Before cars, there were horses, and many of us have heard the near-cliche “If Henry Ford had given people what they wanted, he would have made faster horses.”  But he didn’t, and now we have traffic jams. Something important to realize though is that when Ford combined mobility with an engine, he didn’t rely on the design of a horse – he didn’t make a mechanical four-legged machine that mimicked a horse at all. Instead, he looked at the motor, and understood the underlying need (mobility), and designed the car around the new technologies at his disposal.   Think about that for a second.

Over at Eurobike this year, I saw a lot of ugly bikes. And they were all electric.  This is not to say that all electric bikes were ugly, but rather to make a point of something that struck me squarely between the eyes as I browsed around Eurobike: Electric bikes are evolving, but as they come into mainstream, they do not yet have an established design. We (the bike universe) simply don’t yet know what electric bikes are going to be, or even look like.

At the outset, I should draw an important distinction between North America and a healthy-sized swath of the rest of the industrial world.  In Europe, and even more so in Asia, e-bikes are nothing new. They’ve been around for years, and the mindset of the bicycle as “transportation” made the transition to e-bikes very, very easy for people to understand and accept.  But unlike the cheap electric bike swarms in Taipei intersections, the trekking or transport bikes in Europe are a hugely lucrative category.  Average price (depending on who you ask) seems to be around 1,500 to 2,000 Euro, and one brand manager confided to me that their european e-bike sales last year were $50M.

Meanwhile, over here in North America, bicycles are recreation.  An electric bike strikes some as about as sensible as an electric tennis racket, to make it electric defeats its entire purpose. It’s supposed to be exercise, complete with sweat and the promise that you’ll “lose 5 pounds in just one week, guaranteed or your money back!”.  Maybe, some might concede, e-bikes could be good for the elderly or the obese.  This is a dangerous conclusion to reach, as the electric bike is not likely an answer to questions that either of these demographics are asking.

It’s not that e-bikes are new; they’re not.  What’s new is the number of new brands getting into the mix, from new upstarts to established bigger players.  And with these new players and bigger guys come a unique new promise to e-bikes: more of the cycling industry’s top talent focused on it, and wider global distribution. These are the real changes to e-bikes.

For e-bikes to be commercially viable in an expanding market, it logically follows that the current customer base should show potential for expansion.  To expand the customer base, we’ll need new customer segments, or new geographies, or both.  This is where things got very murky at Eurobike this year: e-bikes for freeriding with dual crown forks?  Carbon fiber XC racing models with motors?  And who can forget the Cancellara debacle?  In trying to expand into new segments and geographies, e-Bikes represent an interesting congruence between chasing trends and rapid prototyping: in a short time, we’ve seen the introduction of lots and lots of new models, and everyone is simultaneously trying different things pretty quickly to see what might work. I’m reminded of the first full suspension mountain bikes, and how the first models were all vastly different, and the visual design was mostly a residual by-product of the engineering behind it.  I love prototypes – they’re an awesome and essential part of the design process.  But they’re rarely great sellers.

I’m excited by the idea of electric bikes, and I am even more excited about their potential.  But as the market expands, I’m concerned about three big things:  First, if the world is introduced to electric bikes with such blockish, frankensteinish designs, we’ll miss an important opportunity to get people excited about them.  if the first iPods resembled a homemade bomb with a battery bolted to a logic board, connected by exposed wires, they’d hardly have gained a solid footing with the fashionable crowd.  These bikes have every opportunity to look f@#king cool, to be a fashionable and hip addition to an urban lifestyle, a non-douchey and practical alternative to the fixie. I’m thinking here about Vespa, about electric motorbikes like the zero, and about matching helmets and bags accented by a Burberry tartan scarf.  But with few exceptions, the e-bikes I saw resembled at best an unremarkable cheap bike, and at worst, the something tantamount to fashion suicide, right up there with recumbents.

Second, I don’t think we’re clear about how many different customer segments these new e-bikes might appeal to, nor are we clear who we’re targeting with these new options.  When mountain bikes got started, they were just mountain bikes.  Now there are dozens of categories of mountain bikes, from DH race bikes to lightweight XC race bikes to singlespeeds.  At Eurobike, I didn’t see much evidence of people trying to clearly identify who they were designing their bikes for, and I think that’s largely because collectively, I don’t think we’re very sure about the potential customer segments that might exist.

