ADRIAN CARTER

Founder of Pace, bike designer since the year dot

“WITH THE BIG E-BIKE PUSH WE OPENED UP A FANTASTIC NEW CHAPTER, WITH EVEN MORE OPPORTUNITIES”

If you’re riding bigger terrain you’re climbing more to gain access to the trail head so efficiency remains as important as performance. Let’s take a current design trend as an example - running the chain over a high position idler gear producing a rearward axle path where it could be argued performance is taking precedence over efficiency. And of course if you’re needing more uplifts surely and inevitably e-bikes give you all the climbing ability you’ll ever need, virtually doubling the number of dropins you can do in a day.

As soon as e-bikes become an aspect of the bike of tomorrow then I think we all recognise we’re almost back to the start in terms of mountain bike development. Particularly when we accept what every e-bike rider knows – they’re a different tool that you ride over different terrain (further/ steeper/rougher) with a different style,

at a different speed all of which requires a total rethink in terms of chassis, suspension, tyre and cockpit design.

Performance driven design cuts out less efficient designs (say binning design B,C,D,E and F) to the point where all bikes use design A.

Why not use design A if all other designs aren’t as good? This is really well illustrated in enduro motorcycles which have been evolving for about 70 years rather than the 30 of mountain bikes. Gradually and inevitably moto design has ditched less efficient designs until you’re left with one where suspension, chassis and geometry design is broadly the same across all of the leading brands – almost literally to within a degree and millimetre. Will the same happen in high performance mountain bikes? Well why choose design B when A is better?

It’s natural selection.