Schils and Eddy Merckx

don_don

phil s wrote:

I happened upon this thread a while back and was interested in what sounds like it's going to be a porn-iferous build. Are you planning on racing or is it just going to be a poseur bike?

Oh no LiT, you've got the racing crew involved :shock:

Quick everyone, run and hide!

greg66_tri_v2.0

jashburnham wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

phil s wrote:

Another bling bit of kit I have raced for a while and that works is Zero Gravity brakes.

Really? I've heard mixed views about them. The ZeroGs or the Negative Gs?

The NERD versions look the nuts:

Yeah, but brakes is an area where I'd rather go for performance over looks. I know, I know, the traditionalist in me is holding me back again. Oh well...

il_principe

Also who in their right mind would spend $666 on brakes? I'm sticking with Chorus...

they are beautiful though.

phil s

In answer to the question about brake calipers I am talking about the Zero Gravity. I have used them for three seasons from January to October and they've been great in conjunction with Koolstop Salmon pads for alu rims. Have also used them in the Alps and Pyrenees and was happy with their stopping power at 50+mph, although I do conceed that they need a bit of fiddling to get them set up properly first time you install.
As for the answer on wheels, yes of course there are wheels more aero and better rolling than others but for your common-or-garden amateur racer it's far better to invest in a solid all-rounder (such as the handbuilt combo I gave as an example) and to use the spare cash to hire a powermeter and either get a book or hire a coach to learn how to use it. I wasted some good years of my life training inappropriately. Sure most forms of riding a bike will get you "in the ballpark" fitness wise if you mix it all up a bit, but the specifics you can achieve with a powermeter shouldn't be sniffed at.
Anyhow, I digress, this is a thread about building a bella bici 8)

cjcp

phil s wrote:

I'd avoid all that hassle if you're not racing and invest in a bling set of handbuilts - maybe IRD cadence with White Industries,

I'm being tempted down the IRD route myself.

lost_in_thought

phil s wrote:

Are you planning on racing or is it just going to be a poseur bike?

Good question! I had all sorts of elaborate and cunning plans for sportives and triathlons in 2009, which have been rather hampered by my achilles and its rupturing ways... but in time, racing, yes.

phil s wrote:

Anyway, back on topic, are you specifically after carbon wheels for your new rig? You do realise the hassle of swapping out brake pads and the expense of fixing/replacing punctured tubs? There are several carbon wheelsets out there now that are designed to take clinchers, and/or have alu braking surface. I raced Mavic Cosmic Carbones last season (tub version though) and they are a superb wheel once you're rolling over 25mph and very, very strong... and there's no poncing about with brake pads. This season they've made the range a bit lighter. Edge rims also have a good rep, and while they don't have an alu braking surface they do come in a clincher version. Personally, though, I'd avoid all that hassle if you're not racing and invest in a bling set of handbuilts - maybe IRD cadence with White Industries, Tune hubs or DT Swiss Ceramic hubs, CXRay or DT Aerolite spokes and some coloured nipples to match your frame colour. Cheaper than factory stuff, lighter and more serviceable. Then match with a nice set of light skewers.

Erm, not fussy about carbon/not carbon, do want clinchers not tubulars, have no idea what you're on about with the brake pads, although I'm guessing you need special ones for carbon? I'm a fan of minimal hassle, but will deal with some.

Bike shop recommended the Cosmic Carbones, but I don't like the look of them. I'm a girl. I'm allowed.

And the sentence about handbuilts was waaaaaaaay over my head, as for the brakes, I'll ask Bike Shop what they can get!

I'm going to re-name this thread 'uninformed girl buys over-specced bike'.

lost_in_thought

Oh and furthermore, someone was talking about power-meters earlier....

Now then...

I know what one is, vaguely, and have an edge 705 sitting on the sideboard in its box.

Can I get one and make it talk to the edge? Are they worthwhile pieces of kit?

I'm becoming slowly more informed...

il_principe

lost_in_thought wrote:

Oh and furthermore, someone was talking about power-meters earlier....

Now then...

I know what one is, vaguely, and have an edge 705 sitting on the sideboard in its box.

Can I get one and make it talk to the edge? Are they worthwhile pieces of kit?

