Yet reading the public announcements back to back reveals a striking pattern. Quite a few seem to have found a new golden calf in the Avinox motor. But instead of just asking who mentions the motor the most, we need to ask a much deeper question. Why are so many brands converging on the exact same narrative in the first place?
The Source of the Echo
To appreciate the scale of what is unfolding, it helps to start at the source. Avinox recently released their new M2S drive unit, rated at a maximum peak power of 1500 Watts and 150 Nm of torque. The company proudly states that over 60 industry partners have already integrated their latest drive systems.
It is entirely expected that the motor manufacturer’s own sister brand Amflow would echo that same messaging. The structural shift worth examining begins when independent brands outside that relationship adopt precisely the same approach.
The Symptom of a Narrative Vacuum
Across the industry, bike manufacturers are introducing radically different flagship models using the exact same terminology and focal points. On the surface this looks like a simple marketing echo chamber. But it’s actually a symptom of something much deeper. Many brands currently lack a stronger and more accessible story to anchor the sale. They are facing a narrative vacuum.
The Easiest Common Denominator
In a market where the local dealer is no longer structuring the purchasing decision the way they used to, brands are forced to find new ways to connect with buyers. Developing a unique and compelling brand identity is difficult. Communicating the nuanced benefits of specific suspension kinematics or carbon layups takes time and effort.
The motor becomes the path of least resistance. It’s comparable. It’s tangible. It’s easily and immediately so. A peak power of 1500 Watts and 150 Nm of torque are numbers that any consumer can grasp instantly. Relying on the Avinox specification sheet is not just a lazy marketing choice. For many brands it has become an absolute necessity to stay relevant in a highly competitive market.
The Commoditisation Trap
But that necessity carries a steep price. When marketing leans so heavily on an external reference point like the most powerful motor available, it risks reducing the manufacturer to little more than an assembler, welding tubes around a battery and a screen. It commoditises the e-MTB. If the motor is all that matters, why should a rider pay a premium for a boutique frame when a budget brand offers the identical 1,500 W and 150 Nm on the specification sheet?
This is the trap of performance lingo. It creates a numerical arms race that distances the rider from what actually makes a bike great. As we have discussed extensively throughout our tests and editorials, true performance is not found on a specification sheet alone. Ultimately, a great bike might even be a bike you forget about. If you are constantly thinking about the 1500 Watts under your pedals or staring at a top tube display, the product has failed to integrate seamlessly into the experience.
Reclaiming the Ride
A motor doesn’t dictate how a bike corners in loose dirt. A battery doesn’t determine how a suspension platform recovers from consecutive square edge hits. The brands that will survive this homogenization are the ones that treat the motor as a component of their vision rather than the absolute definition of it. They will be the ones who focus on how a system integrates, how the kinematics are tuned, and how the bike behaves when the new bike smell fades and the real world riding begins.
Hardware escalation alone cannot solve the structural challenges of our sport. We need brands to be confident enough to sell their own visions on engineering, on geometry, and their own ride feel. If they do not, they are simply marketing another company’s motor and paying for the privilege to do so. We leave it to you to decide. Is this peak performance or the slow fading of brand identity?
Words & Photos: Jonny Grapentin
About the Author
Jonny Grapentin
Jonny Grapentin is an editor at 41 Publishing for E-MOUNTAINBIKE and DOWNTOWN. His background as a publisher in digital education explains his didactically grounded approach. He is responsible for "The MIRROR" column, focusing on development logic and the long-term relevance of products beyond launch cycles. His expertise lies in evaluating technological innovation and everyday utility, which he demonstrates in his numerous product tests. Whether it’s kids' bikes, pizza ovens, or espresso machines, he consistently tests innovations for real-world value, and critically questions market trends.
