>>28565279
>Technological """improvement"""
It's a redundant system solving a non-issue, not an improvement.
>no real downside
Aside from repair cost, potential parts availability (its proprietary)
>muh compromise
Why half ass two things when you can just whole ass one thing. Aka a very good Manual transmission.
>accessibility meme
I know you don't really care about that because you don't know any one armed riders.
>Hand strength
Buy a bike you can weild if you lack the strength to operate the one that's too much for you. If I was a Manlet I wouldn't buy a bike with 33" ride height nor demand the manufacturer to make the same thing but shorter.
>new thing bad
Bad thing is bad, I'm not a ludite. However when you shill a gimmick that negatively impacts the products lifespan and insist on yourself that New = better then you're mentally deaf or a PR agent
>>28565281
Funny how you fail to engage with literally any of my points, yet insist I engage with your word game.
>>28565291
If that's what you take away from the discussion, then you aren't picking up anything we are laying down.
>>28565295
a cable is simpler than an e crutch, a cable is easier to repair than an e crutch, a cable is cheaper to buy as a part than any part of your e crutch, and there is more mental faculties required to operate a traditional clutch than your e crutch.
You are all short sighted, ignorant, and blind consumers.
Physical components deteriorate and that feedback is given to the rider.
Hot take, I don't think people with one arm should ride a motorcycle.
No I don't think a limp wrist should hop on a giant bike or feel entitled to the big bike confiding to their shortcomings of their own physique.
Innovation isn't a bad entity, but blindly accepting all gimmicks as innovation is stupid.
If you suck at shifting so bad that you need a e crutch, by all means go for it. Just don't expect to recieve any respect from actual enthusiasts mmmkay