Marginal Gains and real world riding
Comments
-
When I was a foolish child, we used to bomb around unlit roads in the west pennines with one set of ever ready lights between 3 of us . The leader gets the front light, tailgunner gets the rear light, piggy in the middle gets nothing. Riding 20kg steel framed mountain bikes with flexy brakes too.
I think they're the 2 most important changes for me - lights that let me see stuff in the dark and brakes that let me stop when I see something. All the carbon fibre in the world is only going to make me a bit faster - good lights and brakes prevent me from riding into walls.0 -
I have 3 hobbies (obsessions), racing sailing dinghies, astro photography and cycling. There are some very interesting parallels between them when it comes to gear.
1) Kit matters. You don't have to justify it, spending lots of money might not bring great improvement but hobbyists, especially men are obsessed by kit, me included. Look at any hobby magazine, the majority will be adverts about kit and reviews. Even articles that aren't feature kit prominently.
2) If I feel happy and confident with my kit I will perform better. I spend time and money on my boat making sure everything is absolutely perfect - finish of the hull and foils, condition of the sails, rig settings etc etc. It doesn't matter that it makes little difference to speed, the important thing is that it leaves me with no excuses when someone sails faster than me.
3) Small differences do matter to many of us. And yes we all know, thank you very much, that working on fitness, knowledge and skills will make bigger differences, but, having put in the graft I want my kit to deliver the best performance possible.
So for those who say it's 99% marketing, you are quite right but so wrong.0 -
We're also massively restricted by our very feeble imaginations - why are we even thinking that advances will come in tyres, frames etc - it could be so left field that right now it is beyond our capability to even think about it.
When the first mobile phones came out I had no clue that we would pretty much all be carrying them around in our pockets, they would be smaller than a packet of fags and I could watch porn on them
Loads of similar examples out there. 0 -
ugo.santalucia wrote:blinddrew wrote:Ok clearly I haven't explained myself too well at the beginning, marginal gains are just that, but the cumulative effect, over twenty years, are, I think, quite significant. It would be nice to do a back to back ride actually.
Ugo's comments about making bikes more accessible whilst cycle sport disappears up its own backside notwithstanding. ;¬)
My point is that the bike of 2023 might not be such a sophisticated piece of machinery, as in the meantime chances are the all industry of marginal improvements has gone bust... it is a decadent industry that seeks profit from the desire for an imaginary object that does not exist in real life... it is OK for a while,then people move on
Disagree with you - it has always been the case that change happens at the top price point and then works it way down. A lot of the cost of the top end parts is R and D.
Look at a £400 bike now - it has components on it that were unthinkable or unaffordable a 20 years back - and often those improvements also increase safety (think index gears Vs struggling with the shifter on the down tube and better brakes). The car building world has been benefiting this way for tens of years Racing to Top end cars to budget cars.
But I would agree with you regarding things like electric bikes - but they are also benefiting from lighter bikes enabling people to go further and making them more practicable. I fully expect to be using an electric bike in my 70's. ~For many people a bike is more than just a machine to get from A to B it is a thing of beauty and for some technical wizardry0 -
jonomc4 wrote:ugo.santalucia wrote:blinddrew wrote:Ok clearly I haven't explained myself too well at the beginning, marginal gains are just that, but the cumulative effect, over twenty years, are, I think, quite significant. It would be nice to do a back to back ride actually.
Ugo's comments about making bikes more accessible whilst cycle sport disappears up its own backside notwithstanding. ;¬)
My point is that the bike of 2023 might not be such a sophisticated piece of machinery, as in the meantime chances are the all industry of marginal improvements has gone bust... it is a decadent industry that seeks profit from the desire for an imaginary object that does not exist in real life... it is OK for a while,then people move on
Disagree with you - it has always been the case that change happens at the top price point and then works it way down. A lot of the cost of the top end parts is R and D.
