Fastest bike ever?

chris_bass
chris_bass Posts: 4,913
edited September 2013 in Road general
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2013/07/this-b ... bike-ever/

not the most glamorous riding position!! might get me into work a bit earlier i suppose!
www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes

Comments

  • monkimark
    monkimark Posts: 1,511
    As long as you don't have to stop at traffic lights - it might be a bit difficult to get a foot down, especially if ou're clipped in.
  • hatch87
    hatch87 Posts: 352
    With me in it, not a chance
    http://app.strava.com/athletes/686217
    Come on! You call this a storm? Blow, you son of a bitch! Blow! It's time for a showdown! You and me! I'm right here! Come and get me!
  • looks like a 2 wheeled bumming device - not one to ride through Brighton then....
    A person who aims at nothing is sure to hit it

    Canyon Aeroad 7.0 summer missile
    Trek 2.1 winter hack
  • t4tomo
    t4tomo Posts: 2,643
    inverse recumbent?

    best of luck to Obree
    Bianchi Infinito CV
    Bianchi Via Nirone 7 Ultegra
    Brompton S Type
    Carrera Vengeance Ultimate Ltd
    Gary Fisher Aquila '98
    Front half of a Viking Saratoga Tandem
  • turnerjohn
    turnerjohn Posts: 1,069
    where do you hang the panniers ?!
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    turnerjohn wrote:
    where do you hang the panniers ?!

    you could get some shorts with really big back pockets and you'd be sorted!!
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • MichaelW
    MichaelW Posts: 2,164
    turnerjohn wrote:
    where do you hang the panniers ?!
    and where does a baguette go?
  • goonz
    goonz Posts: 3,106
    :lol:

    Is that really the seating position????
    Scott Speedster S20 Roadie for Speed
    Specialized Hardrock MTB for Lumps
    Specialized Langster SS for Ease
    Cinelli Mash Bolt Fixed for Pain
    n+1 is well and truly on track
    Strava http://app.strava.com/athletes/1608875
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Why face down head forward?! U'd think he'd be able to get the same aerodynamics the other way round?
    and a change from circular pedalling to push/pull ... ?

    I do think it's time the UCI sanctioned a development class cycle race - where the designers were allowed out of the norm bike designs - that's how the Int Moth dinghy has become a foiling boat - and even the Americas Cup boats are now hydroplaning ...
  • Bar Shaker
    Bar Shaker Posts: 2,313
    It looks like the aerodynamics were finalised in a garden shed. I wish him the best of luck.

    He will need it.
    Boardman Elite SLR 9.2S
    Boardman FS Pro
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    Bar Shaker wrote:
    It looks like the aerodynamics were finalised in a garden shed. I wish him the best of luck.

    He will need it.

    It probably was. Like everything else Obree has made in his shed and broken a world record with. He probably doesn't need the luck.
    Slowbike wrote:
    I do think it's time the UCI sanctioned a development class cycle race - where the designers were allowed out of the norm bike designs - that's how the Int Moth dinghy has become a foiling boat - and even the Americas Cup boats are now hydroplaning ...

    But it's not about the bike! Why would the UCI care about the development of the bike? With dinghy sailing I can see it would be different - you end up with much faster boats and that has to improve the spectacle. That's not really going to happen with cycling - even if speed was increased a bit, it wouldn't really look any different as a sport.
    Faster than a tent.......
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Rolf F wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    I do think it's time the UCI sanctioned a development class cycle race - where the designers were allowed out of the norm bike designs - that's how the Int Moth dinghy has become a foiling boat - and even the Americas Cup boats are now hydroplaning ...

    But it's not about the bike! Why would the UCI care about the development of the bike? With dinghy sailing I can see it would be different - you end up with much faster boats and that has to improve the spectacle. That's not really going to happen with cycling - even if speed was increased a bit, it wouldn't really look any different as a sport.
    Why would the UCI care about development of the kit?

    Because that's what helps drive the sport....

    How many ppl now ride carbon machines with 11 speed electronic shifting - is that not development - or did they ride that back in the 1900's ... ?!

    TTs are all about aerodynamics - yet the one bit that we do nothing about is the dangly legs pumping up and down on them pedals - if only there was a better way to get aero ... oh, there is ... but the UCI won't allow it in their sanctioned races ...

    Surely, the ultimate development is to create a bike that is accessible to the public that is capable of higher speeds with less effort than currently required - it could encourage more ppl to use bikes as a normal form of transport and get out of their cars ...
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    Slowbike wrote:
    Surely, the ultimate development is to create a bike that is accessible to the public that is capable of higher speeds with less effort than currently required - it could encourage more ppl to use bikes as a normal form of transport and get out of their cars ...

    Maybe - but I can't see it happening. If people think pedalling is too much effort, they'll simply use electric bikes. Speed isn't what puts people off riding (if you are stuck in a traffic jam every morning and evening watching the bikes sail past, you've probably worked out already which form of transport is quicker) - it's danger perceptions, lack of physical fitness and the believe that you'll always be cold and wet.