Third, an e-bike renaissance in North America would ask bike shops to hire and/or train electronics-savvy mechanics – it’s one thing to fix a flat, quite another to identify a faulty capacitor or a blown power supply.  Bike shops that are quick to embrace this new revenue could gain a valuable position as an entrenched expert in the e-bike domain, and become the go-to shop for a region that’s far wider than the current customer radius.  But somewhere, that training has to happen.  Those shops need to be retrofitted to deal with problems.  And we don’t know in advance what those problems will be.

All of these concerns are opportunities: the first is to design an e-bike that people get excited about, in the exact way Tesla did for electric cars in the sports car demographic.  The second is for manufacturers to understand who they’re designing it for, and why, so that the story gets told in the right way, to the right people.  The third is the retail support structure that will make it possible for this category to do well.  When Henry Ford started selling the model T, the first car customers couldn’t take the car to see the same vet that they took their horse to when it got sick.  But that’s not to say that some veterinarians didn’t see a more lucrative opportunity in opening a car repair shop.

Many of the e-bikes I saw were, essentially, motorized horses: previous bike designs, with motors and batteries bolted to them in rather haphazard ways. This is not design, it is panic.  It’s my hope that e-bikes evolve into bikes that don’t look much like the bikes I saw. Some of the options available now might have the right function, but the form seems questionable at best. To settle for nothing more than retrofit design doesn’t seem appropriate for a category that offers this much potential. There were very few I saw that seemed to approach this as an entirely new category that might not need to be limited by the classic frame design, or handlebar design, or drive system, or anything else.  Even fewer seemed to have a clear message of who they were built for.


Written by chris in: General Musings |


  • See the work of Wytse van Mansum on the Urban Arrow.

    that doesn’t just pop a motor onto anything with two wheels.

    Comment | September 13, 2010
  • Excellent piece, Chris. And I couldn’t agree more.

    Well, I could, if you’d talked a bit about the wattage and speed issue. In the EU, e-bikes can’t be throttle-only, are limited to 25kph and can’t be above 250w. In US it’s much different and I’d very worried about the motorbikes that could soon be on bikepaths, but described as bicycles.

    Many e-bike orgs in the EU want wattage and speeds increased. Big mistake.

    If people wanted more speed and power they’d buy mopeds and motorbikes.

    I’m with you on the design front. Before Eurobike I got lots of press releases on how companies are making e-bikes sexier for the new, younger e-bike demographic.

    When I got to the show these bikes weren’t anywhere near as sexy as predicted.

    I worry that bike companies will start devoting way too much of their R&D budgets on a sector that’s very possibly close to saturation point, in Europe at least.

    It worries me that journalists continue to plug e-bikes as though they are Next Big Thing just because their market share, in percentage terms, is growing year on year. But big deal if it’s 25 percent YoY growth if the base was pitifully low in the first place.

    At Eurobike a German trade org revealed that e-bikes will sell 600,000 units in 2010. Sounds a lot but this is just 4 percent of the EU market for bikes. Prediction for 2011? Five percent.

    Why all the brouhaha for such a tiny market? Sure, the bikes are expensive, so lucrative, but if it ain’t mass market, why bother?

    Comment | September 13, 2010
  • [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Carlton Reid, Mark Sanders and Paul Run, chris matthews. chris matthews said: What did I see at Eurobike? Electric bikes. Lots and lots of hideous electric bikes. [...]

    Pingback | September 13, 2010
  • A refreshing change to the regular ‘sheep-like’ mantra.

    Change is 100% inevitable, and makes news. Taking change in the best direction is a bit more tricky. New product development, without long term direction, sometimes feels just another route – lithium to landfill… merely looking for the next craze to make a few $$$ on. This is a damn tough dilemma for me and anyone else in the design business.

    Like you and Carlton, the if we can promote products that the vast ‘blue ocean’ of non-cyclist find not only ‘soundbite’ / momentarily cool, but also give long term, health, fun pleasure and hassle free personal transport then i’ll feel much more comfortable.

    I loved your quotes: “…..if the first iPods resembled a homemade bomb with a battery bolted to a logic board, connected by exposed wires, they’d hardly have gained a solid footing with the fashionable crowd”
    ” … e-bikes I saw resembled at best an unremarkable cheap bike, and at worst, the something tantamount to fashion suicide, right up there with recumbents.”

    Phew, At least you didn’t add folding bikes to that :-)

    Comment | September 13, 2010
  • Chris Jordan

    Electric wheelchairs have also made as much sense as electric bicycles, or electric tennis rackets, for year and years. I know from experience.

    Comment | September 13, 2010
  • First of all, what is also clear is that the terminology is still not sorted out, including at the consumer level.

    “E-bikes” is perhaps more of an umbrella category to include electric scooters, I think, and “pedalecs”(PEDAL EleCtricity bikeS, or close.. is it “pedelecs”?) are the EU-term for those assisted-only-to-25kph electric-assist bikes.

    Imprecise, velo-related language can be distracting: Like many, I cringe at “bikers” used instead of “cyclists”, not because I want to sound douchey but because of the Hell’s Angels association.. or ha ha is this preference a kind of douchey thing?

    Aesthetically-only appealing pedalecs will probably self-select in a Darwinian sort of way, but what is more interesting to me is the new and heavily-invested involvement of companies like Bosch and Shimano. Should the market insist that they offer long-term warranties on their gear? I think so. Are they training mechanics at the relevant shops? I hope so, but when someone mail orders a bike and then has to ship it out for repair things get nasty, and if this person does not have a second bike…

    Personally, I first look for a competent bicycle manufacturer or retailer and then see what and even if they offer an electric option… and wait til they do.

    Comment | September 13, 2010
  • [...] not all that surprising considering the huge presence electric bikes had at the show (read Chris Matthews’ latest post for interesting commentary on that subject). The student designed e-bikes chosen by the jury were- [...]

    Pingback | September 16, 2010
  • gumby659

    The optibike has all of the sexy design elements, but at around $10,000, it’s way beyond what most people are willing to pay. I’d like to see it go full production.

    Comment | September 20, 2010
  • claude

    I will say that this is somewhat of an interesting post, but I think that it may misunderstand what e-bikes are, its purpose and its potential.

    Having DIY my own ebike, I can say my design would probably resemble those frankenbikes you mention. Ie.Norco six dual suspension with a big clunky box for the battery. (this becomes a 70 pound bike with battery) Furthermore, in canada we can go up to 32km/h, use a 500w motor and there is no need for a pedelec (which is by the way pedal control assistance instead of a throttle).

    I disagree that a bicycle is for recreation purpose as stated. A bicycle is a transportation device, the reason and way you use them will vary. I have my ebike to comute to work and a road bike when I want to do exercise. Each have a specific function, and both are optimised for that function.

    My ebike ride to work takes 15 minutes less then when I pedal with my road bike. It has better acceleration, better speed at hill climbing and can maintain a top speed of 32 km/h most of my comute. I dont arrive sweaty, do not need to take a shower, and can start to work immediately, without counting no traffic, free parking in the garage and availability of a secure way via bikepaths (oh, and it cost about 0.03$ of electricity each way)

    I do think that the ebike is oriented toward the crowd that do wishes to lose 5 pound in a week. Using mine to work, I can wear a suit and not be a sweaty mess when I arrive. If I wish I can pedal as much as I like, to do some exercise.

    My question, how much does one pay for the lightest road bike? The reason is an increase in performance do to lighter weight components and more fluid and efficient components. Would a low power motor with a battery do better for cheaper in terms of increase in performance. I says yes absolutely.

    I think there are 4 user groups:
    - comuter, which used to take a car of bus.
    - performers, use motor to enhance their performance
    - less in shape persons looking to get back into bicycling with being to slow. Assistance for steep hill climbing, a little faster top speed but for exercise purpose.
    - experimenter, creating crazy bike that goes to 100km/h or other (see to see more about this community)

    Lastly in terms of repainring ebike, I think it will be more a question of replacing entire component then repairing a specific fault. Example, swapping a controller, a switch, or a cable. I don’t think bike repairs will ever need to have electric engineer to do such work.

    Comment | September 6, 2011
  • want to appreciation for the efforts you have made in writing this article. I am hoping a similar best work by you sometime soon as well. In fact your creative writing ability has inspired me to get started on my personal website now.

    Comment | September 15, 2011
  • Greetings! I know this is kind of off topic but I was wondering if you knew where I could get a captcha plugin for
    my comment form? I’m using the same blog platform as yours and I’m having
    trouble finding one? Thanks a lot!

    Comment | January 29, 2014

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress | Aeros Theme | WordPress Themes