I'm becoming slowly more informed...

I really would not bother. They are v expensive and heavy. The best ones fit on the chainset and are typically used on the training bike - you wouldn't want to spend lots building your uber bike and then stick a power-meter on it. They are supposedly fab for training if you know what you are doing, but imo best left to pros and serious serious amateur racers.

I want an Edge 705. Pencilled in as spring's big purchase.

lost_in_thought

Good answer! Consider them struck off my list of maybes...

So who wants to explain the carbon wheel brake pad thing? There's a garibaldi in it for you if you have a fax machine...

greg66_tri_v2.0

Powermeters: the 705 is ANT+, which means it will talk to powermeters which are also ANT+.

This gives you the option of Powertap (£), a Quarq (£££) and an SRM (££££)

The Powertap *is* the hub of your rear wheel. SO you either have to have it built in, or have it laced into an existing wheel. Won't work with all existing wheels - Campag's G3 spoke config on their rear wheels being an example. If you're getting the Rolfs that have roughyl 4 spokes, I wouldn't bank on being able to lace it into them. If you're having wheels made, mention this early doors, as it will affect your rim/spoke pattern choice.

The Quarq replaces your crankset. It is limited to run with a very small minority of cranksets. Earlier this year it look reasonable value. A price hike plus a collapsing pound has put paid to that. It looks promising, but it's new, and reports are a bit thin on the ground. There are some on the weightweenies forum.

The SRM is the gold standard - most reliable, most accurate, most expensive and most ugly (the FSA carbon version is the least hideous, IIRC). It also replaces your crankset.

Ideally you need a good training book and/or a coach to get the most out of training with a powermeter.

greg66_tri_v2.0

lost_in_thought wrote:

Good answer! Consider them struck off my list of maybes...

So who wants to explain the carbon wheel brake pad thing? There's a garibaldi in it for you if you have a fax machine...

Let's see if I can do this one without being beaten to it.

Carbon rims can have either carbon or alu for the breaking surface. Alu tends to make the wheel heavier.

If you have carbon, the rim/wheel manufacturer will recommend a brake pad to work best with that rim. OK so far.

However, if you use that same pad on an alu rim, you'll get little flecks of alu embedded in the pad. Then you use that pad on your carbon rim, and grind it away. Not good.

Something to be aware of if you swap wheels on a bike from time to time.

And braking in the wet on a carbon braking surface is not for the faint-hearted. Really.

greg66_tri_v2.0

jashburnham wrote:

but imo best left to pros and serious serious amateur racers.

... and me.

phil s

Jashburnham, I'm sorry but to say don't bother they're too heavy is nonsense. I have two wireless Powertaps, one built into a Mavic Open Pro and the other into my carbon race wheels. Whilst not the lightest wheel, neither can be described as particularly heavy. And LiT, yes the Garmin and the Powertap can talk to each other. Quarq looks very sexy but it's too new for me to pass comment on, although I know a couple of the guys on Cervelo Test Team so I'll be asking them shortly (they are the first pro team to use Quarq). SRM is the top choice because it is within the crankset so you are not limited by wheel choice but it is frickin expensive and as far as I understand it needs to be sat outdoors for half an hour before your ride to get used to the ambient temperature... LiT, what I was saying about handbuilt wheels was a reccomendation for various combinations of rim, spokes, hub, etc. I am in no way connected to either of these guys (one in the USA) but I know of their reputation - take a look at their websites and the Ligero one also has a nice gallery of how sexy handbuilts can look.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ligerowheels

http://www.wheelsmith.co.uk/

Feel free to PM me if you have any requests for racing/training advice as I don't always have time to check the boards.

jonginge

Greg66 wrote:

jashburnham wrote:

but imo best left to pros and serious serious amateur racers.

... and me.

I want one. Already got the 705 so will probably go for an entry level Elite+ wheel only. The weight is not that much of an issue as it's at the hub

lost_in_thought

Hmmmmmm so the powertap might be an option... if I keep the Rolf Primas as spares... I'll ask epic about it. I guess if I've got the option and it's not insanely pricey I might as well, although I can see your point about it being overkill Jash!!

One other thing on powermeters.... what do they actually tell you? Wattage output? Sorry, I know it's a rookie question... but you know me... I know nowt.