    As for things like 11 speed electronic shifting - that isn't developing the sport - all that is doing is developing product turnover. The benefit there is 100% for the manufacturers and 0% for the UCI. Can you tell by watching a stage race who is on 11 speed electronic and who on 10 speed mechanical? I can't.

    TT's - no, they aren't about aerodynamics. They are about the legs of the riders and it makes no difference whether they are aero protected or not. At best, you'd be able to run a slightly longer (half a mile?) TT in the same time - but the same bloke would probably win it. Arguably, aerodynamics on a bike would be counterproductive. Very quickly everyone would end up using the same form (much as happens in F1 only to much lesser effect) so the development would grind to a halt. In the meantime, nobody would be continually developing little aero fixes on frames that the customer would use so the manufacturers would lose out (because we aren't going to be bulking our bikes up with fairings in the real world are we?).
    Faster than a tent.......
  • Slowbike wrote:
    Why would the UCI care about development of the kit?

    Because that's what helps drive the sport....

    How many ppl now ride carbon machines with 11 speed electronic shifting - is that not development - or did they ride that back in the 1900's ... ?!

    But how has that changed the sport? Particularly over the past 15 years. If a bike makes you faster, relative to the other riders, then there's a difference in the spectacle and performance. If everyone has access to the same technology, then neither improves. But if you have different kit then the sport is even more open to the financial doping that you see in F1.
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Rolf F wrote:
    As for things like 11 speed electronic shifting - that isn't developing the sport - all that is doing is developing product turnover. The benefit there is 100% for the manufacturers and 0% for the UCI. Can you tell by watching a stage race who is on 11 speed electronic and who on 10 speed mechanical? I can't.
    None of them are on 8 speed sora are they ... ?

    0% for the UCI - what they (should) want is more ppl cycling - and that seems to be whats happening atm - and what do many newcommers like best? A bit of BLING ...

    It's all minor things - but how much restriction on the racing machine do we actually need... ?
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Slowbike wrote:
    Why would the UCI care about development of the kit?

    Because that's what helps drive the sport....

    How many ppl now ride carbon machines with 11 speed electronic shifting - is that not development - or did they ride that back in the 1900's ... ?!

    But how has that changed the sport? Particularly over the past 15 years. If a bike makes you faster, relative to the other riders, then there's a difference in the spectacle and performance. If everyone has access to the same technology, then neither improves. But if you have different kit then the sport is even more open to the financial doping that you see in F1.

    Don't you think that the current carbon machines are faster than the 1920 machines? It's not just about the rider. We're still "stuck" with the traditional bike shape though - is that the best that can be done? Aren't recumbents more aero?
  • Grill
    Grill Posts: 5,610
    Slowbike wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    Why would the UCI care about development of the kit?

    Because that's what helps drive the sport....

    How many ppl now ride carbon machines with 11 speed electronic shifting - is that not development - or did they ride that back in the 1900's ... ?!

    But how has that changed the sport? Particularly over the past 15 years. If a bike makes you faster, relative to the other riders, then there's a difference in the spectacle and performance. If everyone has access to the same technology, then neither improves. But if you have different kit then the sport is even more open to the financial doping that you see in F1.

    Don't you think that the current carbon machines are faster than the 1920 machines? It's not just about the rider. We're still "stuck" with the traditional bike shape though - is that the best that can be done? Aren't recumbents more aero?

    -1 million for suggesting anyone should ride a recumbent.
    English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Grill wrote:
    -1 million for suggesting anyone should ride a recumbent.
    But you need another bike don't you?! afterall n+1 is still n+1 ;)

    I'm not a designer and I don't have any intention to design new bike frames - UCI compliant or not - but it just strikes me as odd if the UCI are being draconian on design requirements for anything other than safety issues.

    If you want 1 design racing then have a 1design racing class - like sailing does. Then you can have the limited development and full development classes ... it would expand the cycle racing scene ...

    Smithfield market - IG Nocturne - manages to run foldup bike races & pennyfarthing races very successfully ... a great spectacle it is too ...
  • Grill
    Grill Posts: 5,610
    Love to see the pros climb on 'bents...

    It's not the same thing though. Cycling is steeped in tradition, thus the shape. UCI aero restrictions such as 3:1 aren't terribly draconian and have still allowed for some interesting innovation as the latest crop of aero bikes have proven.

    At the end of the day it's about money, and if you dilute the sport by creating loads of sub-classes of equipment such as in auto racing, then there will be less cheddar for those at the top.

    I appreciate a good spectacle (being a lover of all thing penny-farthing related), but I don't see them going mainstream. Closest you have at the moment is triathlon, which allows a 5:1 airfoil and produces some crazy bikes such as the new Felt.
    English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Grill wrote:
    Cycling is steeped in tradition, thus the shape
    but why ... (like a petulant child ;) ) ...