Look at a £400 bike now - it has components on it that were unthinkable or unaffordable a 20 years back - and often those improvements also increase safety (think index gears Vs struggling with the shifter on the down tube and better brakes). The car building world has been benefiting this way for tens of years Racing to Top end cars to budget cars.
But I would agree with you regarding things like electric bikes - but they are also benefiting from lighter bikes enabling people to go further and making them more practicable. I fully expect to be using an electric bike in my 70's. ~For many people a bike is more than just a machine to get from A to B it is a thing of beauty and for some technical wizardry
That's always the argument, but the car industry has developed serious electronics, which the bike industry has not... or it has developed them for the shifting, which really is the last thing they should have looked at. ABS was something to look into... tyre pressure sensors that warn you if the pressure goes up or goes down, allowing the rider to avoid an accident... Frame integrity diagnostics, with Doppler... I am thinking these sorts of things, rather than electronic shifting, which is frankly risible and something that could have been done with the technology available 30 years ago and wireless (think in terms of remote controls for toy cars)left the forum March 20230 -
Rather than continually cut weight and cost I would quite like a few of the items on my bike to last a bit beyond the warranty period.0
-
Bikes 10 yrs from now? well go back 10 yrs - are they a whole lot different?
why should a carbon bike make you ride 2mph faster avg ? that would be a significant pwr increase or aero improvements - sceptical over that claim - wheels and tires havnt improved to that effect? more than likely the wrong tire measurements were input? or you ride different roads.
unless roads start to improve than we ll all be talking about the first road bikes with suspension forks by then.0 -
0
-
Slowbike wrote:Marginal gains in terms of equipment rather than training ... interesting.
Obviously we have certain constraints atm - so the weight limit imposed by the UCI for a "race legal" bike. I know you can go under that if you want - so long as you're not UCI racing.
So weight will be one area that will improve - and perhaps the weight limit will come down too.
Aerodynamics play a huge part in how much power is turned into speed - so expect more aerodynamic road bikes in future. I wonder if anything as dramatic as the Americas Cup could be incorporated - they have substantially changed the game (developed from ideas from Weymouth speed week) in sailing.
Power transfer - we're using chains and whilst we have various bearings that minimise resistance there is still a bit of loss in the transmission.
Tyres - I think that's a big area for development - I've seen the "solid tyres" around and they're not there yet - but they may be one day...
what have I missed?
I do question how much we sucumb to marketing Bull Sh**.
For example Aerodynamics of the bike be it poor or exceptional have nothing compared to massive, aerodynamically shocking, strange shaped hulk of a human sitting ontop of it.
True if you want extra milliseconds in a TT then it will help but for almost everyone else Aerodynamics of a bike is pretty much pointless unless it had huge sails.
Power transfer, frame design, wheels and tyres have a bigger impact though yeah but they are marginal gains that come at a very high cost.
For example a £700-£1000 bike weighing a average of 8kg and a £2000-£3000 bike weighing a average of <7kg would be the same if the guy on the £2000-3000 bike had a 750ml bottle of water and a few snacks!
I also question the prices of kit in regards to marginal gains and if manufactures are actually having a laugh. A hell of a lot of cycle components and kit are massively priced hiked. Almost all of it comes from the far east and is made (very well) for peanuts.
I noticed this once then I removed a Tiagra front derailleur to replace it with a Ultegra one .... they were virtually identical. The only difference was a slightly smoother shape to the arm. Thats down to a mould that could easily be pressed for Sora, Tiagra, 105 etc aswel.
here:
Ultegra front: http://media.performancebike.com/images ... L-SIDE.jpg
Tiagra Front: http://www.tredz.co.uk/prodimg/47470_1_SuperSize.jpg
The Ultegra derailleur goes for almost %30 more ! Does that very slight change really cost 30% more to do?0 -
This is my franken road/gravel/commuting bike. It weighs around 26lb, runs fast 26x2.00 (modded/shaven) MTB XC tyres at 25/35PSI on 28mm wide rims. Flexy Tange CrMo MTB frame from mid 90's, steerer extender, square taper, MTB/touring shoes... etc.