And thanks for that G66, give me your fax number and a garibaldi will wing its way across the ether to you...

il_principe

phil s wrote:

Jashburnham, I'm sorry but to say don't bother they're too heavy is nonsense. I have two wireless Powertaps, one built into a Mavic Open Pro and the other into my carbon race wheels. Whilst not the lightest wheel, neither can be described as particularly heavy. And LiT, yes the Garmin and the Powertap can talk to each other. I got mine up and running last Saturday and it is bloody, bloody brilliant. And my coach is a very happy punter too as he sees where I need to pull my socks up in terms of the terrain I'm riding. Superb piece of kit. Quarq looks very sexy but it's too new for me to pass comment on, although I know a couple of the guys on Cervelo Test Team so I'll be asking them shortly (they are the first pro team to use Quarq). SRM is the top choice because it is within the crankset so you are not limited by wheel choice but it is frickin expensive and as far as I understand it needs to be sat outdoors for half an hour before your ride to get used to the ambient temperature... for me as an amateur racer, wireless Powertap and garmin is a beautiful combo... and I have improved so much training with power. I've gone from strong to stronger and got over the three year plateau I'd hit.
LiT, what I was saying about handbuilt wheels was a reccomendation for various combinations of rim, spokes, hub, etc. I am in no way connected to either of these guys (one in the USA) but I know of their reputation - take a look at their websites and the Ligero one also has a nice gallery of how sexy handbuilts can look.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ligerowheels

http://www.wheelsmith.co.uk/

Feel free to PM me if you have any requests for racing/training advice as I don't always have time to check the boards.

You miss my point dear fellow. This will be dear Lit's first foray into a proper race bike, she wants an uber bike, well specced and therefore light. Seems daft to spend all that money on high end stuff then stick a power meter on there really, isn't that what training bikes are for?

Correct me if I'm wrong Lit but I don't see you getting so serious that you're going to be getting a coach etc in the near future, and surely powertap without proper training/coaching knowledge is just a waste of money?

lost_in_thought

God knows. It might be fun to have the information, if it's not too expensive. With the weight of the bike, as long as it's reasonable then sure... how much do these powertaps weigh anyway??

As for the coaching thing, you're probably right Jash - but you never know I guess.

If it's expensive or too hard I won't, if it's neither then I will!!

phil s

A powermeter tells you your wattage as well as speed, heart rate and cadence usually. I spent years training by heart rate and not quite getting enough out of my training to progress that bit extra. I was "in the ballpark" but a little lost, hence why I plateaued and it was very frustrating. The heart rate monitor told me how fast my heart was beating but it didn't seem to offer up too many specifics about how I could further my abilities.
If I were starting out all over again and had this knowledge I would invest in the powermeter and either find a coach or someone to mentor me through it all for a few months. That counts for either newbie racers with a competitive streak (I am very competitive) or someone looking to do well in sportives.
Anyway, my offer of advice stands. If you are interested I know of places to get a powermeter cheaper than at UK retail. It's a big investment, but for me the most important I have ever made.

greg66_tri_v2.0

lost_in_thought wrote:

One other thing on powermeters.... what do they actually tell you? Wattage output?

It depends on the headunit (the computer). At their most basic, they give you normal cycling computer data, plus watts. So that seems a bit crap, doesn't it?

Except it's not. Allow me to explain.

Let's assume that if you rode flat out on a turbo for an hour with a constant power output, your wattage would remain constant at 250w. So your average wattage for that trip would be 250w.

Your flat out constant output over that hour - 250w - is also your Functional Threshold Power (FTP). It's a figure personal to you - what you can sustain at the limit for an hour.

Then there's Normalised Power. That's based on formula worked out by a Dr Andrew Coggan. For any given ride you do, the NP shown by your powermeter is what you would have had to have produced at a constant rate over an hour to achieve the same result.

Think of FTP as a measure of where the red zone starts. Go back to our hour on the turbo. Your FTP is 250w. You ride the first 30 mins at 125, and the second 30 mins at 375w. Your average for the trip is still 250. But the NP for that trip will be much higher than 250w: you (personally) would have needed to produce a higher constant power output than 250w for an hour to replicate your overall power output for that ride. And because NP> FTP, you'll have been in the red zone.

Just as with cars, time spent above the red zone is disproportionately Bad News. If your FTP is 250w you can chuck out 250w for an hour and then lie down and die. But you won't be able to ride 500w for 30 mins, or 1000w for 15 mins, etc. The relationship isn't linear - it's something like to the fourth power

(So, if you can ride at 250w for 3600 seconds, you can ride at 500w for a period = to the fourth root of 3600w or about 7.7 seconds. Which is actually wrong - you'd be able to manage a bit longer than that - maybe a minute or two, but it gives you an illustration of how "expensive" periods of time at high power levels are).


Gedding it so far?

So now you look down at your power reading and look at it a bit differently. You charge off the lights, pushing 800-1200w for 10 seconds, and that's going to leave a hole. It's why intervals are so knackering. It's why in bike races the pace changes a lot, to weed out the field. You charge up a hill at the same rate - ditto.

So you use the power reading to measure your output. Don't "burn matches" (as Coggan puts it) unless you need to. The perfectly efficient ride is one where NP = ave power. If NP>>ave power, you've been burning too many matches.

I'm not sure what the 705 can display from any given powermeter - I don't think it can display NP without Garmin buying a lience to use Coggan's formula. Not sure about ave power. On the fly power: yes.

cjcp

There's some good stuff here, but <takes pipe out of his mouth, does buttons up on cardigan to keep the cold out and puts slippers on> IMO, it's only worth it if you have the time to train properly (and, from what I've been told and read, a power meter can help you train "properly" i.e. efficiently) outside of the commute*. If you do not, then you know what you have to do better in sportives or racing: ride your bike more and faster.

*EDIT: Unless you are G66.

il_principe

phil s wrote:

A powermeter tells you your wattage as well as speed, heart rate and cadence usually. I spent years training by heart rate and not quite getting enough out of my training to progress that bit extra. I was "in the ballpark" but a little lost, hence why I plateaued and it was very frustrating. The heart rate monitor told me how fast my heart was beating but it didn't seem to offer up too many specifics about how I could further my abilities.
If I were starting out all over again and had this knowledge I would invest in the powermeter and either find a coach or someone to mentor me through it all for a few months. That counts for either newbie racers with a competitive streak (I am very competitive) or someone looking to do well in sportives.
Anyway, my offer of advice stands. If you are interested I know of places to get a powermeter cheaper than at UK retail. It's a big investment, but for me the most important I have ever made.

I'm interested to hear that it really works that well actually. I've always been a bit dismissive of complex training schemes for amateurs. My theory is not really based on my own experience but mainly on the experience of training with two friends who are Triathlon nuts. They did the UK Ironman this year and finished 94 and 95 out of 1148 including Pros. They don't train using HR or powermeters and neither has a really structured regime, they just get the miles in relentlessly and are very singleminded. I guess the difference is that with proper coaching and use of HR/Power they could get to pro level but then their times were 10:55 and the winner (http://www.stephenbayliss.net/) did it in 8:53, that's a huge amount of time to make up.

phil s

cjcp wrote:

There's some good stuff here, but <takes pipe out of his mouth, does buttons up on cardigan to keep the cold out and puts slippers on> IMO, it's only worth it if you have the time to train properly (and, from what I've been told and read, a power meter can help you train "properly" i.e. efficiently) outside of the commute. If you do not, then you know what you have to do better in sportives or racing: ride your bike more and faster.

True, true. But I have gone from a 12-18 hour training week to an 8-10 hour week due to recent baby - and improved. It's more about the mental investment. I was great at riding myself into the ground for hours on end, not so good at the analysis.
Anyway, we digress again. Take a look at some of those puppies on the Ligero wheelworks album for an idea of what a good wheelbuilder can make for you if you want a special wheel.

lost_in_thought

Holy moly.... I think I'm becoming overinformed!

Having read it twice I think I now do understand, yes... this is complimicated stuff. I can see why there's been the emphasis on books/coaches!

I have to admit it does sounds very interesting as a different way to measure your output. Necessary - I doubt it - but interesting nonetheless.

