While I have some general agreements with the article, I find some glaring misrepresentations in your response.
Many heavy duty, EBike designated chains, Connex Whipperman for example, won’t run on narrow side chainrings popular with mid drive users.
I didn't even know Whipperman had e-bike chains. I was referring to KMC's heavy duty e-bike chains, which work fine on narrow/wide chainrings in my experience (dozens installed successfully on a variety of bikes).
Front drive hub motors have very safe and practical applications.
They do, and if you read my reply again, I acknowledged as much. What I am concerned with is front hub conversion kits, which is what the article was referring to. Front forks aren't warrantied for front hub motors, so front hub conversion kits are a problem. I've personally seen forks that failed from conversion kits. However, as I acknowledged in my original post, a bike built, engineered, and warrantied around a front hub motor is a different thing entirely.
Broken spokes are rare in properly built wheels with quality rims and spokes. I’ve seen a fair number in mid drives. And never any unusual rates with proper hub builds.
What do you define as a properly built wheel? I regularly see broken spokes in a variety of hub motor applications. BionX, Rad Power, Pedego, you name it. What is improper about these builds?
I think you miss the point regarding power levels. Justin pointed to the advent of 3000W mid drives. They are hard on drive systems. Very hard.
I agree. They're also illegal to use on anything other than private property, so would presumably be a niche application?
BIONX is an example of one regenerative braking system. My steel fork, front DD using a Grin controller and CA3 is extremely effective. As a Grin user you may have utilized that feature. BIONX is no longer available and maybe not a good representation of how it should have been implemented?
Perhaps not. The fact remains that the article talked about regenerative braking wear as if it were a one-sided thing. It's not, it's a two-sided issue (disc pad wear on one side, motor wear on the other.
Visit a forum with higher voltage mid drives and read about disc pad wear. Significant for some unless upgraded to high end systems.
Would these be street legal? I only have experience with street legal class 1 and class 3 mid-drives, and my comments were only for street legal e-bikes. I believe that disc brake wear is negligible on a lightweight and street legal mid-drive. And potentially less costly than the motor wear of a regenerative system.
Higher end bikes fo have great performance and are fabulous bikes, but pretty anemic for much of the market. Bafang popularity clearly demonstrates that.
I think it's hard to parse Bafang's popularity. I think part of it is more power, and part of it is a lower price. Which does it lean more into? I can't say. I just ordered a bike with an OEM Bafang mid-drive myself, so I'm not closed off to Bafang as a brand.
Your post is a great counterpoint, but I think you make judgements that leave many holes and exceptions. Some, like front hubs glaringly narrow. Front drives can be very successful build methods. Albeit limited, low power dual torque arms and steel forks, but still no reason to pitch the baby with the bath water.
Again, re-read my comment about front hub motors. I dismissed hub motor *kits* for quality and safety concerns. A frame is likelier to handle a rear hub motor than a fork is to handle a front hub motor. You might get lucky in either case, but in both cases they're not engineered for that application when you're doing a conversion. I can only again point to the fact that I acknowledged their potential validity for an OEM build, though.