A Winter Bike - What's that all about?

2»

Comments

  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    celbianchi wrote:
    Regarding the highlighted bit. Thta's not true really is it? If you are riding at lets say an arbitary 250W. If you are doing it at say 20mph on a stripped down race bike or at 13mph on a 23lb winter hack - pray tell me where you get the additional training benefit from 250W at 20 mph or 250W at 13mph?

    I've been there and it works!
    The point is that if you want to keep up with the group then your 250W isn't going to cut it. You have to up your output or get dropped. Extra training. Or get slower partners :wink:
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • discurio
    discurio Posts: 118
    When work coughs up for cyclecheme for my new road bike my scabby old MTB will probably be the go to bike for when its shitty and raining.

    also can someone please explain N + 1? im baffled by that
    I'm not dumb. I just have a command of thoroughly useless information
  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    discurio wrote:
    also can someone please explain N + 1? im baffled by that

    N = The number of bikes that you have.
    N + 1 = The number of bikes that you will have.
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • Wirral_paul
    Wirral_paul Posts: 2,476
    Nuggs wrote:
    Wirral_Paul wrote:
    Just building up my new winter bike at the moment. Gone for a new chinese carbon frame
    Winter bikes cannot be carbon. Carbon will dissolve in winter.

    The exception to this is if the 'new' winter bike is an 'old' summer bike which has been demoted. These are immune from the dissolving problem.

    :wink:


    Shhhhh - dont let my frame hear you say that. It may get upset if it gets an inkling it has been demoted (which it hasn't) and i've told it that its dissolve-proof!!

    :wink:
  • mingmong
    mingmong Posts: 542
    eh wrote:
    MTBers dont have Summer/Winter bikes and we don't enjoy ourselves unless we re covered in mud!

    Not true I know plenty of people with winter mtbs. A hardtail with Deore level kit for when it's grotty and a pukka full sus for dry conditions.

    Don't most people just end up with a winter bike by default, in that they buy a new bike and keep the old one for winter?

    Agree. Got 4 winter bikes then ;-)

    My riding buddy rides his best bike throughout the year, ergo he gets the benefits of riding a nice bike. However, the detrimental effects on his running gear is apparent in the summer as the bike tends to 'sing' a little on the last 5 miles of a ride.

    You pays your money...
  • celbianchi
    celbianchi Posts: 854
    daviesee wrote:
    celbianchi wrote:
    Regarding the highlighted bit. Thta's not true really is it? If you are riding at lets say an arbitary 250W. If you are doing it at say 20mph on a stripped down race bike or at 13mph on a 23lb winter hack - pray tell me where you get the additional training benefit from 250W at 20 mph or 250W at 13mph?

    I've been there and it works!
    The point is that if you want to keep up with the group then your 250W isn't going to cut it. You have to up your output or get dropped. Extra training. Or get slower partners :wink:

    Hmm, I think this is also incorrect. Lets assume your 20 minute output is 350W. Then that is what you can do, so if you are riding in a group and are required to ride at 350W for 25 mins then you will simply get dropped sooner on the heavy bike as you'll be travelling more slowly.
    Your training should be planned to increase your ouput and I'd say this would be achieved by a variety of rides over a variety of outputs. simply riding a heavier bike is not adding a training benefit. If you ride for 2 hours at say 250W then whichever bike it is on, the training effect will be the same.
  • derbygrimpeur
    derbygrimpeur Posts: 822
    daviesee wrote:
    discurio wrote:
    also can someone please explain N + 1? im baffled by that

    N = The number of bikes that you have.
    N + 1 = The number of bikes that you will have.

    "will" is actually "should"

    This is also subject to N = D - 1

    where D = Divorce/Separation from partner
  • amun1000
    amun1000 Posts: 242
    Ahh but...

    N = (D - 1) * S

    Where S = separation settlement of joint estate

    unless

    N = ((D-1) * S) * - B

    Where B = Bit*h (takes you for the whole lot)
    When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
  • derbygrimpeur
    derbygrimpeur Posts: 822
    in short, buy more bikes :D
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,383
    derbygrimpeur wrote:
    daviesee wrote:
    discurio wrote:
    also can someone please explain N + 1? im baffled by that

    N = The number of bikes that you have.
    N + 1 = The number of bikes that you will have.