I average 19.0-20.5mph on it on most of routes from 15 to 50miles, mostly riding with a 10-15lb commuting rucksack.
On one of the recent Wiggle sportives I spent almost entire time overtaking people, of which some were riding truly high end bikes (Yes I know it's not a race) and finished it with a fast group doing my turns as well. Even when coasting next to other people, my bike didn't appear to be any slower...
When browsing forums I come across many claims as to how much difference everything makes;
road bikes generally - MASSIVE DIFFERENCE!
carbon bike - big difference
lighter or aero wheels - 0.5-2.00mph
complete aero bike - 2.00mph (one of the blogs)
then there's the rest - ceramic bearings, road pedals/shoes, stiff carbon frames, stiff cranks and BBs all apparently transferring power "more efficiently" and despite the differences being small, apparently "it's all adding up"...
Now if I was to believe in all this pseudo-scientific nonsense I think my av speeds should go up by 3-5mph, don't you think?
P.S. 700C wheels with 25mm GP4000s on the same bike were just 0.3mph faster (3-4min on a 50mile route). Go figure.0 -
Barteos wrote:This is my franken road/gravel/commuting bike. It weighs around 26lb, runs fast 26x2.00 (modded/shaven) MTB XC tyres at 25/35PSI on 28mm wide rims. Flexy Tange CrMo MTB frame from mid 90's, steerer extender, square taper, MTB/touring shoes... etc.
I average 19.0-20.5mph on it on most of routes from 15 to 50miles, mostly riding with a 10-15lb commuting rucksack.
On one of the recent Wiggle sportives I spent almost entire time overtaking people, of which some were riding truly high end bikes (Yes I know it's not a race) and finished it with a fast group doing my turns as well. Even when coasting next to other people, my bike didn't appear to be any slower...
When browsing forums I come across many claims as to how much difference everything makes;
road bikes generally - MASSIVE DIFFERENCE!
carbon bike - big difference
lighter or aero wheels - 0.5-2.00mph
complete aero bike - 2.00mph (one of the blogs)
then there's the rest - ceramic bearings, road pedals/shoes, stiff carbon frames, stiff cranks and BBs all apparently transferring power "more efficiently" and despite the differences being small, apparently "it's all adding up"...
Now if I was to believe in all this pseudo-scientific nonsense I think my av speeds should go up by 3-5mph, don't you think?
P.S. 700C wheels with 25mm GP4000s on the same bike were just 0.3mph faster (3-4min on a 50mile route). Go figure.
19-21mph average on that? ... Do you live in a flat area because I call BS unless your superman. Guys on tours do 7mph faster average and they are supermen.
Haha.0 -
New Forest. Fairly flat with just a small number of short sharp hill here and there. Lovely Furious Freds deal with bad road surface exceptionally well.
Looks are deceptive. "That" may look like a poo but really isn't a slow bike. It makes a perfect gravel grinder, too.
The handlebars may seem little high (lowered by 1" since the picture was taken) but I spend most of the time on the drops and it suits me perfectly.
The tyres were modded (with side cutters...) so there is almost no tread 8)
P.S. Not 21mph. 20.5mph - best time on a 16 mile commute. I've never timed it without the rucksack though 0 -
Barteos wrote:This is my franken road/gravel/commuting bike. It weighs around 26lb, runs fast 26x2.00 (modded/shaven) MTB XC tyres at 25/35PSI on 28mm wide rims. Flexy Tange CrMo MTB frame from mid 90's, steerer extender, square taper, MTB/touring shoes... etc.
I average 19.0-20.5mph on it on most of routes from 15 to 50miles, mostly riding with a 10-15lb commuting rucksack.
