First attempt with SPD's today in 30 mins

supersonic

The two studies conclude the same - namely actively pulling up reduces overall torque. But decreases negative torque.

Will Snow

so SS would that give a rise in efficiency? Im assuming negative torque is bad in this case? God I need to sleep haha

Will Snow

I think im using the efficient wrongly here, I do not mean that the pedal stroke itself is more efficient due to the use of clips, but the use of the body is made more efficient. Does that make more sense?

supersonic

It showed a reduction in overall efficiency.

Will Snow

"In one condition, participants were asked to use
their preferred pedaling technique (preferred). In a second
condition, participants were asked to pedal in circles and to
concentrate on the transition phases through top dead center
and bottom dead center of the crank cycle (circling). In a
third condition, participants were instructed to emphasize an
active pull during the upstroke of the crank cycle (pulling).
Finally, they were instructed to emphasize the pushing
action during the downstroke of the crank cycle (pushing)."

I think this is the interesting point here; Im trying to say why clipless may improve overall efficiency as a means of justifying why roadies etc use them, you get to use more muscles etc. The study emphasised deliberate pulling up technique, suggesting this was more of a study of what was more efficient, pulling up as hard as you can or pushing down as hard as you can. As you pointed out, pulling up does reduce efficiency compared to pushing down. What Im trying to say is that a combination of the two may be even more efficient (i.e. the preferred method) than just pushing down, as you can use more muscles, yadda yadda ya. Otherwise Im not sure what advantages clips would have for roadies, apart from stiffer shoes and so on. Sorry to keep you awake haha

Will Snow

by unweighting the downward crank by pulling up (which we seemed to agree would be all that happened by pulling up) you can save your pushy down muscles, at the expense of your pully up muscles? Therefore using two sets of muscles, reducing fatigue.

supersonic

The circling method was also shown to be less efficient in the study. Pushing was the maximum, but as you say, for each individual their preferred method was the highest for all the tests they conducted.

Was their preferred method one of those three though?

If you like to pull, and have developed those muscles, then clipless will have advantages. You also have the foot in the same position for maximum consistency which may improve efficiency further [and reduce injuries], plus of course the safety of not being able to slip.

Also we have to look at MTBs and grip and suspension: some pedaling methods may work better over bumps and with sus than purely on the flat.

supersonic

Will Snow wrote:

by unweighting the downward crank by pulling up (which we seemed to agree would be all that happened by pulling up) you can save your pushy down muscles, at the expense of your pully up muscles? Therefore using two sets of muscles, reducing fatigue.

I think the theory is that those flexor muscles fatigue more quickly - actually making overall fatigue worse for some people.

Anonymous

Hmm. Don't have a thorough understanding of biomechanics, but my guess is that using the weaker pulling muscles would lead to fatigue, no matter how well trained those muscles are. Some areas are just stronger than others. For example, thigh muscles with always be stronger than biceps (to give but an example)
I don't think using those pulling muscles would benefit in the long run, basically.

Pure hypothesis there though.

Anonymous

Dammit, Sonic beat me to the punch.

supersonic

Hehe, I agree

Will Snow

You know what supersonic, yeehaa, I think we can draw an important conclusion here:

Preferred method is best.

I think applying science to the situation is an exercise in futility, there are too many variables to consider. Please lock this thread, I dont think I can take the mind abuse anymore!! haha

This is why I like quantum mechanics, you get an answer. Well sort of.

Anonymous

Nah, in quantum mechanics you get a whole host of answers for any situation. Then you get a probability curve that determines which outcome is most likely.

I'll go with "prefered is best" on the basis of "whatever makes you happy"

supersonic

I hate quantum mechanics haha.

I am rusty though. Very rusty.

Hmm, I have now been looking at different length crank arms in this... and infinite crank arms.

Time for bed methinks!

Anonymous

On a side note, I really do wish we could get past the whole "to progress from a noob to a pro you need to be clipped in" bull that keeps getting touted.
Far to many places seem all to eager to promote that attitude.

Anonymous

What about a crank arm based on quantum mechanics, where it's length and position varies through an infinite combination until it reaches the most probably eficient setup?
Sounds like something you could make a lot of money selling to people

My brain hurts now too, been trying to think of how best to represent this whole mess in a physics simulation to demonstrate or refute once and for all.

Will Snow

Quantum mechanics has an equation! Admittedly is Schroedinger's equation, which is horrific in every sense, but atleast it has one! Super, I dont think it is possible to be anything apart from rusty in quantum unless you study it on a daily basis.
And yeehaa, agreed. Its all down to riding style, terrain and so many other things. And we all know that clips arent cool so excuse while I get my 5.10s and monster energy drink and drift some berms

Anonymous

Meh, quantum mechanics is sooooooo old fashioned. What are you a beardy weirdy? Don't you know it's all about string theroies these days?
(String theory is one thing I can NOT fathom at all)

Will Snow

and remember, experiments are what science is all about. The equations and that malarky is just book keeping. So I would suggest that SS's study link is the best answer anyone is likely to get. Link to it again, incase you have lost it here

Will Snow

string theory is easy http://xkcd.com/171/

supersonic

Faster than light cranks - is the answer

Will Snow

Dont start on faster than light, I have a relativity exam on monday!

supersonic

I love Einstein's thought experiments.

Will Snow

I love thinking about relativity, and all its weird and wonderful effects... its the Lorentz transformations and tensor calculus that gets me

Anonymous

Will Snow wrote:

string theory is easy http://xkcd.com/171/

I freaking love XKCD!

Will Snow

i think it is required reading for any science geek

cee

all i know is that I have one mate who breaks his wrist every time he rides flats.
I have another mate that tears his shorts at the right hip whenever he rides spds.

Me...I ride flats...I have never ridden spds...I did have a wobble off years ago with straps...

bails87

cee
Argh! Let it die!

Will Snow

mwu haha!! it lives!! it ... LIVES!!!

antfly

bails87 wrote:

cee
Argh! Let it die!

It`s your fault for bringing it up in that other thread, why couldn`t you just let it lie. :roll: