although I agree that the torque from the motor is relatively moderate, the wear still accumulates with mileage. Riders with a crank drive also rarely have to stand on the pedals. The chain and the small cogs at the rear suffer much more wear and tear with a crank drive motor compared to a hub motor for the same mileage.
I agree totally with that Woosh but
saying crank drives inherently wear out drive components by default is wrong. It's either abuse via torque of rider or simple wear and tear consummate with usage. At riding weight of 105kg on ordinary mtb I could wear out same parts in similar mileages without the need of electric motor. To my mind the extra wear associated with emtb crank drive is simply a function of going faster, steeper and further. I expect around 1000 miles (minimum) from a cassette. That isn't difficult to achieve. (far exceeded on Haibike)
Again, to my mind that does not constitute any inherent problem with crank drives as suggested by some.
The other thing to mention is that much as its obvious hub drive is bound to suffer less drive mechanism wear, it simply doesn't do the job. I, d be walking up many steep, gnarly climbs in Derbyshire with hub drive, saving all drive mechanism wear. A tool that doesn't work never actually wears out.
There isn't a legal (250w) hub drive bike made that could compete with legal (250w) crank drive emtb on steep slow climbs.
Yes, hub drive have their uses but mtb is certainly not one of them.
Writing crank drives off because chains /sprockets wear out is quite ridiculous. All drive trains wear out.
Standing on pedals was stretching issue to make point high torque does not necessarily mean high power.