    "will" is actually "should"

    This is also subject to N = D - 1

    where D = Divorce/Separation from partner

    The poetic way to say it and where it is the most humerous, is "The correct number of bikes to own is n+1, where n is the number of bikes currently owned"
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    celbianchi wrote:
    Hmm, I think this is also incorrect. Lets assume your 20 minute output is 350W. Then that is what you can do, so if you are riding in a group and are required to ride at 350W for 25 mins then you will simply get dropped sooner on the heavy bike as you'll be travelling more slowly.
    Your training should be planned to increase your ouput and I'd say this would be achieved by a variety of rides over a variety of outputs. simply riding a heavier bike is not adding a training benefit. If you ride for 2 hours at say 250W then whichever bike it is on, the training effect will be the same.

    I think you are over analyzing this. How many people have watt meters? Some but not most.
    The difference in my case at a guess may be 10%. Club runs are easy in the summer (ie social, not training) and I have to work hard to keep up on the hills in the winter but that's about it. YMMV.
    It depends on whether you are cycling for fun & fitness or race training at your max already.
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • celbianchi
    celbianchi Posts: 854
    daviesee wrote:
    celbianchi wrote:
    Hmm, I think this is also incorrect. Lets assume your 20 minute output is 350W. Then that is what you can do, so if you are riding in a group and are required to ride at 350W for 25 mins then you will simply get dropped sooner on the heavy bike as you'll be travelling more slowly.
    Your training should be planned to increase your ouput and I'd say this would be achieved by a variety of rides over a variety of outputs. simply riding a heavier bike is not adding a training benefit. If you ride for 2 hours at say 250W then whichever bike it is on, the training effect will be the same.

    I think you are over analyzing this. How many people have watt meters? Some but not most.
    The difference in my case at a guess may be 10%. Club runs are easy in the summer (ie social, not training) and I have to work hard to keep up on the hills in the winter but that's about it. YMMV.
    It depends on whether you are cycling for fun & fitness or race training at your max already.

    Ok, I probably am, but training on a heavy bike does not guarantee a training benefit over training on a race equipped bike. The same logic applies in reverse of course. Watts is watts is watts, 'wattever' (see what I did there?) you ride.
    It would be a bit misguided for someone to invest in a winter bike assuming a training boost as chip\'oyler suggested.
  • Chip \'oyler
    Chip \'oyler Posts: 2,323
    celbianchi wrote:
    daviesee wrote:
    celbianchi wrote:
    Hmm, I think this is also incorrect. Lets assume your 20 minute output is 350W. Then that is what you can do, so if you are riding in a group and are required to ride at 350W for 25 mins then you will simply get dropped sooner on the heavy bike as you'll be travelling more slowly.
    Your training should be planned to increase your ouput and I'd say this would be achieved by a variety of rides over a variety of outputs. simply riding a heavier bike is not adding a training benefit. If you ride for 2 hours at say 250W then whichever bike it is on, the training effect will be the same.

    I think you are over analyzing this. How many people have watt meters? Some but not most.
    The difference in my case at a guess may be 10%. Club runs are easy in the summer (ie social, not training) and I have to work hard to keep up on the hills in the winter but that's about it. YMMV.
    It depends on whether you are cycling for fun & fitness or race training at your max already.

    Ok, I probably am, but training on a heavy bike does not guarantee a training benefit over training on a race equipped bike. The same logic applies in reverse of course. Watts is watts is watts, 'wattever' (see what I did there?) you ride.
    It would be a bit misguided for someone to invest in a winter bike assuming a training boost as chip\'oyler suggested.

    Back when I was a nipper there was a woman in our club called Margaret Allen. Every winter she would put a couple of bricks in her saddlebag to make her bike heavier. I suggest you look her up in the CTT handbook to see what National Titles she won - having a heavier bike obviously worked for her in the winter.

    I know what you're saying. It's a bit like the old question "what weighs the most a ton of iron or a ton of feathers". But living in a hilly area like Barnsley, having extra weight in the winter was thought to be beneficial to help with leg strength etc After all don't runners add leg weights on their sessions?

    I overheard Keith Murray the other day advising a younger rider that the key to going faster in TTs was power. And the sessions he suggested to gain power/strength were big gear hill reps (done sat in the saddle). Now I'm pretty sure a heavier bike would help with these sessions.
    Expertly coached by http://www.vitessecyclecoaching.co.uk/

    http://vineristi.wordpress.com - the blog for Viner owners and lovers!
  • celbianchi
    celbianchi Posts: 854
    Chip \'oyler wrote:
    celbianchi wrote:
    daviesee wrote:
    celbianchi wrote:
    Hmm, I think this is also incorrect. Lets assume your 20 minute output is 350W. Then that is what you can do, so if you are riding in a group and are required to ride at 350W for 25 mins then you will simply get dropped sooner on the heavy bike as you'll be travelling more slowly.
    Your training should be planned to increase your ouput and I'd say this would be achieved by a variety of rides over a variety of outputs. simply riding a heavier bike is not adding a training benefit. If you ride for 2 hours at say 250W then whichever bike it is on, the training effect will be the same.