On one of the recent Wiggle sportives I spent almost entire time overtaking people, of which some were riding truly high end bikes (Yes I know it's not a race) and finished it with a fast group doing my turns as well. Even when coasting next to other people, my bike didn't appear to be any slower...
When browsing forums I come across many claims as to how much difference everything makes;
road bikes generally - MASSIVE DIFFERENCE!
carbon bike - big difference
lighter or aero wheels - 0.5-2.00mph
complete aero bike - 2.00mph (one of the blogs)
then there's the rest - ceramic bearings, road pedals/shoes, stiff carbon frames, stiff cranks and BBs all apparently transferring power "more efficiently" and despite the differences being small, apparently "it's all adding up"...
Now if I was to believe in all this pseudo-scientific nonsense I think my av speeds should go up by 3-5mph, don't you think?
P.S. 700C wheels with 25mm GP4000s on the same bike were just 0.3mph faster (3-4min on a 50mile route). Go figure.
Wow! That's a very well endowed post "You really think you can burn off sugar with exercise?" downhill paul0 -
Somebody needs to produce a fun, functional road bike that doesn't weigh 30kilos and fall to bits in 5 seconds for under £200. Think an MX-5 bike.Insert bike here:0
-
rickeverett wrote:
19-21mph average on that? ... Do you live in a flat area because I call BS unless your superman. Guys on tours do 7mph faster average and they are supermen.
Haha.
I know this thread hasn't been touched for a while, but it turns up on google searches and this is a (completely ignorance based) point that needs answering:
Yes, riders on the Tour go 7mph faster. Well done! Unfortunately you don't understand what that difference means, because you're ignorant of the most basic facts needed to have an intelligent opinion on this topic. I.e. work done against air resistance - which is almost all work at that speed - goes with the SQUARE of speed. So a solo rider who can make 27mph would require about THREE TIMES the power output of the guy you were calling a liar. (In fact, even TDF riders can only make this speed because they're drafting in tight groups and rotate the lead. This is probably the most basic fact about the TDF to understand, but never mind...)
This is in fact why bike performance differences are so small once you have a bike with low hysteresis rubber and reasonably aero position - any reduction in aero drag results in only the SQUARE ROOT of that improvement in speed.
..This is basic stuff that everyone buying a performance bike should understand, but virtually no one does - people concentrate on what cycling magazines tell them to, and those magazines rely on ads for their profits.0 -
Hey I really like the look of your fraken bike it weighs the same as my best road bike. :oops:
I Would like to try an make up something similar so I could run big tyres for winter but im lacking in the bike mechanic skills.0 -
Moonbiker wrote:Hey I really like the look of your fraken bike it weighs the same as my best road bike. :oops:
My main bike weighs a bit more still - about 12.4kg.
(But that's with heavy duty 27" touring wheels and 27x1 1/4 Gatorskins - and the frame is Tange no.5, which is essentially plain gauge 531, so it's not the lightest anyway)
My new TT build on the other hand is likely to be somewhere between 8.5 and 7.5kg initially, and with blingy carbon wheels and better bits it could be more like <7kg. Not far off half the weight of the other bike. :shock:0 -
I have the luxury of 3 bikes and can make interesting comparisons. I also have the handicap of two artificial hips and they act as road 'sensors' which pick up every bump and gravelly road I cycle on. I gave up my Columbus steel frame in '07 after 18 years of riding it. I would never go back. Having kept a cycling 'diary' for years, I can safely say that I am 1.5mph quicker and that is technology alone.
My C40 frame was made from 1994 to 2004 (I believe). The Wilier is a '09 Izoard. The Izoard is much more responsive, equally as comfortable and yet it is not top of the range yet the C40 was at it's time, such is the increase in technology and it was comparatively cheaper.
I rode the Pinarello for 3 years - it is Alu with carbon forks before converting it to a winter trainer. Although it handles well, the Pinarello is a clumpy, stiff bone shaker of a thing despite the touring saddle, the forks and cf seatpost.
That 1.5mph is marginal but when looking at a 60+ mile ride, I don't fret at the state i'll be in when I get home. I know it won't let me down (campagnolo record) - I won't be making 'that call', I know the chances of getting a puncture is very slim (high quality rubber and latex), I will enjoy the ride as it ill be comfortable (cf), I won't carry a spoke key in case I hit a pothole (factory built wheels that are bombproof) etc etc.
All that technology has made cycling so much more fun. I would not be cycling now if that technology hadn't moved on.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
pinarello001 wrote:I know it won't let me down (campagnolo record) - I won't be making 'that call', I know the chances of getting a puncture is very slim (high quality rubber and latex), I will enjoy the ride as it ill be comfortable (cf), I won't carry a spoke key in case I hit a pothole (factory built wheels that are bombproof) etc etc.
All that technology has made cycling so much more fun. I would not be cycling now if that technology hadn't moved on.
Just to be clear, you aren't suggesting that old bikes have these problems, but new ones do not, are you?
I can agree on the ride comfort, and better tyres, but otherwise if generalising at all, I'd be inclined to go in the other direction. Not all modern factory wheels are bomb proof, and I'd rather break a spoke on a 32 spoke old handbuilt. Friction shifters require pretty much no maintenance at all. Some if not many modern bits are built to be light rather than last, and there are rubbish ones in both camps. I'd rather have old Record than new; my old Ti Super Record axle is a beautiful thing, and the 8 speed Chorus parts I have are very nicely made as well.
If you are having trouble with your components and knocking your wheels out of true every ride, or even on a regular basis, it's probably because you aren't maintaining it properly; it doesn't matter much what it is.0 -
pinarello001 wrote:I won't carry a spoke key in case I hit a pothole (factory built wheels that are bombproof) etc etc.
Interesting thread resurrection.
Just to be clear... you don't need to carry a spoke key because there is nothing you can do with it if you have (most) factory wheels.
However, as you might expect, lots of folks bring here their "bombproof" Mavic/Fulcrum/Campagnolo/Shimano wheels when they break a spoke or need the wheels to be trued, which happens quite frequently, despite the incipit. Half of the times it turns out to be impossible to true them and for very silly reasons... most of those times being bonded nipples.
So I wouldn't be necessarily impressed by a wheel that doesn't go out of true, as it might simply be because the nipple is seized. However, if you happen to slightly damage the rim in the above pothole, then you need the spoke key to compensate for the damage... and that's where your bombproof wheels reveal how they survived the bomb, but the price is they can no longer be used.left the forum March 20230 -
meanwhile wrote:rickeverett wrote:
19-21mph average on that? ... Do you live in a flat area because I call BS unless your superman. Guys on tours do 7mph faster average and they are supermen.
Haha.
I know this thread hasn't been touched for a while, but it turns up on google searches and this is a (completely ignorance based) point that needs answering:
Yes, riders on the Tour go 7mph faster. Well done! Unfortunately you don't understand what that difference means, because you're ignorant of the most basic facts needed to have an intelligent opinion on this topic. I.e. work done against air resistance - which is almost all work at that speed - goes with the SQUARE of speed. So a solo rider who can make 27mph would require about THREE TIMES the power output of the guy you were calling a liar. (In fact, even TDF riders can only make this speed because they're drafting in tight groups and rotate the lead. This is probably the most basic fact about the TDF to understand, but never mind...)
This is in fact why bike performance differences are so small once you have a bike with low hysteresis rubber and reasonably aero position - any reduction in aero drag results in only the SQUARE ROOT of that improvement in speed.
..This is basic stuff that everyone buying a performance bike should understand, but virtually no one does - people concentrate on what cycling magazines tell them to, and those magazines rely on ads for their profits.
Power required to overcome aerodynamic drag is proportional to speed cubed...0 -
frisbee wrote:Power required to overcome aerodynamic drag is proportional to speed cubed...
