Arggh! These lists are so frustrating!
I get it, it's just the nature of the beast-- shopping for an e-Bike is more complicated and, for most of us mortals, requires more research than buying a guitar, camera, or even a car, IMHO.
But I can't help reading this and thinking what I thought 14 months ago: It's astounding that no one provides a list of eMTBs under $4,000 and and under 50 pounds. I can't believe I'm the only person who cares about those two particular data points. (I'm sure others feel the same way about the metrics that were important to them.)
If Wired or anyone else feels compelled to publish a list, how about starting with a disclaimer: Explain that the drive systems are very different and go over the different types -- hub drives with gears, hub drives without gears, front hub drives, mid drives with torque sensors, mid-drives without torque sensors.
Then explain why watts and torque are very confusing metrics, and do not explain how much assistance you have or how fast the bike will go under different circumstances.
Then take Nash's approach, (or EBRs) and provide your favorite examples of each category.
Also: This sentence really annoyed me: "When you're carrying kids to school or flying down a hill at 25 mph with only a helmet for protection, you want a ride you can trust." Many of us go quite a bit faster than 25 MPH downhill. (I also don't seem to remember a lot of people talking about 'carrying their kids' to school on an e-Bike, and you aren't limited to just a helmet for protection.)
The tone just seems... weird, like the author hasn't talked to a lot of people who actually ride different kinds of e-Bikes and isn't even clear on what they are typically used for-- she's just been talking to the other writers at Wired and writing about whatever bikes are sent to them to review. Writing for Slate does not give you the chops to write a piece like this; it seems like the author's not really well versed on the vocabulary necessary to describe e-Bikes or her audience.
