Power vs Battery
Electric mountain bikes (eMTBs) are often marketed on headline numbers: “XXX Nm torque”, “Peak power: YYY W”, “Unleash your climb”. And yes—those are attention-grabbers. But how often do they really matter in your everyday rides? More importantly: at what cost (weight, battery drain, price, etc.)? What riders actually want (and need) — battery capacity, power delivery and efficiency beat raw torque more often than not.
What Actual Riders Say
From E-MOUNTAINBIKE’s 2024 eMTB Reader Survey and 2025 Trend Poll (https://ebike-mtb.com/en/2024-emtb-reader-survey-and-trends-2025/), when asked what they want most from a motor, riders ranked “natural ride feel, efficiency, and low noise higher than “maximum torque” or “maximum power”. In usage, the most used support modes are the mid-to-moderate support settings - Trail/eMTB or Tour. Only ~5–7 % of riders make “Boost” or full-power their go-to mode. Regarding battery capacity about 60 % are riding bikes with 600-800 Wh capacity. And about 40% are using close to 75-100% of the batterys capacity on a averaga ride.
Why Max Power / Max Torque Is Over-Emphasized
Diminishing returns
After a certain point, more torque or power gives you less marginal benefit. If your bike already has enough torque to climb the steeper trails you ride, more torque won’t make climbs much easier—but it will cost in terms of weight, cost, battery drain, and possibly ride feel (harsh power hits, wheel spin, etc.).Real-world usage is moderate
As data shows, riders mostly use mid-range support modes. They rarely run full-power all the time. That means the motor’s behaviour in those moderate modes (how smooth it is, how well it delivers torque vs. how it wastes energy) matters much more than its peak specs.Weight & design trade-offs
To handle higher torques (and power), bikes often need stronger (thus heavier) components, reinforced frames, heavier motors or cooling, stronger drivetrains. That extra mass works against climbing and draining the battery more quickly.Battery drains fast in high power modes
High torque/power implies high current draw, which in turn drains battery much faster (especially in steep climbs, technical terrain). The same battery will give you much less range if you ride aggressively in full power vs. more moderate, efficient modes.
Why Bigger / Better Battery Matters More
Range & flexibility
A larger battery (or more usable battery capacity) gives you more flexibility—longer rides, more vertical gain before needing to recharge. Most riders want to finish the ride, not worry about running out of battery.Efficiency is king
If your motor delivers smooth torque, good power curves, efficient electronics, and you ride in support modes intelligently, you get more usable range for the same battery size. Better torque management, smoother power delivery, lower losses from friction, heat, etc., allow you to “stretch” your battery farther than simply having more peak torque which might go unused.Real-world constraints
Weight of battery, charging time, battery durability, pack configuration (integrated vs removable) matter. A big battery that’s badly integrated or weighed down by a heavy motor ends up hurting more. Conversely, a reasonably sized battery with good real-world range and smart assistance modes yields better everyday satisfaction.Desire for features like range extenders / fast-charge
Usually riders prefer options like range extenders (for when battery gets low) and fast charging rather than simply more Nm. It’s about staying on the trail longer or reducing “ankle-biting” battery anxiety.
Why Most Riders Don’t Need More Torque but Better Control of Existing Torque
Most trails and terrains people ride on don’t require “monster torque”. Moderately steep grades, mixed terrain, singletrack—none of these typically demand the maximum torque numbers shown on spec sheets (unless you’re racing, doing shuttle laps, or hauling heavy loads).
What does matter is how the torque is delivered: is it smooth, controllable, predictable? Does the motor’s control system allow gradual build-up, or is it jerky when you open the throttle or switch support modes? Ease of modulation makes a big difference for traction, confidence, and efficiency.
Rider weight, tire grip, suspension setup, and overall bike weight often make as much or more difference than raw torque. If you have a 25-kg eMTB and a huge battery but poor setup or heavy wheels/tires, you might actually suffer more inefficiencies than someone on a lighter bike with moderate torque but a well-matched battery.
Psychological effect: knowing you have reliable performance (range, consistent assistance, low battery drain) builds confidence. Chasing Nm might give bragging rights, but if your battery dies halfway up a climb or you have to avoid steep terrain because of battery limitations, that’s far worse than having “just enough” torque.
What Most Riders Prefer: Range Over More Nm
Riders overwhelmingly value being able to ride longer and further without worrying about charging or running out of battery.
