Would you install a weightless motor to your bike?

[Deleted member 121159]

Just a thought experiment - would you install a weightless motor to your bike that'll, say, increase your power by 50%?

The point of this experiment is to think about what we feel is a legitimate upgrade to the bike and what's 'cheating'.

Some of us will say we don't want an e-bike because it's heavy and handles differently to a normal bike. So suppose the motor didn't weigh anything and the bike feels exactly the same, but it silently boosts your power by 50%. Suppose you can easily afford the upgrade - would you do it? Is that cheating? If other riders noticed that you were faster because of the weightless motor, would that make you feel like you're cheating?

How about other upgrades that make the bike lighter and more aero? What about high-end tyres with low rolling resistance? They make you faster too, so is that also cheating? Do you feel differently about the imaginary weightless motor upgrade and normal (actually feasible) upgrades? Would you feel a little bit guilty if you noticed that you were faster up hills overnight because your new bike weighs 5kg less and your tyres are just faster?

Now think about upgrades that don't affect the weight or aerodynamics, but indirectly increase your speed by making the bike comfortable to ride. Say you invested in getting a bike fit, a saddle that's comfy for you, or a suspension stem, and so on. Is that also cheating?

Please note, I'm not trying to say that you shouldn't make upgrades to your bikes. Noticing some single speed riders on audax rides prompted this question, that's all. I'd love to hear what people think.

 

[Punkawallah]

While I frequently complain that e-bikes are ‘cheating’, it’s done with tongue firmly in cheek. I’d rather see someone out pedalling an e-bike than sat in a car, if only because they may then be less likely to take up a hospital bed when I need it :-)
Personally I wouldn’t take the motor option, because it was actively making you go faster. Aero, tyres etc are what I’d term ‘passive’ advantages, which while they -let- you go faster, they wouldn’t unless you put the effort in first. I can see the element of ‘challenge’ in breasting the hill under your own steam.

 

[wafter]

An interesting suggestion but still doesn't address my main reasons for disliking e-bikes - such as additional cost and complexity of non-standardised parts; which is surely yet another route toward assured obsolescence..

If all down-sides were magically removed (which of course they can't be) I'd have no objection on a utility bike; probably less-so on a leisure steed..

 

[wiggydiggy]

Yes, lifting my eBike would be much easier with a weightless motor.

 

[Drago]

Cheating? That would imply it is some kind of competition with rules.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Interesting question. I think in my case the answer is no. If I wanted to make my bike faster I could always (a) carry less pointless crap around with me or (b) buy a lighter bike or (c) ride it in flatter places or (heaven forbid) (d) pedal a bit harder. I only ride for a bit of fun and exercise. If I worried about how fast I was, life would be a constant disappointment.

So no, I don't think I would. If I was still commuting ... maybe.

 

[Mo1959]

It’s only cheating if it’s giving you some sort of undisclosed benefit, such as in competition or I suppose in the likes of Strava segments where it is unfair to compare your times with normal bikes.

 

[youngoldbloke]

Yes I would, but I only ride an e-bike because I'm now unable to ride an unassisted one. I've been riding bikes for getting for 65 years so I reckon I can do what I like now.

 

[Deleted member 121159]

While I frequently complain that e-bikes are ‘cheating’, it’s done with tongue firmly in cheek. I’d rather see someone out pedalling an e-bike than sat in a car, if only because they may then be less likely to take up a hospital bed when I need it :-)
Personally I wouldn’t take the motor option, because it was actively making you go faster. Aero, tyres etc are what I’d term ‘passive’ advantages, which while they -let- you go faster, they wouldn’t unless you put the effort in first. I can see the element of ‘challenge’ in breasting the hill under your own steam.

Yes I have nothing against e-bikes either and even think they might be the way to get more people cycling. This question is more aimed at recreational cyclists.

The active/passive distinction is interesting. The motor only responds to pedalling so technically it's not completely active. It only amplifies your effort and in that sense the same as other upgrades.

It is interesting to me that many cyclists want to take on challenges to go further and/or faster, but also want to make upgrades to the bike which make the challenges easier. Why not make the challenges harder by riding slower bikes?

Again it's not an attack on riding nice bikes.

 

[All uphill]

Cheating what or who? What is the prize?

The concept of cheating makes no sense to me in the context of my leisure and utility riding.

 

[Deleted member 121159]

Cheating what or who? What is the prize?

The concept of cheating makes no sense to me in the context of my leisure and utility riding.

In the context of setting personal goals and challenges, for example, even if there's no official competition. What if you set out to complete a 400k ride and got a friend to drive a van in front of you for drafting? What if you waited for the day when there's constant tailwind?

 

[Jody]

I'd do it if there were no weight penalty. The ones we hired last year made up hill on the trails (on full boost) almost as fun as the downs.

 

[Deleted member 121159]

It’s only cheating if it’s giving you some sort of undisclosed benefit, such as in competition or I suppose in the likes of Strava segments where it is unfair to compare your times with normal bikes.

In a competition, using aerodynamic technology to make cycling easier is allowed but using medical technology to achieve the same is not allowed. Why?

Obviously the gains achieved by EPO would be much greater than deep section wheels. But suppose there's a medical technology to save 10 watts rather than 100 watts or whatever. Should that be allowed? (Assume that it doesn't make their hearts burst either)

 

[Bristolian]

Would I? No, I prefer to make my way in cycling (as in life) by my own efforts but have no issues with anyone feeling the need for some outside assistance. Horses for courses.

I don't consider adding a motor to be in the same bracket as buying a lighter or more aero bike as no matter how much marginal gain is obtained from those features the overall performance of man and machine is ultimately down to the effort put in by the rider.

 

[Dogtrousers]

It is interesting to me that many cyclists want to take on challenges to go further and/or faster, but also want to make upgrades to the bike which make the challenges easier. Why not make the challenges harder by riding slower bikes?

That's an interesting question that I've often asked myself. I ride a comfortable, rather heavy, steel bike. I love it. Occasionally when I have money burning a hole in my pocket and/or it's my birthday I wonder whether I should treat myself to a fancy lightweight machine. It's very tempting.

I generally end up deciding against because I'd just change myself from being a slow old bugger on a steel bike to a slow old bugger on a lightweight bike. I end up blowing the money on fancy GPS tech instead, so I can know exactly how slow an old bugger I am.