    I think you are over analyzing this. How many people have watt meters? Some but not most.
    The difference in my case at a guess may be 10%. Club runs are easy in the summer (ie social, not training) and I have to work hard to keep up on the hills in the winter but that's about it. YMMV.
    It depends on whether you are cycling for fun & fitness or race training at your max already.

    Ok, I probably am, but training on a heavy bike does not guarantee a training benefit over training on a race equipped bike. The same logic applies in reverse of course. Watts is watts is watts, 'wattever' (see what I did there?) you ride.
    It would be a bit misguided for someone to invest in a winter bike assuming a training boost as chip\'oyler suggested.

    Back when I was a nipper there was a woman in our club called Margaret Allen. Every winter she would put a couple of bricks in her saddlebag to make her bike heavier. I suggest you look her up in the CTT handbook to see what National Titles she won - having a heavier bike obviously worked for her in the winter.

    I know what you're saying. It's a bit like the old question "what weighs the most a ton of iron or a ton of feathers". But living in a hilly area like Barnsley, having extra weight in the winter was thought to be beneficial to help with leg strength etc After all don't runners add leg weights on their sessions?

    I overheard Keith Murray the other day advising a younger rider that the key to going faster in TTs was power. And the sessions he suggested to gain power/strength were big gear hill reps (done sat in the saddle). Now I'm pretty sure a heavier bike would help with these sessions.

    I'm not. If you are doing big gear reps then what restricts you is your fitness. If you are doing 5 min reps at say 400W then whether your bike weighs 6kg or 16kg you are only generating 400W. If you can only do them at 400W it matters not what machine you are riding.
    See the thread on leg strength in the training forum for all the scientific contribution from experts. (warning though you may lose the will to live)
    Regarding Margaret and the bricks, I know plenty of people 25 years ago were following similar idea's. Times move on and I don't know of any of the top roadmen (or women) round our way adding weight to rucksacks etc to stimulate a training benefit these days.
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    celbianchi wrote:
    Regarding the highlighted bit. Thta's not true really is it? If you are riding at lets say an arbitary 250W. If you are doing it at say 20mph on a stripped down race bike or at 13mph on a 23lb winter hack - pray tell me where you get the additional training benefit from 250W at 20 mph or 250W at 13mph?

    Have you done the maths on this?

    My summer commuter weighs about 18-19lbs, my December-January MTB commuter more like 30lbs. The speed difference is more like 2 or 3 mph at most. So, do you really think I'm only running the same wattage on my MTB as my road bike?

    The bike weight difference is considerably greater than you suggested and the speed difference considerably smaller. Either your maths is wrong or your argument is wrong!
    Faster than a tent.......
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,540
    edited August 2011
    Chip \'oyler wrote:


    Back when I was a nipper there was a woman in our club called Margaret Allen. Every winter she would put a couple of bricks in her saddlebag to make her bike heavier. I suggest you look her up in the CTT handbook to see what National Titles she won - having a heavier bike obviously worked for her in the winter.

    I know what you're saying. It's a bit like the old question "what weighs the most a ton of iron or a ton of feathers". But living in a hilly area like Barnsley, having extra weight in the winter was thought to be beneficial to help with leg strength etc After all don't runners add leg weights on their sessions?

    I overheard Keith Murray the other day advising a younger rider that the key to going faster in TTs was power. And the sessions he suggested to gain power/strength were big gear hill reps (done sat in the saddle). Now I'm pretty sure a heavier bike would help with these sessions.
    Could you not just whack your bike in a higher gear and cycle faster?

    The energy you put in is the same whether the bike is heavy or light. If it's light it goes a little faster.
    _
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,383
    ...so your putting in more watts to ride at the same speed on a heavier bike...why not just man up and pedal the lighter one harder? [casts line] Are you one of these people who never takes a turn on the front?
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • celbianchi
    celbianchi Posts: 854
    Rolf F wrote:
    celbianchi wrote:
    Regarding the highlighted bit. Thta's not true really is it? If you are riding at lets say an arbitary 250W. If you are doing it at say 20mph on a stripped down race bike or at 13mph on a 23lb winter hack - pray tell me where you get the additional training benefit from 250W at 20 mph or 250W at 13mph?

    Have you done the maths on this?

    My summer commuter weighs about 18-19lbs, my December-January MTB commuter more like 30lbs. The speed difference is more like 2 or 3 mph at most. So, do you really think I'm only running the same wattage on my MTB as my road bike?

