|
|
|
|
|
by avar
320 days ago
|
|
Before the "fat bike" phenomena the same demographic used to ride around in "snorfiets" scooters which were theoretically limited to 25 km/h, but pretty much everyone modified for speeds of up to 50 km/h. But somehow the Dutch have this collective amnesia on the topic, and today nobody remembers how the "snorfiets" problem of 10-15 years ago has pretty much disappeared, to be replaced by a quieter and safer mode of transport (even ilegally modified E-Bikes usually fall far short of modified "snorfiets" speeds). > [...]appear to be designed without pedaling in mind,
> as exerting effort without proper ergonomics would
> quickly become uncomfortable and painful.
This is a trend in E-Bike design in general, which makes sense. When they first came out manufacturers were just adding a motor and battery to existing designs.The "fat bike" design is something that wouldn't work well unassisted, because it trades a severe increase in rolling resistance for better ride comfort. But as a clean sheet design it makes more sense than the alternative. Why incorporate a complex suspension design (which, to be fair, some of them also have), when you can just have the tire absorb the bumps in the road? The marginal cost in electricity is trivial. |
|
It's only a trend because people are not using them like bikes. The people who still want to pedal but need help because of illness, old age or too-long-distances for normal cycling often purchase actual bicycles which use normal bike parts.
> The "fat bike" design is something that wouldn't work well unassisted, because it trades a severe increase in rolling resistance for better ride comfort.
That is an understatement. People would quickly develop knee and/or lower back pain if they had to put any effort for any meaningful distance.