
>>> again.
>>>
>>> When I look at my power curve over the the past 12
>>> months, that roughly
>>> amounts to sustained power over five seconds vs.
>>> sustained power over
>>> one hour, a factor of 720!
>>> A 70 kg cyclist on a 10 kg bicycle needs about 14 seconds
>>> in order to
>>> accelerate to 25 km/h. Adding a generous 10 kg for motor
>>> and batteries
>>> reduces that to less than three seconds, the actual
>>> quotient is  <21%.
>>> percent.
>>>
>>> To conclude this observation, which distracts from the
>>> actual point,
>>> even old and weak, but healthy cyclists are able to
>>> produce 140 W or,
>>> say, 2.2 W/kg for less than a half a minute, but people
>>> rarely do more,
>>> when it isn't necessary.
>>>
>>> You don't need 250 W, even for riding a heavy dutch type
>>> bicycle, 140 W
>>> is enough for doing 22 km/h.
>>>
>>> But what do I notice when looking at how average people
>>> actually use
>>> their e-bikes on flat ground? Those people ride their
>>> e-bikes with about
>>> 22 km/h, too!
>>>
>>> Adding another 500 $ or € to the cost of a better e-bike
>>> (say, 2500 €)
>>> is al lot more attractive than adding the same amount to
>>> a 500 €
>>> bicycle. Now that many modern e-bikes have got more
>>> power, lighter
>>> frames and better gears, people _still_ ride their
>>> e-bikes with about
>>> 22-23 km/h, just to not trigger the speed limiter.
>>>
>>> Unlike cyclists, e-bikers are not motivated or forced to
>>> adapt their
>>> speed to circumstances such as wind, incline or ground
>>> conditions. Why
>>> should you pedal more than 70 watts at a 4% hill, going
>>> 22 km/h? Easily
>>> done on a 25 km/h e-bike restricted to 250 W on paper.
>>> How many
>>> ordinary people (not doing cycling as a sport) do you
>>> know who can
>>> sustain > 304 W for hours?
>>>
>>> Doing the same calculation on the lower end (flat ground)
>>> or the upper
>>> end (say, 20% grades) gives similar results, less than
>>> <40 W on flat
>>> ground, even 12 % with 22 km/h is doable, needing 175 W
>>> human power plus
>>> 600 W from the motor.
>>>
>>> Are you able to ride longer 12 % grade uphill with a
>>> speed of 22 km/h? I
>>> guess not.
>>>
>>> Of course, your average utility or leisure cyclist
>>> couldn't and wouldn't
>>> do that, either, not even when switching to an e-bike. He
>>> or she would
>>> do what I'd do (and actually tried as an experiment, as
>>> you perhaps
>>> remember from my previous answer to your question), I'd
>>> reduce the
>>> 120-130 W I'd need for riding 4-5 km/h uphill to those 90
>>> W I can
>>> sustain for hours, let the motor add 340% ~ 306 W, doing
>>> an easily
>>> ridden 12 km/h there.
>>>
>>> But that's me. From looking at what people do who _are_
>>> into ebikes I
>>> conclude that people are even more lazy, when given the
>>> choice they paid
>>> real money for. They reduce their speed to what they can
>>> do without
>>> having to learn to ride really slow, they slow down to
>>> about 8 km/h, now
>>> needing about 230 W only for those 12 %, spending  50-60
>>> W human power
>>> plus 170-180 W from the motor.
>>>
>>> Just what they spend when going for a walk, even under
>>> extreme
>>> circumstances.
>>>
>>> Usually, e-bikes do what people usually do with motor
>>> vehicles, their
>>> cruising speed is limited mostly by regulations, not by
>>> the limits of
>>> their own endurance, muscle strength or cardio fitness.
>>> Motorists use
>>> all the power their motor and external energy source
>>> delivers, within
>>> the regulatory limits.
>>>
>>> Cylists, are lazy too, even more so, because they have
>>> to. Ten colories
>>> spent on needlessly accelerating and then braking are ten
>>> calories lost
>>> and not available when the gained speed could have been
>>> used for just
>>> rooling with speed for a while.
>>>
>>> Riding at your limit without overdoing is, getting
>>> strength and
>>> endurance is an art.  But even without all that sport
>>> science training
>>> methods, just _using_ your own power when all you have is
>>> that power,
>>> for getting around on a bicycle far and fast enough will
>>> get you more
>>> strength and endurance, on the long run.  This makes
>>> cycling more
>>> usefull and more enjoyable, at the same time.
>>>
>>> Adding a strong motor to a bicycle, as it is done with
>>> e-bikes limited
>>> to 25 km/h, eliminates most of that.  Arguing "but this
>>> still is
>>> cycling!!" is like selling electric wheelchairs to
>>> healthy people and
>>> pointing to the Paralympics to justify it.
>>>
>>
>> "looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I
>> conclude that people are even more lazy..."
>>
>> That's what I see as well.  Your post is well considered
>> as an observer of the actual situation now.
>
> Coincidentally, yesterday's the New York Times had an
> article about a young mother whose infant daughter died. The
> grief was overwhelming, of course. Her major point was that
> she coped largely through riding an eBike. Apparently her
> local terrain and conditioning or experience made a
> conventional bike too difficult for her.
>
> I take that to mean there are special cases out there, as
> always. (Tails of the normal curve.) And eBike riders can be
> enjoying the outdoors and nature. But I agree, most eBike
> riders seem to want to avoid actual exercise.
>

