Europacar bikes in Paris Roubaix

ForumNewbie

I know some riders in Paris Roubaix were riding cyclo-cross bikes to cope with the cobbles, but I was surprised to see the Europacar riders had the type with an extra set of brakes levers on the top of the bars as can been seen in the picture below:
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=Turgot ... x=77&ty=48
I was surprised as I thought with pros being paranoid about unnecessary weight, they would have had these extra brake levers removed. Anyone else notice that and find it strange?

iainf72

Not really. I don't think anyone in Paris-Roubaix is too concerned with weight.

inseine

i don't think that most pros are paranoid about extra weight, especially on a relatively flat course.

all show no go

Weight isn't an issue in Paris-Roubaix. Toughness and handling are key. Many riders choose to ride with their hands on the bar tops so it makes sense to have additional levers there.
Paris-Roubaix is a bike nerds wet dream due to the bikes that are put out for the riders to do their thing on. Different machines for a different race. Not always necessary, but it gives the various brands loads of exposure.

Tom BB

Yeah I find it strange that they've got levers on the tops-the weight wont make one scrap of difference, but why would they need them? Surely they aren't going to be braking much on cobbles, which is when they'd be on the tops? I kknow that there are 'some' turns, but really in most forms of bike racing be that mtb, cyclocross or road, braking is kept to a miniumum! I guess that they know better than me though!

inkyfingers

Tom BB wrote:

Yeah I find it strange that they've got levers on the tops-the weight wont make one scrap of difference, but why would they need them? Surely they aren't going to be braking much on cobbles, which is when they'd be on the tops? I kknow that there are 'some' turns, but really in most forms of bike racing be that mtb, cyclocross or road, braking is kept to a miniumum! I guess that they know better than me though!

For that inevitable moment when a Euskatel rider crashes in front of them?

rozzer32

As has been said before the weight isn't a factor. Plus the extra strength from the extra weight is worth it.

Hence why they ride with 32 spoke normal box section wheels. Better to have the weight of an extra few spokes then waste 30 seconds or longer waiting for a replacement wheel because the wheel is bust.

I think the extra brake levers are just to give the riders more options. Naturally they ride on the tops of the bars on the cobbles and if there is a crash or they have to suddenly grab the brakes they can do this from the tops. Also I presume being able to adjust your speed quickly while riding on the cobbles is helpful, but then I'm no pro rider.

rick_chasey

I would imagine the average weight of the peloton in Paris Roubaix is consistently the heaviest of any race in the whole season.

dave_1

The lighter you are the more you rattle and the slower you go and the slower you go the more again you rattle and bounce-vicious circle. Weight is not so important. If you have power to turn a big gear at higher speed and are heavier you will glide more and feel less bounce. I raced in Belgium in early 1990s and realised the cobbles in a UK town were nothing much in terms of prep for the hellish experience of racing really rutted cobbles. The strength of Boonen and company to turn those big gears fast enough to glide and not be slowed is just awesome!

shinyhelmut

inkyfingers wrote:

Tom BB wrote:

Yeah I find it strange that they've got levers on the tops-the weight wont make one scrap of difference, but why would they need them? Surely they aren't going to be braking much on cobbles, which is when they'd be on the tops? I kknow that there are 'some' turns, but really in most forms of bike racing be that mtb, cyclocross or road, braking is kept to a miniumum! I guess that they know better than me though!

For that inevitable moment when a Euskatel rider crashes in front of them?

So you could switch back to a normal bike at half way when they've all abandoned

ddraver

Dave_1 wrote:

The lighter you are the more you rattle and the slower you go and the slower you go the more again you rattle and bounce-vicious circle. Weight is not so important. If you have power to turn a big gear at higher speed and are heavier you will glide more and feel less bounce. I raced in Belgium in early 1990s and realised the cobbles in a UK town were nothing much in terms of prep for the hellish experience of racing really rutted cobbles. The strength of Boonen and company to turn those big gears fast enough to glide and not be slowed is just awesome!

Hmm, there are a generation of superlight/super expensive XC bikes that would disagree with you there Dave...

dave_1

ddraver wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

The lighter you are the more you rattle and the slower you go and the slower you go the more again you rattle and bounce-vicious circle. Weight is not so important. If you have power to turn a big gear at higher speed and are heavier you will glide more and feel less bounce. I raced in Belgium in early 1990s and realised the cobbles in a UK town were nothing much in terms of prep for the hellish experience of racing really rutted cobbles. The strength of Boonen and company to turn those big gears fast enough to glide and not be slowed is just awesome!