I will still revert, however, to my previous state of 'if it's not too difficult/expensive I'll have it'. And apparently the newest powertap weighs 416g. Which isn't that bad, I suppose.

il_principe

@Gregg - is the wattage reading on the i-magic anywhere near accurate, or a load of cr@p?

cjcp

phil s wrote:

cjcp wrote:

There's some good stuff here, but <takes pipe out of his mouth, does buttons up on cardigan to keep the cold out and puts slippers on> IMO, it's only worth it if you have the time to train properly (and, from what I've been told and read, a power meter can help you train "properly" i.e. efficiently) outside of the commute. If you do not, then you know what you have to do better in sportives or racing: ride your bike more and faster.

True, true. But I have gone from a 12-18 hour training week to an 8-10 hour week due to recent baby - and improved. It's more about the mental investment. I was great at riding myself into the ground for hours on end, not so good at the analysis.
Anyway, we digress again. Take a look at some of those puppies on the Ligero wheelworks album for an idea of what a good wheelbuilder can make for you if you want a special wheel.

Congrats on the baby - and know what you mean; I have two little monsters myself. You're doing well to get the 8-10 hrs in! You're a credit to men everywhere! 8) If you were doing 12-18hr training, what Cat racer are you? And has your training prog changed to make it more race-focused: e.g. less of the longer rides and more intensive efforts?

greg66_tri_v2.0

jashburnham wrote:

@Gregg - is the wattage reading on the i-magic anywhere near accurate, or a load of cr@p?

When I ran them side by side, it was usually within 5-8 watts. There's inevitably a lag at times, because I think they process data differently/have different sampling rates/whatever.

When I did my FTP test (such a good way to puke) they were sitting pretty much side by side. I suspect that as they go higher, there will be greater discrepancies; higher power streams tend to be more erratic, and so sampling frequency can make a big difference.

greg66_tri_v2.0

cjcp wrote:

*EDIT: Unless you are G66.

I thank you.

phil s

cjcp wrote:

Congrats on the baby - and know what you mean; I have two little monsters myself. You're doing well to get the 8-10 hrs in! You're a credit to men everywhere! 8) If you were doing 12-18hr training, what Cat racer are you? And has your training prog changed to make it more race-focused: e.g. less of the longer rides and more intensive efforts?

Thanks for the congrats. Yes, training has to be very organised. I am a good Cat 2 but last season I only did half a season before going to work at the Tour. When i got back my wife was heavily preggers so I stopped. My training now does involve more intense efforts, but it's an intelligent mix of training and recovery. Gunning for Cat 1 this season as I'll be doing harder races and racing something approaching a full season... and it all started from being a 'fast' commuter a few years ago 8)

greg66_tri_v2.0

jashburnham wrote:

I'm interested to hear that it really works that well actually. I've always been a bit dismissive of complex training schemes for amateurs. My theory is not really based on my own experience but mainly on the experience of training with two friends who are Triathlon nuts. They did the UK Ironman this year and finished 94 and 95 out of 1148 including Pros. They don't train using HR or powermeters and neither has a really structured regime, they just get the miles in relentlessly and are very singleminded. I guess the difference is that with proper coaching and use of HR/Power they could get to pro level but then their times were 10:55 and the winner (http://www.stephenbayliss.net/) did it in 8:53, that's a huge amount of time to make up.

But isn't the question with these two where they could have placed if they'd had a structured program? It sounds as if they are both pretty gifted when it comes to endurance sport, but maybe they could have come in top 20 rather than top 100 with a focussed, structured plan.

il_principe

Greg66 wrote:

jashburnham wrote:

@Gregg - is the wattage reading on the i-magic anywhere near accurate, or a load of cr@p?

When I ran them side by side, it was usually within 5-8 watts. There's inevitably a lag at times, because I think they process data differently/have different sampling rates/whatever.

When I did my FTP test (such a good way to puke) they were sitting pretty much side by side. I suspect that as they go higher, there will be greater discrepancies; higher power streams tend to be more erratic, and so sampling frequency can make a big difference.

This is interesting news. I shall experiment. Of course results gained through training doors are going to be somewhat removed from the reality of being outside, but interesting all the same.

My Focus frame is flexing a lot around the BB area when plugged into the turbo - no way I'm sticking the Prince in there though.