On 4/21/2024 12:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/21/2024 10:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>
>> Coincidentally, yesterday's the New York Times had an article about a
>> young mother whose infant daughter died. The grief was overwhelming,
>> of course. Her major point was that she coped largely through riding
>> an eBike. Apparently her local terrain and conditioning or experience
>> made a conventional bike too difficult for her.
>>
>> I take that to mean there are special cases out there, as always.
>> (Tails of the normal curve.) And eBike riders can be enjoying the
>> outdoors and nature. But I agree, most eBike riders seem to want to
>> avoid actual exercise.
>>
>
> Well, yes, positive examples are out there, including relatively active
> cyclists who've always owned premium 'Sunday morning' bikes but in their
> 80s suffer stamina deterioration and find battery powered 25lb carbon
> bikes helpful.
>
> Which isn't the general run of things:
> https://www.chicagomag.com/wp-content/archive/city-life/April-2015/Divvy-Is-Usually-Faster-Than-Public-Transportation/divvy-commuter.jpg

I'm reading on other forums that eBikes are over-represented in crashes,
perhaps because people who have near zero biking experience are suddenly
able to ride 18 mph in traffic.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/21/2024 1:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/21/2024 12:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/21/2024 10:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>
>>> Coincidentally, yesterday's the New York Times had an
>>> article about a young mother whose infant daughter died.
>>> The grief was overwhelming, of course. Her major point
>>> was that she coped largely through riding an eBike.
>>> Apparently her local terrain and conditioning or
>>> experience made a conventional bike too difficult for her.
>>>
>>> I take that to mean there are special cases out there, as
>>> always. (Tails of the normal curve.) And eBike riders can
>>> be enjoying the outdoors and nature. But I agree, most
>>> eBike riders seem to want to avoid actual exercise.
>>>
>>
>> Well, yes, positive examples are out there, including
>> relatively active cyclists who've always owned premium
>> 'Sunday morning' bikes but in their 80s suffer stamina
>> deterioration and find battery powered 25lb carbon bikes
>> helpful.
>>
>> Which isn't the general run of things:
>> https://www.chicagomag.com/wp-content/archive/city-life/April-2015/Divvy-Is-Usually-Faster-Than-Public-Transportation/divvy-commuter.jpg
>
> I'm reading on other forums that eBikes are over-represented
> in crashes, perhaps because people who have near zero biking
> experience are suddenly able to ride 18 mph in traffic.
>

Yes, and that's especially noted for urban electric power
cycles and tourists. Often not cyclists (i.e., in traffic
they do not think or react like cyclists), in unfamiliar
neighborhoods with unfamiliar traffic/pedestrian patterns on
a heavy thing, with which handling they are inexperienced,
at speed. Dangerous mix.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Am Sun, 21 Apr 2024 11:11:47 -0400 schrieb Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:

>On 4/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/21/2024 6:52 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>> Am Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:42 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>
>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>> But thats beside the point. The point being,  giving a weak person the
>>>>> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy
>>>>> way
>>>>> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
>>>>> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
>>>>> different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle
>>>>> simulation
>>>>> done by its controller.  And you convently ignore that most humans
>>>>> aren't professional competetive cyclists.
>>>
>>>> No I didn’t professional cyclists produce way more power both peak and
>>>> continuous,
>>>
>>> So you are doing it again: you conveniently ignore that most humans
>>> aren't top level professional competive cyclists, by talking about what
>>> professional cyclists do and by ignoring what ordinary people can do and
>>> what these people do with e-bikes on the one hand, and with real
>>> bicycles, on the other hand.  But let's talk about that distraction, for
>>> a moment and lets mention in passing that some competetive professional
>>> offroad motorcyclists need more strength and endurance than your average
>>> cyclist on his bike.
>>>
>>> <https://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/steve-mcqueen-husqvarna-011.jpg>
>>>
>>>> some beyond 2000 watts some just under, which is comfortably
>>>> above what a E bike can produce.
>>>
>>> So now you are not only equating your average cyclist to word class
>>> athletes, you are now cherry picking the best of the best in that group?
>>> "`Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice."
>>>
>>> But perhaps you are just confused about what a human power curve tells
>>> about how much power ordinary people can deliver over what time  span.
>>>
>>> In reality, a TdF athlete only spends about 140 W while riding in the
>>> peleton. Event the leader at the front rarely exceeds 245 W there.
>>>
>>> Source:
>>> <https://www.tour-magazin.de/profi-radsport/tour-de-france/tour-de-france-verstehen-wattleistungen-im-check-welche-leistung-bringen-die-profis-aufs-pedal/>
>>>
>>>
>>> | During a normal stage of the Tour de France, pro riders can
>>> | pump out around 230-250 watts on average, which equates to
>>> | burning about 900 calories per hour. But on some of the
>>> | harder stages they can average over 300 watts, or 1,100
>>> | calories per hour. Tadej Pogacar has a Functional Threshold
>>> | Power – an estimate of the power he can sustain for around
>>> | one hour – of around 415 watts. But for explosive one-hour
>>> | attacks on big climbs, some Tour riders have been known to
>>> | exceed an average of 500 watts. And in the final stages of a
>>> | sprint finish, sprinters can hit maximal efforts of over
>>> | 1,500 watts.
>>>
>>> from
>>> <https://www.alpecincycling.com/en/pro-peloton/from-body-fat-to-power-output-anatomy-of-a-tour-de-france-rider/>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sprinters sometimes accelerate to 65-70 km/h - once, in the final
>>> sprint, after they had saved their strength for most of the time with
>>> the support of helpers.  600 W in addition to your own 136 W (plus 340
>>> percent, remember?) is more than enough to accelerate an e-bike in no
>>> time to 25 km/h.
>>>
>>> My back-of-the-envelope calculation using 136 W and +600W shows an about
>>> fivefold power advantage for the e-bike.  Not much, you think, cars come
>>> with 50 to 250 hp, making not that much difference on the road? Think
>>> again.
>>>
>>> When I look at my power curve over the the past 12 months, that roughly
>>> amounts to sustained power over five seconds vs. sustained power over
>>> one hour, a factor of 720!
>>> A 70 kg cyclist on a 10 kg bicycle needs about 14 seconds in order to
>>> accelerate to 25 km/h. Adding a generous 10 kg for motor and batteries
>>> reduces that to less than three seconds, the actual quotient is  <21%.
>>> percent.
>>>
>>> To conclude this observation, which distracts from the actual point,
>>> even old and weak, but healthy cyclists are able to produce 140 W or,
>>> say, 2.2 W/kg for less than a half a minute, but people rarely do more,
>>> when it isn't necessary.
>>>
>>> You don't need 250 W, even for riding a heavy dutch type bicycle, 140 W
>>> is enough for doing 22 km/h.
>>>
>>> But what do I notice when looking at how average people actually use
>>> their e-bikes on flat ground? Those people ride their e-bikes with about
>>> 22 km/h, too!
>>>
>>> Adding another 500 $ or € to the cost of a better e-bike (say, 2500 €)
>>> is al lot more attractive than adding the same amount to a 500 €
>>> bicycle. Now that many modern e-bikes have got more power, lighter
>>> frames and better gears, people _still_ ride their e-bikes with about
>>> 22-23 km/h, just to not trigger the speed limiter.
>>>
>>> Unlike cyclists, e-bikers are not motivated or forced to adapt their
>>> speed to circumstances such as wind, incline or ground conditions. Why
>>> should you pedal more than 70 watts at a 4% hill, going 22 km/h? Easily
>>> done on a 25 km/h e-bike restricted to 250 W on paper.  How many
>>> ordinary people (not doing cycling as a sport) do you know who can
>>> sustain > 304 W for hours?
>>>
>>> Doing the same calculation on the lower end (flat ground) or the upper
>>> end (say, 20% grades) gives similar results, less than <40 W on flat
>>> ground, even 12 % with 22 km/h is doable, needing 175 W human power plus
>>> 600 W from the motor.
>>>
>>> Are you able to ride longer 12 % grade uphill with a speed of 22 km/h? I
>>> guess not.
>>>
>>> Of course, your average utility or leisure cyclist couldn't and wouldn't
>>> do that, either, not even when switching to an e-bike. He or she would
>>> do what I'd do (and actually tried as an experiment, as you perhaps
>>> remember from my previous answer to your question), I'd reduce the
>>> 120-130 W I'd need for riding 4-5 km/h uphill to those 90 W I can
>>> sustain for hours, let the motor add 340% ~ 306 W, doing an easily
>>> ridden 12 km/h there.
>>>
>>> But that's me. From looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I
>>> conclude that people are even more lazy, when given the choice they paid
>>> real money for. They reduce their speed to what they can do without
>>> having to learn to ride really slow, they slow down to about 8 km/h, now
>>> needing about 230 W only for those 12 %, spending  50-60 W human power
>>> plus 170-180 W from the motor.
>>>
>>> Just what they spend when going for a walk, even under extreme
>>> circumstances.
>>>
>>> Usually, e-bikes do what people usually do with motor vehicles, their
>>> cruising speed is limited mostly by regulations, not by the limits of
>>> their own endurance, muscle strength or cardio fitness. Motorists use
>>> all the power their motor and external energy source delivers, within
>>> the regulatory limits.
>>>
>>> Cylists, are lazy too, even more so, because they have to. Ten colories
>>> spent on needlessly accelerating and then braking are ten calories lost
>>> and not available when the gained speed could have been used for just
>>> rooling with speed for a while.
>>>
>>> Riding at your limit without overdoing is, getting strength and
>>> endurance is an art.  But even without all that sport science training
>>> methods, just _using_ your own power when all you have is that power,
>>> for getting around on a bicycle far and fast enough will get you more
>>> strength and endurance, on the long run.  This makes cycling more
>>> usefull and more enjoyable, at the same time.
>>>
>>> Adding a strong motor to a bicycle, as it is done with e-bikes limited
>>> to 25 km/h, eliminates most of that.  Arguing "but this still is
>>> cycling!!" is like selling electric wheelchairs to healthy people and
>>> pointing to the Paralympics to justify it.
>>>
>>
>> "looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I conclude that people
>> are even more lazy..."
>>
>> That's what I see as well.  Your post is well considered as an observer
>> of the actual situation now.
>
>Coincidentally, yesterday's the New York Times had an article about a
>young mother whose infant daughter died. The grief was overwhelming, of
>course. Her major point was that she coped largely through riding an
>eBike. Apparently her local terrain and conditioning or experience made
>a conventional bike too difficult for her.

On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 21:32:58 +0200, Wolfgang Strobl
<news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:

>Am Sun, 21 Apr 2024 11:11:47 -0400 schrieb Frank Krygowski
><frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
>
>>On 4/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 4/21/2024 6:52 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>>> Am Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:42 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>>> But thats beside the point. The point being,  giving a weak person the
>>>>>> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy
>>>>>> way
>>>>>> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
>>>>>> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
>>>>>> different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle
>>>>>> simulation
>>>>>> done by its controller.  And you convently ignore that most humans
>>>>>> aren't professional competetive cyclists.
>>>>
>>>>> No I didn’t professional cyclists produce way more power both peak and
>>>>> continuous,
>>>>
>>>> So you are doing it again: you conveniently ignore that most humans
>>>> aren't top level professional competive cyclists, by talking about what
>>>> professional cyclists do and by ignoring what ordinary people can do and
>>>> what these people do with e-bikes on the one hand, and with real
>>>> bicycles, on the other hand.  But let's talk about that distraction, for
>>>> a moment and lets mention in passing that some competetive professional
>>>> offroad motorcyclists need more strength and endurance than your average
>>>> cyclist on his bike.
>>>>
>>>> <https://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/steve-mcqueen-husqvarna-011.jpg>
>>>>
>>>>> some beyond 2000 watts some just under, which is comfortably
>>>>> above what a E bike can produce.
>>>>
>>>> So now you are not only equating your average cyclist to word class
>>>> athletes, you are now cherry picking the best of the best in that group?
>>>> "`Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice."
>>>>
>>>> But perhaps you are just confused about what a human power curve tells
>>>> about how much power ordinary people can deliver over what time  span.
>>>>
>>>> In reality, a TdF athlete only spends about 140 W while riding in the
>>>> peleton. Event the leader at the front rarely exceeds 245 W there.
>>>>
>>>> Source:
>>>> <https://www.tour-magazin.de/profi-radsport/tour-de-france/tour-de-france-verstehen-wattleistungen-im-check-welche-leistung-bringen-die-profis-aufs-pedal/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> | During a normal stage of the Tour de France, pro riders can
>>>> | pump out around 230-250 watts on average, which equates to
>>>> | burning about 900 calories per hour. But on some of the
>>>> | harder stages they can average over 300 watts, or 1,100
>>>> | calories per hour. Tadej Pogacar has a Functional Threshold
>>>> | Power – an estimate of the power he can sustain for around
>>>> | one hour – of around 415 watts. But for explosive one-hour
>>>> | attacks on big climbs, some Tour riders have been known to
>>>> | exceed an average of 500 watts. And in the final stages of a
>>>> | sprint finish, sprinters can hit maximal efforts of over
>>>> | 1,500 watts.
>>>>
>>>> from
>>>> <https://www.alpecincycling.com/en/pro-peloton/from-body-fat-to-power-output-anatomy-of-a-tour-de-france-rider/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sprinters sometimes accelerate to 65-70 km/h - once, in the final
>>>> sprint, after they had saved their strength for most of the time with
>>>> the support of helpers.  600 W in addition to your own 136 W (plus 340
>>>> percent, remember?) is more than enough to accelerate an e-bike in no
>>>> time to 25 km/h.
>>>>
>>>> My back-of-the-envelope calculation using 136 W and +600W shows an about
>>>> fivefold power advantage for the e-bike.  Not much, you think, cars come
>>>> with 50 to 250 hp, making not that much difference on the road? Think
>>>> again.
>>>>
>>>> When I look at my power curve over the the past 12 months, that roughly
>>>> amounts to sustained power over five seconds vs. sustained power over
>>>> one hour, a factor of 720!
>>>> A 70 kg cyclist on a 10 kg bicycle needs about 14 seconds in order to
>>>> accelerate to 25 km/h. Adding a generous 10 kg for motor and batteries
>>>> reduces that to less than three seconds, the actual quotient is  <21%.
>>>> percent.
>>>>
>>>> To conclude this observation, which distracts from the actual point,
>>>> even old and weak, but healthy cyclists are able to produce 140 W or,
>>>> say, 2.2 W/kg for less than a half a minute, but people rarely do more,
>>>> when it isn't necessary.
>>>>
>>>> You don't need 250 W, even for riding a heavy dutch type bicycle, 140 W
>>>> is enough for doing 22 km/h.
>>>>
>>>> But what do I notice when looking at how average people actually use
>>>> their e-bikes on flat ground? Those people ride their e-bikes with about
>>>> 22 km/h, too!
>>>>
>>>> Adding another 500 $ or € to the cost of a better e-bike (say, 2500 €)
>>>> is al lot more attractive than adding the same amount to a 500 €
>>>> bicycle. Now that many modern e-bikes have got more power, lighter
>>>> frames and better gears, people _still_ ride their e-bikes with about
>>>> 22-23 km/h, just to not trigger the speed limiter.
>>>>
>>>> Unlike cyclists, e-bikers are not motivated or forced to adapt their
>>>> speed to circumstances such as wind, incline or ground conditions. Why
>>>> should you pedal more than 70 watts at a 4% hill, going 22 km/h? Easily
>>>> done on a 25 km/h e-bike restricted to 250 W on paper.  How many
>>>> ordinary people (not doing cycling as a sport) do you know who can
>>>> sustain > 304 W for hours?
>>>>
>>>> Doing the same calculation on the lower end (flat ground) or the upper
>>>> end (say, 20% grades) gives similar results, less than <40 W on flat
>>>> ground, even 12 % with 22 km/h is doable, needing 175 W human power plus
>>>> 600 W from the motor.
>>>>
>>>> Are you able to ride longer 12 % grade uphill with a speed of 22 km/h? I
>>>> guess not.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, your average utility or leisure cyclist couldn't and wouldn't
>>>> do that, either, not even when switching to an e-bike. He or she would
>>>> do what I'd do (and actually tried as an experiment, as you perhaps
>>>> remember from my previous answer to your question), I'd reduce the
>>>> 120-130 W I'd need for riding 4-5 km/h uphill to those 90 W I can
>>>> sustain for hours, let the motor add 340% ~ 306 W, doing an easily
>>>> ridden 12 km/h there.
>>>>
>>>> But that's me. From looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I
>>>> conclude that people are even more lazy, when given the choice they paid
>>>> real money for. They reduce their speed to what they can do without
>>>> having to learn to ride really slow, they slow down to about 8 km/h, now
>>>> needing about 230 W only for those 12 %, spending  50-60 W human power
>>>> plus 170-180 W from the motor.
>>>>
>>>> Just what they spend when going for a walk, even under extreme
>>>> circumstances.
>>>>
>>>> Usually, e-bikes do what people usually do with motor vehicles, their
>>>> cruising speed is limited mostly by regulations, not by the limits of
>>>> their own endurance, muscle strength or cardio fitness. Motorists use
>>>> all the power their motor and external energy source delivers, within
>>>> the regulatory limits.
>>>>
>>>> Cylists, are lazy too, even more so, because they have to. Ten colories
>>>> spent on needlessly accelerating and then braking are ten calories lost
>>>> and not available when the gained speed could have been used for just
>>>> rooling with speed for a while.
>>>>
>>>> Riding at your limit without overdoing is, getting strength and
>>>> endurance is an art.  But even without all that sport science training
>>>> methods, just _using_ your own power when all you have is that power,
>>>> for getting around on a bicycle far and fast enough will get you more
>>>> strength and endurance, on the long run.  This makes cycling more
>>>> usefull and more enjoyable, at the same time.
>>>>
>>>> Adding a strong motor to a bicycle, as it is done with e-bikes limited
>>>> to 25 km/h, eliminates most of that.  Arguing "but this still is
>>>> cycling!!" is like selling electric wheelchairs to healthy people and
>>>> pointing to the Paralympics to justify it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> "looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I conclude that people
>>> are even more lazy..."
>>>
>>> That's what I see as well.  Your post is well considered as an observer
>>> of the actual situation now.
>>
>>Coincidentally, yesterday's the New York Times had an article about a
>>young mother whose infant daughter died. The grief was overwhelming, of
>>course. Her major point was that she coped largely through riding an
>>eBike. Apparently her local terrain and conditioning or experience made
>>a conventional bike too difficult for her.
>
>I think it is a bit more complicated. You have to look at the sitution
>as the result of a process, not as a momentary, isolated decision.
>
>Before the advent of ebikes, people started cycling as a child, some
>early, some a little bit later. Our two boys started cycling even before
>elementary school. Some five year olds can do 50 km and enjoy it,
><https://www.mystrobl.de/Plone/radfahren/fahrten/urlaub/emsland1992.jpeg>
>most children should be able to do that two year years later, if they
>get the chance to learn it. The fascinating feature of cycling is that,
>just like with walking and running, skills, the ability to assess and
>handle their own strength comes with and by practice and intensity,
>taking motivation and time. Skills, both mental and physical ones, grow
>while and _because_ a child uses and trains his or her muscles, while
>riding more often, faster, longer distances and while handling more
>difficult situations needing and using more strength.
>
>Giving a child an ebike, because handling a bicycle is too difficult for
>her is like giving her a loaded firearm, because running away or asking
>somebody for help is too difficult.
>
>People are able to learn using a motorcycle or a car, without having
>used a bicycle, ever. But even if you take into account the trend of
>letting young people drive at an earlier and earlier age, we have so far
>refrained from letting preschool children drive a car or a motorcycle.
>
>Sensible people know that you can put children on bikes from a very
>early age and why you should do this. The belief that a necessarily
>long learning and strengh building phase can be cut out by starting with
>an ebike on only deprives them of the chance of ever learning to ride a
>bike properly. This is most obvious when considering children, but it
>applies to adults, too.
>
>
>>
>>I take that to mean there are special cases out there, as always. (Tails
>>of the normal curve.) And eBike riders can be enjoying the outdoors and
>>nature.
>
>People can also do this by driving a convertible with open top. Now even
>electrically and with a little less noise and no smell. :-) Just don't
>call this "cycling". It isn't.
>
>
>>But I agree, most eBike riders seem to want to avoid actual
>>exercise.
>
>The person who quite early coined the term Pedelec for 25 km/h e-bikes
>in the German-speaking world was a linguistics student who presented it
>as a marketing term in her master thesis and explicitly linked it to the
>message "cycling without effort".
>
>Besides that, using a bicycle for utility purposes and getting around,
>for example for commuting implies some excercise, whether you like it or
>not, it's hard to avoid. On the other hand, using an 25 km/h ebike for
>exercise that way is rather difficult. Most people live in urbanized
>regions, regular utility trips are rather short and most often on flat
>ground. Riding up to 25 km/h needs almost no effort with motor support,
>but riding faster than 25 km/h has to be done without any motor support.
>So what is it: exercising by carring a dead weight of about 6-8 kg while
>riding fast, or not exercising at all by riding slow? Simply
>transporting 7 kg of pebbles in the panniers would be easier and serve
>the same purpose a lot cheaper. :-)

Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> Am Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:42 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> ...
>>> But thats beside the point. The point being, giving a weak person the
>>> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy way
>>> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.
>>>
>>> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
>>> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
>>> different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle simulation
>>> done by its controller. And you convently ignore that most humans
>>> aren't professional competetive cyclists.
>
>> No I didn’t professional cyclists produce way more power both peak and
>> continuous,
>
> So you are doing it again: you conveniently ignore that most humans
> aren't top level professional competive cyclists, by talking about what
> professional cyclists do and by ignoring what ordinary people can do and
> what these people do with e-bikes on the one hand, and with real
> bicycles, on the other hand. But let's talk about that distraction, for
> a moment and lets mention in passing that some competetive professional
> offroad motorcyclists need more strength and endurance than your average
> cyclist on his bike.
>
> <https://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/steve-mcqueen-husqvarna-011.jpg>
>
>
>> some beyond 2000 watts some just under, which is comfortably
>> above what a E bike can produce.
>
> So now you are not only equating your average cyclist to word class
> athletes, you are now cherry picking the best of the best in that group?
> "`Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice."
>
> But perhaps you are just confused about what a human power curve tells
> about how much power ordinary people can deliver over what time span.
>
> In reality, a TdF athlete only spends about 140 W while riding in the
> peleton. Event the leader at the front rarely exceeds 245 W there.
>
> Source:
> <https://www.tour-magazin.de/profi-radsport/tour-de-france/tour-de-france-verstehen-wattleistungen-im-check-welche-leistung-bringen-die-profis-aufs-pedal/>
>
>
> | During a normal stage of the Tour de France, pro riders can
> | pump out around 230-250 watts on average, which equates to
> | burning about 900 calories per hour. But on some of the
> | harder stages they can average over 300 watts, or 1,100
> | calories per hour. Tadej Pogacar has a Functional Threshold
> | Power – an estimate of the power he can sustain for around
> | one hour – of around 415 watts. But for explosive one-hour
> | attacks on big climbs, some Tour riders have been known to
> | exceed an average of 500 watts. And in the final stages of a
> | sprint finish, sprinters can hit maximal efforts of over
> | 1,500 watts.
>
> from
> <https://www.alpecincycling.com/en/pro-peloton/from-body-fat-to-power-output-anatomy-of-a-tour-de-france-rider/>
>
>
> Sprinters sometimes accelerate to 65-70 km/h - once, in the final
> sprint, after they had saved their strength for most of the time with
> the support of helpers. 600 W in addition to your own 136 W (plus 340
> percent, remember?) is more than enough to accelerate an e-bike in no
> time to 25 km/h.
>
> My back-of-the-envelope calculation using 136 W and +600W shows an about
> fivefold power advantage for the e-bike. Not much, you think, cars come
> with 50 to 250 hp, making not that much difference on the road? Think
> again.
>
Fag paper calculations really?
>

>
>
> Doing the same calculation on the lower end (flat ground) or the upper
> end (say, 20% grades) gives similar results, less than <40 W on flat
> ground, even 12 % with 22 km/h is doable, needing 175 W human power plus
> 600 W from the motor.
>
> Are you able to ride longer 12 % grade uphill with a speed of 22 km/h? I
> guess not.

In my experience only the more expensive E MTB would manage that them selfs
as they have the higher Torque, certainly most hire bikes or cheap town
bikes are nowhere able to hold on to the 15 MPH limiter up even fairly
modest grades let alone double digit ones!
>

>
Large snips
>
> Riding at your limit without overdoing is, getting strength and
> endurance is an art. But even without all that sport science training
> methods, just _using_ your own power when all you have is that power,
> for getting around on a bicycle far and fast enough will get you more
> strength and endurance, on the long run. This makes cycling more
> usefull and more enjoyable, at the same time.
>
> Adding a strong motor to a bicycle, as it is done with e-bikes limited
> to 25 km/h, eliminates most of that. Arguing "but this still is
> cycling!!" is like selling electric wheelchairs to healthy people and
> pointing to the Paralympics to justify it.
>
A motor doesn’t make it a motor bike other than the very narrows of
definitions. Be they hire bikes like the lime bikes or mates E MTB or folks
cheap E hybrids.

They are much closer to human than motor, both in terms of bike weight
being a extra 10kg (though some are much less) and performance, hire E
bikes do not keep up with motorcycles away from the lights, they don’t even
keep up with me.

E MTB are like riding with a much fitter club mate, they are a bit faster
in the trails but again not motorbike fast as well MTB trails are technical
so yes power will help but it’s not the only thing that makes one fast, the
exception being fireroad climbs which frankly are fairly dull anyway so
generally places folks ease off and chat.

Ie at present level at least for uk E bikes quack and walk like a duck ie a
bike, rather than a motorbike.

