E-Bike racing is pointless - Discuss

[Tiberius]

The Theory and Philosophy of Electric Bike Racing

Purpose of this discussion. Every time some sort of ebike race or competition is proposed there is a chorus of people saying "what is the point, what does it prove?" This thread is to debate these issues. I hope thereby that we can concentrate the discussions here, and not overload threads about actual events with these questions. Therefore, please don't ask "what is the point?" about this discussion.

So, what is the purpose of an e-bike race, what does it prove?
Only a non-racer would ask these questions. The purpose is to come first. It proves that, at that place and time, the winner is a better person than the losers. Whether any wider meaning can be read into it, or whether any useful conclusions can be drawn is a different debate, and the purpose of this current discussion.

Do bikes have to be legal?
A fair question, but only a non-racer would ask it that way. A true racer would ask "When are the rules published, what are the names of the scrutineers, what are the penalties for being caught?"

Are modified bikes allowed?
My own view is that if they are not, then it really is a pointless exercise. Unmodified bikes belong in the manufacturers' test departments.


Nick

 

[Tiberius]

Theorem: E-bike racing does not have to be pointless, but in practice it always is

There is a funny effect, by which any attempt to make an e-bike race work actually turns it into a pointless exercise. What happens is that well-meaning people set about writing rules for the race, but miss the point.

What goes round the course is the combination of the bike and the rider. So as soon as you start writing rules about the bike, you just turn it into a contest between the riders.

This is particularly true (and blindingly obvious) if the course is on the flat and the minimum speed all round is above the motor assist cut off limit. And yet, people still want to address this problem by writing rules about the bikes.

I am in my 50s, and I have no intention of entering into a pissing contest against lycras with bulging thighs. What I need to do is to outwit them by having a faster bike, so I want a race configured so that is possible.

Nick

 

[burncycle]

Yes it is pointless.

Time trialing different ebikes with the same rider is more productive, over various terrain.
Time trials for medium distances.
Then laps on a course until the battery is dead from a full charge with the distance measured (Duracell Bunny).
Then chronic hills measured in time and the battery life remaining.
Example 300feet climb in 5miles.

Test could be done with a leisure cyclist, then a pro cyclist.

Data could be crunched with many different outcomes for the ebikes.

The ebike race smacks of the "top Gear" mentality.

Bob.

 

[Tiberius]

Time trialing different ebikes with the same rider is more productive, over various terrain.
Time trials for medium distances.
Then laps on a course until the battery is dead from a full charge with the distance measured (Duracell Bunny).
Then chronic hills measured in time and the battery life remaining.
Example 300feet climb in 5miles.

Test could be done with a leisure cyclist, then a pro cyclist.

Bob,

You are right, but what you describe is more like a consumer test than a race.

I need also to respond to something that David from Wisper wrote in another thread:

What we really need is a team of unbiased riders with exactly the same weight, strength, stamina and intelligence..... but until such a bike riding robot is invented I think we are stuck with bulging mussels and lots of lycra.

Surely it wouldn't be that difficult with the aid of a running machine with incline capabilities and a motor to turn the crank to simulate a riders effort to make an ebike test rig?​

David, you are absolutely right in what you say. But surely that is something that should be going on in the R & D department of a manufacturer.

Nick

 

[Tiberius]

Anyway, guys, I am sorry about the multiple posts but I'm going to be away for a day or two and I'm trying to kick off a debate.

If anyone is still interested, when I get back I will explain how and why I think it is possible to run an e-bike race in such a way that it isn't pointless.

Nick

 

[flecc]

Whether it's pointless or not depends on whether there is an objective, and whether that objective can be met. I don't think having a winner is an objective with e-bikes, because of their hybrid nature. Who won, the bike or the rider?

Answering that is like answering which is the system in the Toyota Prius that makes it successful, the electric motor or the petrol engine, a foolish question since they are both utterly dependent on each other. So it is with e-bikes. They don't have the motor power to tackle anything met on the roads, and with the added weight of an e-bike, the rider doesn't have the strength to do so alone either. As with the Prius, both are dependent on each other for success, which brings us back to "Who won", the rider or the bike.