Actually that depends, the more steamlined the body the higher the order. A basic cycle (with a person on it) is pretty un-aero so squared is about right. As you move to more streamlined shapes (faired recumbents, sports cars etc) you get closed to a cubed ratio.Music, beer, sport, repeat...0 -
ugo.santalucia wrote:pinarello001 wrote:I won't carry a spoke key in case I hit a pothole (factory built wheels that are bombproof) etc etc.
Interesting thread resurrection.
Just to be clear... you don't need to carry a spoke key because there is nothing you can do with it if you have (most) factory wheels.
However, as you might expect, lots of folks bring here their "bombproof" Mavic/Fulcrum/Campagnolo/Shimano wheels when they break a spoke or need the wheels to be trued, which happens quite frequently, despite the incipit. Half of the times it turns out to be impossible to true them and for very silly reasons... most of those times being bonded nipples
Been playing with my RS80? 0 -
-
That chain looks too slack...0 -
meanwhile wrote:
I know this thread hasn't been touched for a while, but it turns up on google searches and this is a (completely ignorance based) point that needs answering:
Yes, riders on the Tour go 7mph faster. Well done! Unfortunately you don't understand what that difference means, because you're ignorant of the most basic facts needed to have an intelligent opinion on this topic. I.e. work done against air resistance - which is almost all work at that speed - goes with the SQUARE of speed. So a solo rider who can make 27mph would require about THREE TIMES the power output of the guy you were calling a liar. (In fact, even TDF riders can only make this speed because they're drafting in tight groups and rotate the lead. This is probably the most basic fact about the TDF to understand, but never mind...)
This is in fact why bike performance differences are so small once you have a bike with low hysteresis rubber and reasonably aero position - any reduction in aero drag results in only the SQUARE ROOT of that improvement in speed.
..This is basic stuff that everyone buying a performance bike should understand, but virtually no one does - people concentrate on what cycling magazines tell them to, and those magazines rely on ads for their profits.
Tell that to Tony Martin.
TdF Stage 9 to Mulhouse 170km Av. speed 39 km/h.
Vuelta de Espana 2013 Stage 6 missed out by 20 metres after 160km breakaway, Av speed 41km/h.
Even in the 54km ITT in this years TdF the last placed rider averaged over 40km/h. (Albeit 12 and a half mins behind Tony Martin)
Pro riders are superhuman in comparison to our real world efforts, and when they are in a bunch going full gas the speed is nearer 40 miles per hour.0 -
@ Ugo - the wheel conundrum is a bit of 'horses for courses'. I only weigh 64.kg's and I have been relatively easy on bike's, bits and wheels. My 6 ft 4.5 friend mangles bike bits and wheels. He folded a pair of deep section wheels in a race on the Isle Of Wight, snapped a crank arm when sprinting (against me, I won) for the Café sign in Kendal, bust a cf seatpost on his MTB on the black trail at Kiroughtree and destroyed a pair of Ksyriums at Goodwood.
...and that's the shortlist.
I had a pair of Elite's - far too stiff for me and every single nipple was seized. Happily, I never had to true them.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
blinddrew wrote:frisbee wrote:Power required to overcome aerodynamic drag is proportional to speed cubed...
Actually that depends, the more steamlined the body the higher the order. A basic cycle (with a person on it) is pretty un-aero so squared is about right. As you move to more streamlined shapes (faired recumbents, sports cars etc) you get closed to a cubed ratio.
No, a fat old granny on a shopping bike with a big basket on the front or Graham Obree on his face first streamlined recumbent will both follow the power to speed cubed relationship.0 -
antsmithmk wrote:
That chain looks too slack...
You're responding to a year old picture/post. It's either been replaced by now or is very, very slack.0 -
I have just upgraded from a Spesh Allez to a Scott CR1 and I am 15% quicker. I am still puzzled as to why as it can not be the 1-2kgs drop in weight. Is it geometry and if so did I just get lucky that I bought a bike perfect (?) for me?0
