Wheelset that doesn't roll well

pinno

mfin wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

thread got moved due to misunderstood humour content.

Correct, you start a thread to point out the total crap people say and then people miss the point and fill it with crap drivel jokes. I despair sometimes.

Can you start another thread on the same theme?

ai_1

mfin wrote:

...you start a thread to point out the total crap people say and then people miss the point and fill it with crap drivel jokes. I despair sometimes.

Out of curiosity. What sort of responses were you hoping for when you started this thread?

mfin

People missed the point then go and splurge crap joke recommendations on how to make a wheel badly, when the point was that there are so many people who buy new wheels over on Road Buying Advice and then describe what those new wheels are like by saying that they are impressed at how they 'roll really well', which is stupid. Simple really.

ai_1

mfin wrote:

People missed the point then go and splurge crap joke recommendations on how to make a wheel badly, when the point was that there are so many people who buy new wheels over on Road Buying Advice and then describe what those new wheels are like by saying that they are impressed at how they 'roll really well', which is stupid. Simple really.

So it was supposed to be rhetorical? Doesn't work great on a discussion forum, especially if you don't execute it very well, which I'm afraid you didn't.
Sorry but to so poorly make a point and criticise others for ruining your attempt is absurd, nevermind ignorant and unpleasant.

P.S.
A vast amount of what's said on these forums is nonsense, it's not restricted to comments about wheels rolling well. In fact read a few of the Bikeradar magazine reviews and you'll find they're pretty much as bad. They'd have you thinking stiff bikes fly forwards when you breath on the pedals and less stiff ones drain all energy from the universe. So it's not quite obvious that you're trying to make some specific and apparently serious point when you post something like this thread. In context it comes across as a silly/jokey thread seeking silly/jokey responses, which is exactly what it got and there'as not much wrong with that!

mfin

Ai_1 wrote:

So it's not quite obvious that you're trying to make some specific and apparently serious point when you post something like this thread"

cheer up! It wasn't serious and I don't really care about it at all, it's only fun, if it sounds serious I can assure you it's completely the opposite and just dry. Plus, I didn't even try to communicate the exact point, that would be completely boring.

Origami02

t4tomo wrote:

I reckon you need to go handbuilt for that spec. You'd never get factory built to suit.

I thought this was the best reply. Nice to see it said with irony for once rather than, as often appears to the case, the result of some mass hypnotic state.

pinno

At least we don't get the 'They spin up real good' line you get on Bike Review. WTF is 'They spin up real good' supposed to mean anyway?

Sorry Ai_1, i'm with mfin on this one. We can arrange a fight around the back of Farmfoods if you like?

Yellow Peril

it all comes down to the heavyweight vs non-aero argument. There's a blog somewhere by a Swedish scientist who conducted extensive tests in a slurry tank and found that a 10kg wheel would be better at going slower than a wheel of normal weight with ice cream wafers stuck on each spoke

pinno

Yellow Peril wrote:

it all comes down to the heavyweight vs non-aero argument. There's a blog somewhere by a Swedish scientist who conducted extensive tests in a slurry tank and found that a 10kg wheel would be better at going slower than a wheel of normal weight with ice cream wafers stuck on each spoke

I bet he came up smelling of roses.

Did the ice cream wafers create an aerofoil effect? Plenty of slurry tanks on the IOM, perhaps you could do a study yourself YP.

FishFish

Ai_1 wrote:

"
One last thought. It might be interesting to experiment with a thixotropic material. The most easily available is probably

Swarfega the branded hand cleaning gel from outside of the M25. Maybe it would not enhance the non rolling characteristics but if you apply it to your left foot then it will be clean enough to remove. The foot that is not the thixotropic gel. Once removed you would realise that whilst the rolling speed is reduced by virtue of only having one foot in fact that was a mistake because it is the cyclist that has been slowed down and not the wheel.

pinno

I think that Swarfega Grit is the solution to the rolling problem. Slap it everywhere. Use it as bearing grease, foot gel, chamois cream, warm up balm, energy gel, chain lubricant and of course, to compliment Veet.

I think that would solve most rolling problems.

Yellow Peril

pinarello001 wrote:

Yellow Peril wrote:

it all comes down to the heavyweight vs non-aero argument. There's a blog somewhere by a Swedish scientist who conducted extensive tests in a slurry tank and found that a 10kg wheel would be better at going slower than a wheel of normal weight with ice cream wafers stuck on each spoke

I bet he came up smelling of roses.

Did the ice cream wafers create an aerofoil effect? Plenty of slurry tanks on the IOM, perhaps you could do a study yourself YP.

Absolutely we're always in the sh!t over here

Yellow Peril

I also heard that some dude in Switzerland is working on hi-tech square rims. I expect the UCI will shut him down and bury any research

pinno

Apollo have got the copyright on square rims. Square rims negate the frame clearance for calipers. Very handy that as you don't need brakes anyway.

There is a research institute into performance in Switzerland that is using different types of frame material, They are using 3 control groups riding black unmarked bikes. 50 in each group. The first group ride bikes that are made from carbon fibre and weigh in a 820 grams for the whole bike. The second group ride bikes that are made of steel and weigh 10kg's, the 3rd group ride bikes made of lead and weigh 126kg's.

The riders who ride the lead bikes are told that they are riding NASA quality CF and the CF lot are told that their bikes are Deadonium, mined in Honduras. It's quite funny really, there is no difference in performance (downhill) between the 3 groups.

The full results of the test will be published after the court case where the Institute is being sued for the accidental destruction of chalets.

Yellow Peril

pinarello001 wrote:

Apollo have got the copyright on square rims. Square rims negate the frame clearance for calipers. Very handy that as you don't need brakes anyway.

There is a research institute into performance in Switzerland that is using different types of frame material, They are using 3 control groups riding black unmarked bikes. 50 in each group. The first group ride bikes that are made from carbon fibre and weigh in a 820 grams for the whole bike. The second group ride bikes that are made of steel and weigh 10kg's, the 3rd group ride bikes made of lead and weigh 126kg's.

The riders who ride the lead bikes are told that they are riding NASA quality CF and the CF lot are told that their bikes are Deadonium, mined in Honduras. It's quite funny really, there is no difference in performance (downhill) between the 3 groups.

The full results of the test will be published after the court case where the Institute is being sued for the accidental destruction of chalets.

Tyler Farrar is the development rider for the lead bikes. He's been using one in the pro peleton for the past 5 years