    Perhaps its time that cycling was afforded the same level of development that other sports get ...
    No money in Americas cup I guess ... ;)
  • frisbee
    frisbee Posts: 691
    Bar Shaker wrote:
    It looks like the aerodynamics were finalised in a garden shed. I wish him the best of luck.

    He will need it.

    Yes because he has no history of designing innovative bikes and winning world championships and world records, oh wait.... :roll:
  • Daz555
    Daz555 Posts: 3,976
    I can't see Obree breaking the world record but good luck to him. It would be great if he could get the British outright record along with the world record for riding in the prone position.
    You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
    If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
    If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    Slowbike wrote:
    Don't you think that the current carbon machines are faster than the 1920 machines? It's not just about the rider. We're still "stuck" with the traditional bike shape though - is that the best that can be done? Aren't recumbents more aero?

    They are of course - never mind that irrc derailleurs were banned at that point! But you are being a little unfair. That's right at the start of the development process - the law of diminishing returns has applied for decades in cycling. If you look back at the last 40 odd years of cycling, the only really significant development has been the wider range of gears that can be handled now. If you put the current peloton on 1980s bikes, the race would look much the same as it does now except you wouldn't be able to see the manufacturers logos on the frames.

    Of course nobody is riding 8 speed Sora in the peloton right now - but I bet if they did, in most cases neither you nor I would have the faintest idea that they were. It would make absolutely bugger all difference. And yes, people do want bling - that was my point - but they want useable bling. Fairings would make bikes bulky and unwieldy and heavy and would be excessively expensive. Most people would be scared to death riding a recumbent on the roads so a move to those in pro tours I think would be hugely retrograde (plus see Grills comment on the climbing!). The traditional bike frame has lasted so long because it is the right shape and it works. And it means that the bling comes in neat little, relatively affordable packages. That's why bikes are so bloody ace!
    Faster than a tent.......
  • neeb
    neeb Posts: 4,467
    It would actually be pretty interesting to see on what sort of courses recumbents would outperform standard road bikes if you mixed them in the same race..

    On mountainous courses they wouldn't have a chance - they would be much slower uphill and the aero advantage downhill would be limited or cancelled out entirely by controllability / cornering. That said, on a low recumbent with an aero fairing you could take more risks descending because the consequences of sliding on a corner would be less severe - could be entertaining to watch.. :wink:

    On a really flat stage with not much cornering I guess recumbents would have an advantage, but the dynamics of the peloton would be completely different - I've never ridden a recumbent but I can't see how you could throw it around and launch rapid attacks in the same way as on a normal road bike. Sprint finishes would be all about positioning quite a long distance before the finish. A lead-out train of recumbents with full fairing would be something interesting to see... On the other hand, if they are much more aero than normal bikes, how much would that cancel out the advantages of drafting?
  • Mad_Malx
    Mad_Malx Posts: 5,002
    Just seen this - Great man!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-g ... t-24088647

    Former world champion cyclist Graeme Obree has set a new world record for riding in the prone position.

    The 47-year-old from Ayrshire reached a record breaking speed of 56.62mph (91km/h) in his unconventional Beastie bike.

    He is competing in the World Human Speed Championships at Battle Mountain, Nevada.

    On Saturday he will aim to break the British land speed cycling record on a different recumbent bike.

    Speaking from Nevada, Obree told BBC Radio Scotland: "The timekeeper announced it was a new world record and that is a strange feeling. I've not heard that for 20 year, so I'm still absorbing it, that's nice and anything else is a bonus".

    [The overall record is I think 83mph (133km/h) by Sam Whittington last year - I'm guessing this was a recumbent?]
  • neeb
    neeb Posts: 4,467
    Effing brilliant!

    Great to see that he got the payback for all the hard work and ingenuity.
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    Paging Bar Shaker to the thread..... :lol:
    Faster than a tent.......
  • Daz555
    Daz555 Posts: 3,976
    Slowbike wrote:
    Don't you think that the current carbon machines are faster than the 1920 machines? It's not just about the rider. We're still "stuck" with the traditional bike shape though - is that the best that can be done? Aren't recumbents more aero?
    How would recumbents help bike racing?

    Bike racing is defined by the air - everything about racing and tactics is governed by the effort required to stay in the wind compared to sitting behind. If a UCI allowed too much the sport would evolve instantly into HPV racing and bike racing as we know it would no longer exist. We would never see a peloton or a bunch sprint ever again. Every stage would be a TT. No thanks.

    People who rider HPVs can have their own races. Bike racing as we know it is for "safety bicycles" and that is just fine.
    You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
    If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
    If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.
  • Daz555
    Daz555 Posts: 3,976
    Mad_Malx wrote:
    [The overall record is I think 83mph (133km/h) by Sam Whittington last year - I'm guessing this was a recumbent?]
    Aye - in this sleek piece of tech:

    samwhittingham.jpg
    You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
    If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
    If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.