The first thing worth saying is that this is not a dismissal of Avinox.

On the contrary, the system is clearly impressive. The power delivery appears refined, the integration is exceptionally well executed, and the overall package feels like one of the most sophisticated developments the eMTB category has seen in some time.

In the right environment, it makes perfect sense. Riders who live near truly large mountains, with sustained steep access roads and long vertical climbs, may well find that level of performance genuinely useful.

But most riders do not live in that environment. And that is why I keep coming back to the same conclusion: the Ibis Oso V2 may ultimately be the more significant bike.

Not because it is more extreme, but because it feels more relevant to how many people actually ride.

1. Peak power matters less than usable power

One of the most interesting questions in eMTB right now is not how much power a motor can produce, but how much of that power can be used meaningfully on real trails.

In many cases, the limiting factor is not motor control. Systems such as Avinox appear very well managed in that respect. The limiting factor is the trail itself.

Trees, rocks, switchbacks, cambers, roots, line choice and traction all shape how much assistance can actually be applied. On tighter, more technical terrain, the ceiling arrives sooner than many spec sheets suggest.

For that reason, I suspect many riders will find that 100Nm is already more than enough. Personally, I would go further: around 85Nm feels close to the point where the return on additional torque begins to diminish quite sharply.

Beyond that, extra output may remain impressive, but not always especially transformative.

2. Greater output also raises a practical concern: range

The other side of very high torque is energy consumption.

130Nm, and even more so 150Nm in boost, inevitably puts greater pressure on battery range. That is not a criticism of one system in particular so much as a simple reality of the category.

In practice, that may matter more than many riders expect. Without a thoughtfully designed range extender solution, it becomes easier to imagine the excitement of huge power giving way to a more familiar concern: how far the bike will actually go.

And once riders begin reducing assistance levels to preserve battery life, an obvious question emerges. If you are moderating the system to protect range, how often are you truly benefitting from its full capability?

The most impressive technology is not always the technology that improves the greatest number of rides.

3. Exceptional integration does not automatically mean essential integration

Another reason Avinox has generated so much attention is its integration. Here too, the praise appears well deserved.

Yet there is a difference between a feature being well executed and being central to the ownership experience.

Take the touchscreen, for example. It is elegant, modern and undeniably premium. But how often do most riders really need that level of on-bike interaction?

My suspicion is that many riders will settle quickly on two or three preferred assistance modes and rarely move far beyond them. In that context, deeper configuration may become something used occasionally rather than constantly.

For occasional adjustments — perhaps before a trip, or before a particularly long ride somewhere unfamiliar — using a phone may not feel like such a major compromise after all.

That does not make the integration unimportant. It simply means its day-to-day value may vary more than its headline appeal suggests.

4. Compact packaging is impressive, but not necessarily transformative

There is also the question of motor compactness. For the power available, the packaging is undeniably remarkable.

Even so, I am not convinced that this changes the category as much as some suggest. These are still recognisably eMTBs, not so they were only 3 or 4 years ago, but with all the presence and intent that implies.

Compactness is a genuine achievement. Whether it meaningfully reshapes the riding experience is a separate question.

5. The Oso V2 stands out because it is not confined to one role

This is where the Oso V2 becomes especially compelling.

Many of the newest Avinox-powered bikes feel purpose-built for a specific category: trail, enduro, or long-travel gravity-focused riding. There is nothing wrong with that, of course. Specialisation often produces excellent bikes.

What feels unusual about the Ibis Oso V2 is the extent to which it can step across categories without feeling like a compromise.

The ability to move from 140/130mm to 180/165mm with a second fork, shock and clevis in roughly ten minutes is not a small adjustment. It meaningfully alters the character of the bike.

Even before considering changes such as 29er to mullet or chainstay configuration, the Oso V2 already feels less like a single fixed product and more like an adaptable riding platform.

One platform, several very real use cases

That flexibility is what makes the Oso V2 feel so important.

It is easy to imagine an Oso S without a range extender in 29er  as the ideal setup for technical local trails that are challenging and engaging, but not exceptionally steep or fast. i.e.: your every day after work laps in the forest or weekend local group ride where having fun with small features and the flow of the trail is what is it all about.

It is equally easy to imagine the same platform becoming an Oso DH with a range extender for bike park laps, or for uplift-style riding on days when the lifts are not running (or places without an uplift) and your local or national enduro races (I think that international races like the EDR would require hot swapping of the main battery and that is something that is beyond what most are willing to do and spend for so admittedly there is still a compromise but since such race are currently almost inexistent due some UCI inability to monetise them,

And then there is the travel scenario: big rides in Lofsdalen, heading into the Swedish mountains in search of longer, more committing terrain where range, adaptability and descending confidence all start to matter at once.

Seen through that lens, the Oso V2 offers something quite rare. It does not simply chase one performance peak. It broadens what one eMTB can credibly be.

Closing thoughts

Avinox may well prove to be one of the most influential new systems in the category. It is innovative, highly integrated and clearly capable. And I can see that brands that have not jump on the bandwagon will likely struggle to sell high end EMTB for the foreseeable future.

But influence does not only come from pushing the outer limits of power. Sometimes it comes from building a bike that meets more riders, in more places, across more styles of riding.

That is why I keep coming back to the Ibis Oso V2.

And it is also why I have just ordered an Oso DH (with the Oso S clevis and 29er 465 dropout)  as my next coaching and race bike — because that combination feels like the clearest expression of what makes this platform so compelling in the first place, and e-Ripley for my personal use and trail coaching and and e-HD6 for racing and big days in the mountains. 

For all the attention currently focused on headline torque numbers and next-generation interfaces, the more meaningful development may be this: a genuinely versatile eMTB platform that can evolve with the ride, the terrain and the rider.