Many would rather accept “only” 80-90 Nm (or whatever is adequate for their terrain) in exchange for more usable watt-hours, lighter weight, better support modes, and more predictable performance.
Range extenders, fast charging, incremental improvements in motor efficiency get more votes (real, actionable utility) than incremental gains in max torque.
Conclusion
Power (torque / peak wattage) sells well. It looks great on a spec sheet. It gets headlines. But for the average rider, more important is how you use what power you already have, how efficiently it is delivered, and whether your battery supports your riding habits.
If you're choosing between two bikes and one has slightly more max Nm but much worse battery or heavier weight, chances are the latter will underperform for your needs.
If you can get a motor that delivers good mid-range torque, smooth delivery, moderate weight, and pair it with a well-sized battery (say ~600-800 Wh), you'll get more satisfaction and fewer trade-offs.
At the end of the day, most riders would rather have more range, better control, quieter operation, and more reliability than raw torque. Because if your battery dies high up, or you have to constantly charge, or the ride feels jerky—you won’t care what the power spec said on day one. And don’t forget the 25km/h compulsory speed limit:)
Why Open E-Bike Systems Are the Future of Cycling Innovation
The e-bike industry is booming. Sales are growing across the globe, urban commuters are trading cars for two wheels, and enthusiasts are pushing the limits of what’s possible with electric assistance. But for all this momentum, the industry is being held back by one fundamental problem: closed systems.
Today, most major e-bike drive unit manufacturers tightly control their hardware and software ecosystems. Motors, batteries, controllers, and even displays are often locked to a single provider. On the surface, this makes sense for a brand trying to deliver a seamless experience. But history shows us that open systems lead to faster innovation, stronger ecosystems, and better results for both companies and end users.
It’s about time for e-biking to follow suit.
Lessons from mobile: Innovation Through Openness
If you look at the history of computing, the parallels are striking. In the early days, computers were often closed systems. Companies like IBM or Apple in its earliest days provided tightly integrated hardware and software, and outside developers had little chance to contribute. This slowed down innovation because only a single company could decide what features would exist, when they would appear, and how fast they could reach users.
But when platforms opened up—think of the personal computer ecosystem in the 80s and 90s, or the explosion of mobile apps after Apple and Google opened their app stores—innovation skyrocketed. Suddenly, thousands of developers and companies could contribute ideas, tools, and features. Competition created better products. Collaboration shortened development cycles. Entire industries were born because the platform was open to participation.
The same principle applies to e-biking. Right now, closed systems mean that only the manufacturer can decide what software features exist, which accessories are supported, or how data flows between devices. If the pace of development seems slow, it’s because it’s bottlenecked by one company’s priorities, and those priorities often don’t match with the wishes of the user.
Lessons From Mobile: Innovation Through Openness
The best example of how openness drives progress comes from the world of mobile. When Apple and Google opened their platforms to outside developers through app stores, the result was an explosion of innovation. Thousands of companies and independent creators suddenly had the freedom to build tools, features, and services that the platform owners themselves would never have imagined.
From fitness trackers to navigation apps to banking on the go, the mobile experience became richer and more useful precisely because the ecosystem wasn’t closed. Customers benefitted from endless choice, and manufacturers benefitted from the added value created by others.
E-biking has the same potential. Right now, closed systems mean that only the manufacturer can decide what software features exist, which accessories are supported, or how data flows between devices. If the pace of development seems slow, it’s because it’s bottlenecked by one company’s priorities, and often those priorities don’t match with the desires of the user. If e-bikes opened up in the same way smartphones did, innovation would accelerate overnight.
Why Closed E-Bike Systems Hurt Everyone
For Customers:
Closed systems limit choice. Riders can’t use 3rd party apps, or the devices they already own. A cyclist with a Garmin or Wahoo head unit may find limited or no integration with their e-bike. Riders who want specific data, custom apps, or performance tweaks are often left frustrated because the system simply doesn’t allow it.
Imagine buying a smartphone where you could only install a small number of pre-selected apps by the manufacturer. That’s essentially what many e-bike owners face today.
For Manufacturers:
Closed systems might feel safe in the short term, but they ultimately slow down progress. Instead of benefiting from a global ecosystem of developers and suppliers who could build on top of their hardware, manufacturers are left carrying the entire innovation burden themselves. That means slower feature rollouts, higher R&D costs, and less flexibility in responding to market demands.