    The bike weight difference is considerably greater than you suggested and the speed difference considerably smaller. Either your maths is wrong or your argument is wrong!

    FFS - the example is purely that a random example, hence use of the word arbitary,
    I have not run the speeds v a mathematical model as it is not important.
    What is important is grasping the fact that any individual can put out xx watts for yy duration. The weight of what they are riding does not impact this and therefore does not add to training benefit.

    You can ride at (ARBITARY FIGURE) 300W for one hour. You devise a training plan to try and increase this to 320W over say a 8 week period. I'll suggest some people will see different output capability if riding say a TT bike v a road bike. But a similar position on a race machine and a winter machine means that all you do by using a heavy winter bike is output the same power at a generally reduced speed.
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,383
    ...or an increased power output at the same speed (which I think is his point) - Alternatively if you keep the bikes that same a higher power output results in a higher speed, so just ride the same bike faster....
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • Chip \'oyler
    Chip \'oyler Posts: 2,323
    ddraver wrote:
    ...or an increased power output at the same speed (which I think is his point) - Alternatively if you keep the bikes that same a higher power output results in a higher speed, so just ride the same bike faster....

    Exactly. Going out with your usual group in the winter, you on your heavier bike and them on their lighter machines, in order to keep up with them you will have to work harder.

    I'll be honest I don't ride with a power meter - but I will be soon, so no doubt all my previous training logic will be turned on it's head!
    Expertly coached by http://www.vitessecyclecoaching.co.uk/

    http://vineristi.wordpress.com - the blog for Viner owners and lovers!
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    celbianchi wrote:
    Rolf F wrote:
    celbianchi wrote:
    Regarding the highlighted bit. Thta's not true really is it? If you are riding at lets say an arbitary 250W. If you are doing it at say 20mph on a stripped down race bike or at 13mph on a 23lb winter hack - pray tell me where you get the additional training benefit from 250W at 20 mph or 250W at 13mph?

    Have you done the maths on this?

    My summer commuter weighs about 18-19lbs, my December-January MTB commuter more like 30lbs. The speed difference is more like 2 or 3 mph at most. So, do you really think I'm only running the same wattage on my MTB as my road bike?

    The bike weight difference is considerably greater than you suggested and the speed difference considerably smaller. Either your maths is wrong or your argument is wrong!

    FFS - the example is purely that a random example, hence use of the word arbitary,
    I have not run the speeds v a mathematical model as it is not important.
    What is important is grasping the fact that any individual can put out xx watts for yy duration. The weight of what they are riding does not impact this and therefore does not add to training benefit.

    You can ride at (ARBITARY FIGURE) 300W for one hour. You devise a training plan to try and increase this to 320W over say a 8 week period. I'll suggest some people will see different output capability if riding say a TT bike v a road bike. But a similar position on a race machine and a winter machine means that all you do by using a heavy winter bike is output the same power at a generally reduced speed.

    At least make an effort to debate the point rather than just randomly stringing words together (anyone can do that). Your use of the word 'arbitrary' has no relevance to the point I was making - what absolute wattage you are riding is totally irrelevant. The issue is whether or not that wattage changes from bike to bike. Which (I'll repeat as you didn't seem to understand it) was that for a considerably heavier bike, my speed isn't massively reduced and therefore I can perceive that I am making more effort, and therefore generating more watts, than I am on my road bike. Perhaps the wattages are the same or perhaps a light bike makes me lazy and I do ride at greater power on the heavier bike. Hence I ask the polite question whether you were making a post based on reasoned calculation or just making things up in your head. (FFS :wink: )
    Faster than a tent.......
  • celbianchi
    celbianchi Posts: 854
    Rolf F wrote:
    Which (I'll repeat as you didn't seem to understand it) was that for a considerably heavier bike, my speed isn't massively reduced and therefore I can perceive that I am making more effort, and therefore generating more watts, than I am on my road bike.

    Yes I agree. If your speed is largely unchanged then you will be putting out more power on the heavy bike. Simply changing to the winter bike though is not a guarantee of greater training effect. I'm sure you can agree based upon your observations above.
    The power output is important to demonstrate this point. 400W may equal 21mph on the race bike, it may equal 16mph on the winter bike. However, at the end of either session you have been riding at 400W so the training effect is the same.

    Rolf F wrote:
    Perhaps the wattages are the same or perhaps a light bike makes me lazy and I do ride at greater power on the heavier bike. Hence I ask the polite question whether you were making a post based on reasoned calculation or just making things up in your head. (FFS :wink: )

    My post on this subject is merely to point out that having as winter bike is not a training benefit over a stripped down race bike.
    It's what you do on the bike that counts.

    Can we close this here?

Categories