For at least 50 years bike value has been defined by a simple equation: their efficiency in turning human effort into forward motion. The quality (and generally, price) of a bike was defined by how efficiently it solved that equation and the definitive aspect of that solution was easily packaged and sold as weight savings. Everything else was secondary. This paradigm was really put in high gear with the advent of drop bar road bikes and derailleurs. At the end of the day, weight ruled supreme, less by virtue of its actual value in solving the efficiency equation than for the fact that it was so darned easy to quantify.
Seems to me that the industry has critically failed to notice is how fundamentally the advent of e-bikes has altered the efficiency equation and therefore, disrupted the faster/farther/easier paradigm. Yet even today, weight is still the/a primal factor driving e-bike price and in evaluating e-bike quality. I think it's mainly driven by the bike industry in general thinking that every "cyclist" expects an ebike to be as close to traditional as possible (i.e. batteries hidden in the frames and motor integrated such that they are not so noticeable).
Realistically, there is no reason the weight/power-efficiency paradigm should apply to anything other than racing bikes.
Here's why I bring this up. I think this is the reason ebikes are not really getting people to consider them viable transportation solutions. More battery capacity that can be hidden in a frame tube is needed and more power so assist is truly effective past 20mph/32kph is needed. I'm not advocating the 10kw motorcycle-like ebikes that have riding geometries that don't really allow effective rider input but something in the range of 1000W mid-drive and 2000W hub drive systems that allow for sustained commuting speeds in the range of 25-35mph (please I know there are those that will quickly say this is no longer a bike but I have hit speeds of 35mph on a non-powered bike going down hills since I was probably 12 years old so I don't need to hear that mamby pamby stuff again).
If there was an affordable transportation-grade ebike available (I think Vintage, Wattwagon, and Bultaco have viable solutions now but they are on the high side of price scale) would it be find a lot of market success?
Seems to me that the industry has critically failed to notice is how fundamentally the advent of e-bikes has altered the efficiency equation and therefore, disrupted the faster/farther/easier paradigm. Yet even today, weight is still the/a primal factor driving e-bike price and in evaluating e-bike quality. I think it's mainly driven by the bike industry in general thinking that every "cyclist" expects an ebike to be as close to traditional as possible (i.e. batteries hidden in the frames and motor integrated such that they are not so noticeable).
Realistically, there is no reason the weight/power-efficiency paradigm should apply to anything other than racing bikes.
Here's why I bring this up. I think this is the reason ebikes are not really getting people to consider them viable transportation solutions. More battery capacity that can be hidden in a frame tube is needed and more power so assist is truly effective past 20mph/32kph is needed. I'm not advocating the 10kw motorcycle-like ebikes that have riding geometries that don't really allow effective rider input but something in the range of 1000W mid-drive and 2000W hub drive systems that allow for sustained commuting speeds in the range of 25-35mph (please I know there are those that will quickly say this is no longer a bike but I have hit speeds of 35mph on a non-powered bike going down hills since I was probably 12 years old so I don't need to hear that mamby pamby stuff again).
If there was an affordable transportation-grade ebike available (I think Vintage, Wattwagon, and Bultaco have viable solutions now but they are on the high side of price scale) would it be find a lot of market success?
Last edited: