Hacker News Reader

Comment by MichaelNolan | Hacker News Reader

A lot of comments are casting doubt on why “athletes” would be interested in this product. In the bike world, electric pedal assist bikes have become very popular. I have some family members who are avid cyclists. They do 100+ miles a week. As they have gotten older (60+) they were losing the ability to engage in social rides with their bike friends, but e-bikes have solved that issue by giving them just a small boost needed to keep up.

I could see this doing the same for older runners if the tech gets good enough.

“Athlete” != “professional athlete” the word encompasses a wide range of people and abilities.

View on HN

Yeah, stuff like this is great for people who want to be outside and get some exercise, but aren't doing it for the purpose of competing with anyone.

I personally love hiking. I love going into nature, seeing new places, and being away from people. But there are times where I go for a slightly easier course instead of the one I actually want to do, because that few extra hours would absolutely wreck my body, especially since I'm often hiking in different places for several days. A little boost would be nice.

And with e-bikes, they're great for commuters and people just riding around their neighborhood. Lots of people ride them in my town for doing shopping trips. More affordable than a car, better for the environment, better for your health, and people who otherwise would take a car because they can't deal with pedaling uphill or long distances have a great alternative. I imagine powered shoes will be the same. People who feel like they're too old/out of shape to walk long distances often opt for cars, but if powered shoes give them the confidence to walk, it's far better to take an electronically assisted walk than to sit in a vehicle.

The linked article says this at the end:

> * If you have a body, you are an athlete.

Pedantic, but the definition of an athlete is someone proficient in a physical activity. Quite some people barely use their bodies, unless we count moving in and out of a car.

> I could see this doing the same for older runners if the tech gets good enough.

I have degenerative disc disease that's severe enough to prevent me from running without causing neurological problems or pain. I miss being able to run (I'm in my early 40s), I haven't done it in 8 years. If something like this could lead to treating my problem, it would open up new worlds for me.

People with pedal-assist ebikes do more work and ride them for more distance than people with acoustic bikes.

Less gatekeeping, more celebration: imagine being Pogi and being able to crank 300 watts for hours on end. It would make touring the countryside a joy!

I don't think this is really true in general. When you climb a pass, the distance and elevation are fixed; the ebike riders buzzing by at twice your speed are not doing more work than you - they are avoiding some of the work inherent in the climb.

I'm sure it depends on geography. In my area, the e-bikes are pretty much confined to the rail-trails, which are flat. When I get out into the hills, the bikes buzzing by me at twice my speed are all conventional. I've seen no e-bikes out there.

Also, making educated guesses, it may be a non-issue. Most of the e-cyclists in my area seem to be divided into two categories: 1) What I would call adult beginners, who had bikes but didn't ride them much before they got e-bikes. 2) Practical uses such as commuting, transporting kids, etc. And recreational use of e-bikes seems to have peaked while basic transportation use continues to grow.

The commuters pass me at a high speed, but they're also in good control, and polite. The beginners tend to ride at the same speed as conventional bikes, or even slower.

The real problem that e-bikes solve is not faster horses, but whether someone wants to get around on a bike at all.

If they're going twice your speed, they can go twice as far. Assuming they're personally providing at least half the power over the course of the bike ride, they're expending identical calories to you, possibly more to compensate for their heavier bike.

It's true that the moment-to-moment intensity is lower, but lowering intensity is some of the most common advice given to people struggling to get into a sport without their body rebelling, and the challenge as often as not is that they're bored at the beginner's pace and want to push more.

It's the same concept as assisted pull ups or knee pushups. Sure, you can build up from scratch by just doing a fraction of the duration, but that's boring and frustrating. Being able to actually move your body the full distance with less effort is a much more engaging way to build up the physical capacity you need to do it without the assist.

They can't go twice as far if the ride is up a defined climb. One you do the distance, that's it, you reached the pass, you can now only coast back down to the base.

In my experience, those on e-bikes are older and less fit in general, so it's not a matter of them making up for the work in volume; it's more that they couldn't do the climb at all without the assistance.

Also, your assumption about them providing half the work is surely wrong. Even basic ebikes provide 250W; some models provide double or triple that still. The rider provides probably 125W at most, so a third or less of the total power.

On a particular climb, sure: energy is conserved, but this is a curb-cut effect. It's easier to make a little jaunt on an ebike, so people are more likely to use their ebikes to take that little jaunt.

More rides, for more distance. The integrated effect is more energy expended.

I think the key factor is amount of rides. On a one to one comparison, obviously an ebike is less work but how much more often are ebike riders riding?

I don't own one but there have been plenty of times in my life where I go somewhere ina car that's in biking distance but don't because maybe there's a decent hill on the way and I don't want to arrive sweaty.

The easy ride an ebike offers opens up more opportunities to ride.

Ding ding ding! It's a curb cut

Social rides? I think using a pedal assist bike would more readily lead to social ostracizing amongst friends who are using regular bikes. In my experience, at least among my circle of friends, if one person couldn't keep up they would rather shorten the distance than allowing that person to use an e-bike.

Electric pedal assist bikes are best suited for commuting and running errands, i.e. using the bike as a transportation tool, not a recreation tool.

This sounds like a gross generalization of cyclists—I hope everyone’s friends aren’t this petty! I’ve gone on plenty of rides on an e-bike/not on an e-bike with folks doing the opposite and have never felt ostracized or made others feel ostracized.

As other commenters posted, it gets even more people out on the paths who wouldn’t normally be able to keep up or might feel self-conscious, and I think that’s a really positive thing.

I must admit I don't interact with all kinds of cyclists. My circle of cyclists are the ones who like indoor cycling as much as going outdoors, and they almost always have a power meter and like to challenge themselves for power PRs, and they tend to be Strava Premium users.

Sounds insufferable.

Who are you to say what e-bikes are best used for? They are a lot of fun to ride.

It's my sincere opinion. You are allowed to disagree.

It’s not about distance, it’s about burst. It sucks to go on a ride where you fall behind or have to all-out every time there’s a hill or you need to accelerate after a stoplight. May only need 50-100w, but makes it so people can keep up with the group and have a fun time.

Depends on how decent your friends are… one couple I know in particular, they both love MTB, but have different endurance levels, so with one having an e-bike it evens out nicely.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com