The E-Bike Identity Crisis: Why the Bicycle Industry Needs to Draw the Line

There’s a growing tension in the bike world right now, and it has nothing to do with trail conditions or new suspension platforms. It’s about identity. More specifically, what an “e-bike” actually is, and what happens when that definition starts to drift. In a recent open letter, Hans Rey, one of the most respected voices in cycling, stated that the industry is at a turning point. The decisions being made today about language, power, and classification of e-bikes will shape the future of trail access, regulation, and how bikes are perceived.

The Problem: Everything Is an “E-Bike”

Right now, the term “e-bike” is being used as a catch-all. It can mean a lightweight Class 1 pedal-assist mountain bike. It can also mean a throttle-powered machine pushing well beyond traditional bicycle limits. In some cases, it even overlaps with what are essentially electric motorcycles. That lack of clarity isn’t just semantic. It’s already creating friction with land managers, lawmakers, and other trail users. When everything gets grouped together, the most extreme versions of the category start to define it.

Why Class 1 Matters

Class 1 e-bikes have largely been accepted because they behave like traditional bikes. They’re pedal-assist only. No throttle. Assistance cuts off at 20 mph. Power output stays within a reasonable range.

In practice, they feel like a bike with a tailwind—not a motorized vehicle. That distinction is exactly what has enabled Class 1 bikes to access trails, bike paths, and shared-use areas. It’s also what keeps them aligned with the spirit of cycling rather than drifting into something else entirely.

The issue is that the category is starting to stretch. More power. More torque. Faster acceleration. Different use cases. At a certain point, you’re no longer talking about a bicycle.

The 750-Watt Line

One of the clearest lines in the sand is power. The 750-watt peak limit has become a benchmark for distinguishing between bicycles and motorized vehicles. But even that line is starting to blur.

There’s a difference between peak power and nominal power, and not all manufacturers play that distinction the same way. Some systems can produce bursts well above what consumers might assume from a spec sheet. From a user standpoint, that might sound like a performance advantage.

From a regulatory standpoint, it’s exactly the kind of gray area that leads to restrictions. And those restrictions are already happening.

This Isn’t Hypothetical

We’re starting to see early signs of what happens when categories get muddy. States like New Jersey are introducing legislation that could require registration, insurance, and helmet laws typically reserved for motorcycles. California is actively working to reinforce power limits to preserve trail access and improve safety. These aren’t fringe conversations. They’re active policy decisions being shaped in real time. And they’re being influenced by how the industry defines, or fails to define, its own products.

The Responsibility Falls on Everyone

What makes this situation different is that it’s not just a manufacturer's problem. It’s an industry-wide issue. Brands have to decide whether short-term performance gains are worth long-term access risks.

Media and marketers need to be precise with their language, rather than leaning into whatever sounds more exciting or clickable. Riders play a role, too. The way people use these bikes—how fast they ride, where they ride, and how they interact with others—shapes public perception. And perception drives regulation.

The Real Question

The takeaway from Rey’s letter isn’t anti-e-bike. It’s about boundaries. For years, the conversation has been centered around how far the category can be pushed. More speed. More power. More capability.

But that mindset ignores the bigger picture. Because at some point, pushing further doesn’t expand the category—it creates a new one. The better question isn’t how much power we can get away with; it’s how much is too much.

For riders, this might feel like industry noise. But it directly impacts where you can ride, what you can ride, and how bikes are treated moving forward. And for the broader cycling community, this is about protecting what makes a bike a bike.