Hmm, there are a generation of superlight/super expensive XC bikes that would disagree with you there Dave...[i/quote]

What was your experience of racing over the cobbles in terms of strategy and gearing. My experience was the bounce is far worse the slower you go..the lighter you are the more you bounce up. The race is flat so weight is also not as crucial but advantageous even

No_Ta_Doctor

inkyfingers wrote:

Tom BB wrote:

Yeah I find it strange that they've got levers on the tops-the weight wont make one scrap of difference, but why would they need them? Surely they aren't going to be braking much on cobbles, which is when they'd be on the tops? I kknow that there are 'some' turns, but really in most forms of bike racing be that mtb, cyclocross or road, braking is kept to a miniumum! I guess that they know better than me though!

For that inevitable moment when Thor Hushovd crashes in front of them?

Fixed that for you.

No_Ta_Doctor

ddraver wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

The lighter you are the more you rattle and the slower you go and the slower you go the more again you rattle and bounce-vicious circle. Weight is not so important. If you have power to turn a big gear at higher speed and are heavier you will glide more and feel less bounce. I raced in Belgium in early 1990s and realised the cobbles in a UK town were nothing much in terms of prep for the hellish experience of racing really rutted cobbles. The strength of Boonen and company to turn those big gears fast enough to glide and not be slowed is just awesome!

Hmm, there are a generation of superlight/super expensive XC bikes that would disagree with you there Dave...

Just because some P-R riders were on XC bikes doesn't mean it's an XC course though.

kozzo

Dave_1 wrote:

What was your experience of racing over the cobbles in terms of strategy and gearing. My experience was the bounce is far worse the slower you go..the lighter you are the more you bounce up. The race is flat so weight is also not as crucial but advantageous even

Your experiencie from early 90' is outdated.

Greetings from Liège.

andyrac

No tA Doctor wrote:

ddraver wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

The lighter you are the more you rattle and the slower you go and the slower you go the more again you rattle and bounce-vicious circle. Weight is not so important. If you have power to turn a big gear at higher speed and are heavier you will glide more and feel less bounce. I raced in Belgium in early 1990s and realised the cobbles in a UK town were nothing much in terms of prep for the hellish experience of racing really rutted cobbles. The strength of Boonen and company to turn those big gears fast enough to glide and not be slowed is just awesome!

Hmm, there are a generation of superlight/super expensive XC bikes that would disagree with you there Dave...

Just because some P-R riders were on XC bikes doesn't mean it's an XC course though.

Or even CX bikes....

ddraver

No tA Doctor wrote:

ddraver wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

The lighter you are the more you rattle and the slower you go and the slower you go the more again you rattle and bounce-vicious circle. Weight is not so important. If you have power to turn a big gear at higher speed and are heavier you will glide more and feel less bounce. I raced in Belgium in early 1990s and realised the cobbles in a UK town were nothing much in terms of prep for the hellish experience of racing really rutted cobbles. The strength of Boonen and company to turn those big gears fast enough to glide and not be slowed is just awesome!

Hmm, there are a generation of superlight/super expensive XC bikes that would disagree with you there Dave...

Just because some P-R riders were on XC bikes doesn't mean it's an XC course though.

I assume you mean CX bikes...

We can all agree that Mountain biking is pretty rough, yet there is a clear trend toward lighter bikes for the most boring of XC courses to the gnarliest of DH run. If "extra weight" was better then would'nt we see heavier bikes rather than lighter bikes?

POWER of the rider, which in turn tends to mean more a HEAVIER rider may be more important but it is not the weight that is significant (If it is then move over Tom, My fat ass is going to ride you into da ground innit!)

dave_1

kozzo wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

What was your experience of racing over the cobbles in terms of strategy and gearing. My experience was the bounce is far worse the slower you go..the lighter you are the more you bounce up. The race is flat so weight is also not as crucial but advantageous even

Your experiencie from early 90' is outdated.

Greetings from Liège.

post your experience on riding/racing cobbled roads so we can learn from you then sir