Moreover, customers increasingly value flexibility and integration. A brand that insists on locking people into its own displays, its own batteries, and its own apps risks alienating tech-savvy riders who expect more freedom.
The Case for Open Systems in E-Biking
So what would an open e-bike ecosystem look like? Let’s explore some possibilities.
1. Better Connected Devices
Imagine your e-bike seamlessly integrating with your Garmin, Wahoo, or Hammerhead head unit. Instead of juggling multiple displays, all your ride data—power output, motor assistance, battery status, even predictive range based on terrain and your history—would appear where you want it.
With an open system, integration wouldn’t be left to the goodwill of the motor manufacturer. It would be possible for third-party device makers to plug into standard APIs, giving riders a smoother, more unified experience.
2. New Custom Apps and Smarter UX
Open systems invite developers to build apps and services that manufacturers never considered. Want an app that adapts motor assistance based on your heart rate? Or one that adjusts battery management depending on the GPX route you upload? Or maybe an app designed for indoor trainers that simulates outdoor e-bike rides?
With an open drive unit, these apps could become reality—developed by startups, independent developers, or even the riders themselves. Just as the App Store created an ecosystem of apps nobody predicted, an open e-bike platform would spark creativity and expand what’s possible.
3. More Customization for Riders
Cyclists love customization. From choosing their saddle and tires to fine-tuning gear ratios, riders want control over their machines. E-bikes should be no different.
An open system could allow:
Custom motor profiles (not just eco, commute, race) tailored to specific riders.
Battery optimization based on a route, terrain, or personal preferences.
Accessibility features for riders with disabilities, built by specialists outside the core manufacturer.
Instead of being told “this is how your motor works,” riders could decide what works best for them.
Why Manufacturers Should Care
It’s easy to see why customers would benefit, but why should manufacturers embrace openness? After all, aren’t closed systems a way to lock customers into their brand?
Here’s why it’s actually in their best interest to open up:
Faster Time to Market
By allowing third-party developers to build software and accessories, manufacturers reduce the pressure on their own R&D teams. They can focus on what they do best—making great drive units—while others handle features, apps, and integration.A Larger Ecosystem = More Value
Just as Android’s openness has led to a diverse hardware ecosystem, an open e-bike system would create a network effect. More developers mean more apps, more integrations, and ultimately, more value for the customer. That makes the manufacturer’s platform more attractive, not less.Stronger Customer Loyalty
Paradoxically, openness can increase loyalty. Riders are more likely to stick with a brand if they know they’re not locked in. Just like PC gamers choose certain platforms because they support third-party upgrades, cyclists would choose drive units that allow flexibility and freedom.Future-Proofing
Technology is moving fast. Today’s closed solution might look complete, but in three years it could feel outdated. By embracing openness, manufacturers ensure their systems remain relevant as new devices, sensors, and use cases emerge.
What an Open Drive Unit Could Unlock
Let’s dream a little. If e-bike drive units became open platforms, we might see:
Smart route-based battery management: upload a GPX file, and the system automatically conserves energy for long climbs while giving extra power on sprints.
Performance coaching: apps that analyze both human and motor power to give real-time training feedback.
Seamless smart home integration: your bike communicates with your charging dock, your phone, and your wearable to optimize charging cycles and health data.
Safety innovations: third-party developers creating crash detection, theft prevention, or predictive maintenance tools that work across different e-bike brands.
Community-driven features: imagine open-source motor profiles tuned by expert riders and shared freely across the community.
None of this requires manufacturers to do all the heavy lifting. It just requires them to open the door.
Conclusion: Open Systems Accelerate Progress
The e-bike industry is at a crossroads. It can continue down the path of closed systems, where progress is slow, options are limited, and customers are locked in. Or it can embrace openness, where ecosystems thrive when everyone is allowed to contribute.
Open systems would mean faster innovation, better experiences for riders, lower costs for manufacturers, and a richer ecosystem for the entire industry.
Like it or not, e-bikes are here to stay, and they are becoming more than just bicycles with motors—they’re connected devices, part of a larger digital and mobile ecosystem. And like every digital ecosystem before them, they will reach their true potential only when they’re open.
So Bosch, Shimano, Brose, Fazua, Tq, Yamaha and all others - it’s time to open the ride.