Unless all riders are on identical machines, I think that's an unanswerable question.
.

 

[frank9755]

A good question, Nick - well done for posting it!

I believe the point of e-bike races is to generate publicity and hence drive sales. If they do that, they have been a success. If the racers enjoy them, that's also good, and if others enjoy reading about them, that's good too.

What they don't do is answer these questions
'How fast could I go on one?'
'What range could I get?'
'Which bike is best?'
'Which bike would be best for me?'

Standard lab tests would also be interesting, eg:
'How fast does it go under standard conditions eg:
- 80kg rider
- on the flat, up a 10% hill
- cadence of 40, 70 and x Nm pedalling force'

I agree that there is little point in confusing the two!

Frank

 

[keithhazel]

A good question, Nick - well done for posting it!

I believe the point of e-bike races is to generate publicity and hence drive sales. If they do that, they have been a success. .

What they don't do is answer these questions
'How fast could I go on one?'
'What range could I get?'
'Which bike is best?'


Frank

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
will it drive sales for all the e-bikes, after all will people want to buy one that came second/third/fourth ?

"how fast could i go on one"...... 15mph...then its down to how good the gearing is and how good your legs are....

range is also dependant on factors as weight of rider, terrain, wind, but also how much power is used...so no results from a rider is a definate answer...

and which bike is best is not answerable really...what is great for one is rubbish for another....eg.. all the hill climbing ability of an e-bike would be a pile of waste scrap metal for me living somewhere less hilly then holland.....

HOWEVER... I HAVE A QUESTION....

if 15mph is the legal limit and someone on a bike that can go at 20mph with or without modifications useing electric assist has an accident that he caused....how does he stand legally ? if he was going more then 15mph with assist was he riding an illegal vehicle that was also not insured/taxed/ m.o.t ?

serious question not my usual sarcasm..

 

[burncycle]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
will it drive sales for all the e-bikes, after all will people want to buy one that came second/third/fourth ?

"how fast could i go on one"...... 15mph...then its down to how good the gearing is and how good your legs are....

range is also dependant on factors as weight of rider, terrain, wind, but also how much power is used...so no results from a rider is a definate answer...

and which bike is best is not answerable really...what is great for one is rubbish for another....eg.. all the hill climbing ability of an e-bike would be a pile of waste scrap metal for me living somewhere less hilly then holland.....

HOWEVER... I HAVE A QUESTION....

if 15mph is the legal limit and someone on a bike that can go at 20mph with or without modifications useing electric assist has an accident that he caused....how does he stand legally ? if he was going more then 15mph with assist was he riding an illegal vehicle that was also not insured/taxed/ m.o.t ?

serious question not my usual sarcasm..

Typical Keith.
You're always going off on a tangent LOL.
Ask this in another thread.

People may buy an ebike even more if it has a good rating, though its alot cheaper than a more expensive ebike that comes 1st.
Its swings and roundabouts really.

 

[fishingpaul]

I would like to see all the bikes tested by the same riders ,and also with extra weight attatched,to simulate heavier riders, these events are usually taken over by fit cyclists who would not normally ride an electric bike.

 

[halfmedley]

I've just been reading the A to B review of the Cytronex and using the 260rpm version over their test route they claim that:

...the Cytronex (is) far and away the fastest bicycle we've ridden on this course beating the previous winner, the Ezee Torq and Forza, by a full 3 and half minutes.

Yet, further on the mentions that the Cytronex at Presteigne (fitted with a slower 235rpm motor) came 5th.

This leads me to suspect that the top four were either a) not road legal machines and/or b) ridden by very strong cyclists.

This does indeed "prove that, at that place and time, the winner is a better person than the losers." However, the problem starts when certain dealers/manufacturers then try to kid us that by winning one race theirs is by definition the best machine. I think we're all intelligent enough to take such claims with a pinch of salt. After all, most worthwhile competitions exist of leagues, rounds, stages etc and only using cumulative results can anything useful be concluded.

 

[Saddlesore]

E-bike racing is pointless - but its fun that's why people want to do it and nothing too serious should be read into the result.

Unless you introduce strict parameters into such a competition then nothing very conclusive is likely to emerge apart from plenty of scope for arguments over a pint of beer down the pub ( A good reason I think)

Its a bit like F1 motor racing where it is difficult to state with certainty if it is the driver or the car that influenced the result whereas in certain other formulae where the the car / engine / tyre combination are identical then it can be seen that the winner is probably the best driver.

However this e-bike competition is seeking to find the best machine and not the best rider and the only way you are going to find this out is to carry out the following:
a) Derestrict the machine so it is capable of achieving its maximum potential and using the same rider of one of same weight ( otherwise you will have to introduce handicaps) and carry out a quarter mile drag race.
b) Using the same set up and the standard battery normally supplied carry out a race on a circular course - the winner being the one who achieves the greatest distance in the shortest time ( computers at the ready to calculate that - designed to prevent someone dawdling at 5 mph to get the distance)
c) Same set up - race up a hillclimb course - fastest time wins as per a.
all this in throttle mode only.

Average out the results and Bobs your Uncle - Any Takers??

 

[Haku]

This does indeed "prove that, at that place and time, the winner is a better person than the losers." However, the problem starts when certain dealers/manufacturers then try to kid us that by winning one race theirs is by definition the best machine. I think we're all intelligent enough to take such claims with a pinch of salt. After all, most worthwhile competitions exist of leagues, rounds, stages etc and only using cumulative results can anything useful be concluded.

I think this sums things up pretty well, from the Tour De Presteigne 2008 details thread:

My original comment on "What exactly is the point of the Tour de Presteigne then?" arose out of talking to a friend who owns a Torq.

Basically he bought the Torq because it was "the bike that won the Tour de Presteigne" (something he tells me practically every time I see him out on the bike!).

Now this chap is actually very happy with his bike, but there seems to be a possibility he bought it on the basis of a misunderstanding.

 

[JohnInStockie]

I dont think that eBike racing is pointless, although I think that trying to draw any meaningful conclusions from the results to choose a bike for yourself can be. Its like saying that horse racing is pointless, is it the skill of the jockey or the speed of the horse? But I wont plow a field with a racehorse!

I think eBike racing DOES raise the image of the 'sport', but you have to remember that its truly 'man and machine', not one or the other. Its good to have boundaries tested.

John

 

[coops]

I think that some confuse what is a 'winning' bike for another rider with what might be a winning bike for them...

What makes the Presteigne rally quite interesting is that it is designed as an endurance test - 1 hour & 1 battery - aswell as being an offroad course allowing motor speeds above 15mph.

Its not that easy to speed for 1 hour on 1 battery, so rider power and battery size will come into it, aswell as general efficiency.

Yet, further on the mentions that the Cytronex at Presteigne (fitted with a slower 235rpm motor) came 5th.

This leads me to suspect that the top four were either a) not road legal machines and/or b) ridden by very strong cyclists.

My own first interpretation would be that the cytronex rider & bike did very well to come 5th - a battery with half the energy of some and a top motor speed several mph slower with all other things being equal and on a flat circuit they could therefore have been several miles behind after 1 hour just on motor speed differential alone. I assume they weren't and there are a good number of possible reasons, bike or rider, for that.

PS was that 5th in the rally, or the hill climb event? Mark/Cytronex has previously posted that he chose a motor geared a bit too high for the hill climb, based on incorrect information about the climb, so he and the bike began to flag before the end and I think fell behind a bit in the placings as a result.

235rpm would not be road legal either though, and I'd like to have a long term report on that AtoB test with 260rpm motor, if it was in a 28"/700C wheel as I expect, before I make any judgements...

Stuart.

 

[Tiberius]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for your contributions; its an interesting debate. There are three points arising that I think its worth discussing before trying to reach a conclusion. These include that its only a bit of fun, and the question of bike, rider or bike+rider, but the one I want to start with is that it doesn't necessarily show which is the best bike.

This is the observation I made earlier that its not a consumer test. JohnInStockie made the point succinctly with his comment about not ploughing a field with a racehorse, and Coops rightly said that what is a "winning" bike for one person may not be for another.

I think we can now move on and put this idea to rest. A consumer test for the "best" bike, and a race are two different things. An F1 race does not tell you whether to buy a Ford Mondeo or a Vauxhall Vectra, but manufacturers put enormous effort into it, and people watch it. This is an example where the machines that race are so far removed from anything the public can buy, but nobody questions it on those grounds.

So an e-bike race should not be expected to settle an argument over which bike is "best"; in fact its better if that notion is left aside from the beginning. What it can be is good promotion for a manufacturer, a demonstration of the state of the art, a test of components, a benchmark exercise, a research opportunity, a trial of skill, etc, etc.

In short, it is sport. While we could argue that a particular, badly conceived, e-bike race may be pointless, we cannot say that all e-bike races are pointless unless we also argue that all sport is pointless.

Nick

 

[burncycle]

Good discussion and the jury's still out on this one.
I do agree its fine as long as its just for fun, but most people do take sport too seriously, dont they ?

Bob.

 

[flecc]

I do agree its fine as long as its just for fun, but most people do take sport too seriously, dont they ?

Bob.

Including BBC1 for the next two weeks.
.

 

[Tiberius]

Thanks Bob,

You do, however, bring me neatly to the second point - and Saddlesore made a similar comment earlier.

Its all very well treating it as fun, and who wants to do things that are not fun, but it is entirely wrong to say it doesn't matter and should not be taken seriously. That is the way to make sure that it is pointless.

I cannot stress this enough. The absolutely worst thing that can happen, whether its a race, a pub quiz, or SATs for 14 year olds, is for the organiser to be seen to not take it seriously.

A good example here is the marathon runs in various cities. There are fun runners, and people in fancy dress, and people doing it for charity. The organisers accommodate these and everyone is glad to see them. But imagine the uproar and the ill-feeling if the event was not also run properly for the serious runners.

I hinted at the beginning that there is a racer's view and a non-racer's view. With respect, only a non-racer would say "its only a bit of fun". Any racer hearing that phrase would be a hundred miles away in an instant. Two racers overhearing that would compete to be the first to be a hundred miles away.

What a racer expects is this:
Rules to be published in advance
All rules to be enforced
Judges, scrutineers, organisers, etc, to make sensible decisions and not act arbitrarily.
If you don't have that minimum standard of professionalism, then it is liable to be a farce.

It may not hurt to repeat this.
If the organisers do not take it seriously then it will be pointless.

There is a corollary to this. The phrase "the judge's decision is final" sounds like plain common sense; after all, there has to be some definitive end to a debate. But the true racer sees this as a warning that he may want to reconsider entering - it could be a sign that the organisers aren't serious and want to be able hand down arbitrary decisions if they are pressed.

Nick

 

[coops]

There will always be competetive racers who must finish first to avoid disappointment for themselves, or to show their bike is a 'winner', but I think a well-organised 'rally' can also be a proving ground for good bike design & reliability and if the participants take the valuable opportunity to compare performance (taking some account of rider fitness) rather than just race, the exercise can be both fun & informative for those who don't just disappear over the horizon.

Something more like the Jurassic test in design, where participants score points for time taken to cover a set distance and the amount of energy used in the process would illustrate more clearly the capabilities of the bikes, as long the riders are well-matched & maybe agree a reasonable 'average' level of input, though that would be hard to judge.

To be honest though, the strengths and weaknesses of different bikes are broadly understood, so the key is to match a well-designed & made bike with a riders particular style & needs.

The competetive mentality does nothing (that I can think of) to promote better understanding or wellbeing.

Stuart.