Originally Posted by
350htrr
I never said it was "the same", What I said is (tried to say) was that BOTH end up helping, (the overall "effect"... of the mechanical advantage or an E Motor) both are actually assisting, allowing a person that
could not, or
would not make it up a particular hill,
to make it up that particular hill... NOW, how much assistance is
too much assistance and still keep an E-Assist bike a bicycle still ...??? IMO as long as the motor cannot make it up the hill without your pedaling input, (working up some sweat) ,
it is assisting you, once you do not need to pedal and the motor takes you up that hill, (and you are no longer working up a sweat)... You are
now riding a moped, IMO...
EDIT; and... Yes, to most people on here, ANY kind of motor assistance makes the bicycle a motorized bike, (technically 100% true) ...
I get what you're saying. I guess I'm responding to arguments I've heard elsewhere that adding a motor to a bike is no more of an assist than adding lower gears.
It's nonsense, of course. And I think they know it's nonsense. If it were really the case, why would someone spend all the $ for a motor if inexpensive gears were the same thing? From a mechanics standpoint, gearing only allows you to complete the same amount of work with less force (or torque), but it takes proportionately more time, so the amount of work performed is the same.