Roger Merriman

AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> On 4/21/2024 6:52 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>> Am Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:42 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>
>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>> ...
>>>> But thats beside the point. The point being, giving a weak person the
>>>> peak power and the endurace of a world class athlete is just a fancy way
>>>> of describing the substitution of muscle power by motor power.
>>>>
>>>> Your wrong about the fact, too, and I've already mentioned that in
>>>> earlier discussions. You ignore that humans have a power curve much
>>>> different from a motor, even when accounting for that bicycle simulation
>>>> done by its controller. And you convently ignore that most humans
>>>> aren't professional competetive cyclists.
>>
>>> No I didn’t professional cyclists produce way more power both peak and
>>> continuous,
>>
>> So you are doing it again: you conveniently ignore that most humans
>> aren't top level professional competive cyclists, by talking about what
>> professional cyclists do and by ignoring what ordinary people can do and
>> what these people do with e-bikes on the one hand, and with real
>> bicycles, on the other hand. But let's talk about that distraction, for
>> a moment and lets mention in passing that some competetive professional
>> offroad motorcyclists need more strength and endurance than your average
>> cyclist on his bike.
>>
>> <https://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/steve-mcqueen-husqvarna-011.jpg>
>>
>>
>>> some beyond 2000 watts some just under, which is comfortably
>>> above what a E bike can produce.
>>
>> So now you are not only equating your average cyclist to word class
>> athletes, you are now cherry picking the best of the best in that group?
>> "`Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice."
>>
>> But perhaps you are just confused about what a human power curve tells
>> about how much power ordinary people can deliver over what time span.
>>
>> In reality, a TdF athlete only spends about 140 W while riding in the
>> peleton. Event the leader at the front rarely exceeds 245 W there.
>>
>> Source:
>> <https://www.tour-magazin.de/profi-radsport/tour-de-france/tour-de-france-verstehen-wattleistungen-im-check-welche-leistung-bringen-die-profis-aufs-pedal/>
>>
>>
>> | During a normal stage of the Tour de France, pro riders can
>> | pump out around 230-250 watts on average, which equates to
>> | burning about 900 calories per hour. But on some of the
>> | harder stages they can average over 300 watts, or 1,100
>> | calories per hour. Tadej Pogacar has a Functional Threshold
>> | Power – an estimate of the power he can sustain for around
>> | one hour – of around 415 watts. But for explosive one-hour
>> | attacks on big climbs, some Tour riders have been known to
>> | exceed an average of 500 watts. And in the final stages of a
>> | sprint finish, sprinters can hit maximal efforts of over
>> | 1,500 watts.
>>
>> from
>> <https://www.alpecincycling.com/en/pro-peloton/from-body-fat-to-power-output-anatomy-of-a-tour-de-france-rider/>
>>
>>
>> Sprinters sometimes accelerate to 65-70 km/h - once, in the final
>> sprint, after they had saved their strength for most of the time with
>> the support of helpers. 600 W in addition to your own 136 W (plus 340
>> percent, remember?) is more than enough to accelerate an e-bike in no
>> time to 25 km/h.
>>
>> My back-of-the-envelope calculation using 136 W and +600W shows an about
>> fivefold power advantage for the e-bike. Not much, you think, cars come
>> with 50 to 250 hp, making not that much difference on the road? Think
>> again.
>>
>> When I look at my power curve over the the past 12 months, that roughly
>> amounts to sustained power over five seconds vs. sustained power over
>> one hour, a factor of 720!
>>
>> A 70 kg cyclist on a 10 kg bicycle needs about 14 seconds in order to
>> accelerate to 25 km/h. Adding a generous 10 kg for motor and batteries
>> reduces that to less than three seconds, the actual quotient is <21%.
>> percent.
>>
>> To conclude this observation, which distracts from the actual point,
>> even old and weak, but healthy cyclists are able to produce 140 W or,
>> say, 2.2 W/kg for less than a half a minute, but people rarely do more,
>> when it isn't necessary.
>>
>> You don't need 250 W, even for riding a heavy dutch type bicycle, 140 W
>> is enough for doing 22 km/h.
>>
>> But what do I notice when looking at how average people actually use
>> their e-bikes on flat ground? Those people ride their e-bikes with about
>> 22 km/h, too!
>>
>> Adding another 500 $ or € to the cost of a better e-bike (say, 2500 €)
>> is al lot more attractive than adding the same amount to a 500 €
>> bicycle. Now that many modern e-bikes have got more power, lighter
>> frames and better gears, people _still_ ride their e-bikes with about
>> 22-23 km/h, just to not trigger the speed limiter.
>>
>> Unlike cyclists, e-bikers are not motivated or forced to adapt their
>> speed to circumstances such as wind, incline or ground conditions. Why
>> should you pedal more than 70 watts at a 4% hill, going 22 km/h? Easily
>> done on a 25 km/h e-bike restricted to 250 W on paper. How many
>> ordinary people (not doing cycling as a sport) do you know who can
>> sustain > 304 W for hours?
>>
>> Doing the same calculation on the lower end (flat ground) or the upper
>> end (say, 20% grades) gives similar results, less than <40 W on flat
>> ground, even 12 % with 22 km/h is doable, needing 175 W human power plus
>> 600 W from the motor.
>>
>> Are you able to ride longer 12 % grade uphill with a speed of 22 km/h? I
>> guess not.
>>
>> Of course, your average utility or leisure cyclist couldn't and wouldn't
>> do that, either, not even when switching to an e-bike. He or she would
>> do what I'd do (and actually tried as an experiment, as you perhaps
>> remember from my previous answer to your question), I'd reduce the
>> 120-130 W I'd need for riding 4-5 km/h uphill to those 90 W I can
>> sustain for hours, let the motor add 340% ~ 306 W, doing an easily
>> ridden 12 km/h there.
>>
>> But that's me. From looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I
>> conclude that people are even more lazy, when given the choice they paid
>> real money for. They reduce their speed to what they can do without
>> having to learn to ride really slow, they slow down to about 8 km/h, now
>> needing about 230 W only for those 12 %, spending 50-60 W human power
>> plus 170-180 W from the motor.
>>
>> Just what they spend when going for a walk, even under extreme
>> circumstances.
>>
>> Usually, e-bikes do what people usually do with motor vehicles, their
>> cruising speed is limited mostly by regulations, not by the limits of
>> their own endurance, muscle strength or cardio fitness. Motorists use
>> all the power their motor and external energy source delivers, within
>> the regulatory limits.
>>
>> Cylists, are lazy too, even more so, because they have to. Ten colories
>> spent on needlessly accelerating and then braking are ten calories lost
>> and not available when the gained speed could have been used for just
>> rooling with speed for a while.
>>
>> Riding at your limit without overdoing is, getting strength and
>> endurance is an art. But even without all that sport science training
>> methods, just _using_ your own power when all you have is that power,
>> for getting around on a bicycle far and fast enough will get you more
>> strength and endurance, on the long run. This makes cycling more
>> usefull and more enjoyable, at the same time.
>>
>> Adding a strong motor to a bicycle, as it is done with e-bikes limited
>> to 25 km/h, eliminates most of that. Arguing "but this still is
>> cycling!!" is like selling electric wheelchairs to healthy people and
>> pointing to the Paralympics to justify it.
>>
>
> "looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I conclude
> that people are even more lazy..."
>
> That's what I see as well. Your post is well considered as
> an observer of the actual situation now.

AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> On 4/21/2024 1:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 4/21/2024 12:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 4/21/2024 10:11 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Coincidentally, yesterday's the New York Times had an
>>>> article about a young mother whose infant daughter died.
>>>> The grief was overwhelming, of course. Her major point
>>>> was that she coped largely through riding an eBike.
>>>> Apparently her local terrain and conditioning or
>>>> experience made a conventional bike too difficult for her.
>>>>
>>>> I take that to mean there are special cases out there, as
>>>> always. (Tails of the normal curve.) And eBike riders can
>>>> be enjoying the outdoors and nature. But I agree, most
>>>> eBike riders seem to want to avoid actual exercise.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, yes, positive examples are out there, including
>>> relatively active cyclists who've always owned premium
>>> 'Sunday morning' bikes but in their 80s suffer stamina
>>> deterioration and find battery powered 25lb carbon bikes
>>> helpful.
>>>
>>> Which isn't the general run of things:
>>> https://www.chicagomag.com/wp-content/archive/city-life/April-2015/Divvy-Is-Usually-Faster-Than-Public-Transportation/divvy-commuter.jpg
>>
>> I'm reading on other forums that eBikes are over-represented
>> in crashes, perhaps because people who have near zero biking
>> experience are suddenly able to ride 18 mph in traffic.
>>
>
> Yes, and that's especially noted for urban electric power
> cycles and tourists. Often not cyclists (i.e., in traffic
> they do not think or react like cyclists), in unfamiliar
> neighborhoods with unfamiliar traffic/pedestrian patterns on
> a heavy thing, with which handling they are inexperienced,
> at speed. Dangerous mix.

Some are ridden poorly and sometimes anti socially but doesn’t seem to
equate to being dangerous we have lots of docked bikes and dock less bikes
most are E bikes now.

But this doesn’t seem to have resulted in a spike in fatalities or injuries
that I’m aware of, but UK does have a lower speed assistance plus in London
at least a shit ton of bikes particularly in central as last mile etc.

Roger Merriman

On 4/21/2024 4:09 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>
> A motor doesn’t make it a motor bike other than the very narrows of
> definitions.

From a pure logic standpoint, I think that statement is precisely
backwards. A bike with a motor is quite obviously a motor bike. The
manufacturers lobbied legislatures very heavily to carve a very narrow
exception into the laws, for legal and sales purposes.

Which is not to say I totally condemn eBikes. There are legitimate uses
for them, and I suspect many of us will someday require them. But they
are problematic in several ways.

I definitely think the upper speed for power assist is far too high in
the U.S. I think eBikes should give no assist above 12 mph.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Am Sun, 21 Apr 2024 20:09:08 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
<roger@sarlet.com>:

>AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> On 4/21/2024 6:52 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>> Am Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:42 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>
>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>> ...
....

>>> Adding a strong motor to a bicycle, as it is done with e-bikes limited
>>> to 25 km/h, eliminates most of that. Arguing "but this still is
>>> cycling!!" is like selling electric wheelchairs to healthy people and
>>> pointing to the Paralympics to justify it.
>>>
>>
>> "looking at what people do who _are_ into ebikes I conclude
>> that people are even more lazy..."
>>
>> That's what I see as well. Your post is well considered as
>> an observer of the actual situation now.
>
>If it’s using a bike for utility which most of the hire bikes are nowadays
>I really don’t see the problem?

Obviously. That doesn't mean that the problem doesn't exist, though. The
relevant fact is, cycling for utitity purposes creates strength and
fitness too, in the long run. It isn't the intent which counts, it's the
effect.

>
>Road/Gravel seems folks are rather missing the point with E bikes or they
>essentially become mopeds, with MTB while I don’t own one I do get why
>folks do like them, are close enough and for folks sessioning stuff ie they
>are riding the trails down, and then a fire road climb or get a lift up, a
>E bike allows them to do more and so on, it’s very much not my type of
>riding, but I can absolutely see why folks do like them, plus wanting to do
>longer rides and so on.

Oh, I can absolutely understand why people like e-bikes, sugar, opioids,
or driving their car around the block, when just crossing the street and
walking to the other side would do*). It is addictive and they develop
a physical dependenciy of various degrees. How often have I heard
healthy colleagues half my current age say "that's far too steep" when
talking about that ridiculously short and easy climb to the campus. 60 m
altitude gain over 1 km, varying from 2 % up to a few meters with 7 %.

When the weather outlook is unstable, I'm doing a local hill with 50 m
altitude gain and continuous twelve percent grade just for fun and
excercise - twelve times in a row. Two hours, 28 km, 845 m altitude
gain.

<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20231031/Z1profil.PNG>
<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20220718/20220718_00003.jpg>

Being able to do that doesn't come easy, when you haven't used the
muscles needed for cycling for years, that's for sure. Muscles atrophy
very quickly, as anybody knows who had to give up for a few months or
more, because of an accident or an illness.

But it comes essentially for free, when regularely riding to work or
other utility purposes and _not_ giving up because a few hundred meters
with, say, six percent seem impossible to handle on a bicycle.

*) Decades ago, when your children where still young schoolchildren, a
family friend with children and we visited some U.S. countries along the
east cost, by driving north, visiting Cape Cod, Boston, Salem and some
other places, on the way. In Boston, we stayed at a small hotel for a
day, having a strange experience when going for breakfast the following
morning. "Where is everybody", one of us asked. No hotel guest in sight,
empty parking lot. Well, we crossed the road on foot, to check some
shops offering snacks over there, but finally settled for a McDonalds on
that side, after walking perhaps another 100 m - and met many of the
hotel guests there, including their cars in the parking lot. Driving
one km to the next crossing, making an U-turn, driving back another km
and parking in 100 m distance from the hotel obviously was easier for
them. I doubt that it was faster, though.

--
Wir danken für die Beachtung aller Sicherheitsbestimmungen

On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 22:07:17 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/21/2024 4:09 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>
>> A motor doesn’t make it a motor bike other than the very narrows of
>> definitions.
>
> From a pure logic standpoint, I think that statement is precisely
>backwards. A bike with a motor is quite obviously a motor bike. The
>manufacturers lobbied legislatures very heavily to carve a very narrow
>exception into the laws, for legal and sales purposes.
>
>Which is not to say I totally condemn eBikes. There are legitimate uses
>for them, and I suspect many of us will someday require them. But they
>are problematic in several ways.
>
>I definitely think the upper speed for power assist is far too high in
>the U.S. I think eBikes should give no assist above 12 mph.

I rhink I agree with Krygowski's last point, but no, I'll never have
one.

On 4/21/2024 9:07 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/21/2024 4:09 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>
>> A motor doesn’t make it a motor bike other than the very
>> narrows of
>> definitions.
>
> From a pure logic standpoint, I think that statement is
> precisely backwards. A bike with a motor is quite obviously
> a motor bike. The manufacturers lobbied legislatures very
> heavily to carve a very narrow exception into the laws, for
> legal and sales purposes.
>
> Which is not to say I totally condemn eBikes. There are
> legitimate uses for them, and I suspect many of us will
> someday require them. But they are problematic in several ways.
>
> I definitely think the upper speed for power assist is far
> too high in the U.S. I think eBikes should give no assist
> above 12 mph.
>

Without parsing the actual limit, Mr Merriman has a point.

In plain English, a bicycle with assisted power is a 'motor
bike' but statutorily there's a distinction between 'assist'
and 'motor vehicle'.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971