what is a reason of 3:1 rule by UCI
superenzo
Posts: 3
what is a reason of 3:1 rule by UCI??
the frameset tube ratio was limited in 3:1,,,,,WHY?
whats wrong with 8:1 tube ratio?It is better to cut though the wind and faster with the design of 8:1 tube ratio,isnt it?
thx
the frameset tube ratio was limited in 3:1,,,,,WHY?
whats wrong with 8:1 tube ratio?It is better to cut though the wind and faster with the design of 8:1 tube ratio,isnt it?
thx
0
Comments
-
what is a reason of 3:1 rule by UCI??
the frameset tube ratio was limited in 3:1,,,,,WHY?
whats wrong with 8:1 tube ratio?It is better to cut though the wind and faster with the design of 8:1 tube ratio,isnt it?
thx
Well yes, but then you also cut through the air better in a faired recumbent! They decided they had to set the line somewhere and 3:1 was the mark.0 -
And why are you not allowed to wear compression socks?0
-
They look ridiculous.0
-
Which is fair enough.0
-
fair for what?Which is fair enough.
actually,if all of us can also break the rule of 3:1 and use the frame with 8:1 tube design,it is fair too,isnt it? :?:
what is fair is that every one is able to do the same thing.0 -
They look ridiculous.
This. A million times, this!I'm on Twitter! Follow @olake92 for updates on my racing, my team's performance and some generic tweets.0 -
What puzzles me is that you are not allowed to wear them under leggings or long tights either, so clearly the UCI objection cannot be based on appearance.They look ridiculous.0 -
Why have a ratio at all? Why limit bikes to tubular sections? Why limit rider positions? Why limit anything?
fair for what?Which is fair enough.
actually,if all of us can also break the rule of 3:1 and use the frame with 8:1 tube design,it is fair too,isnt it? :?:
what is fair is that every one is able to do the same thing.
UCI wants the road sport to remain very much the sport of "safety bicycle" racing - retaining the classic diamond frame and classic riding position.
I'm all for it retaining control of the classic bike format. There are other sports with a more open attitudes to bike design and it ends up looking like this:
Which is fabulous, but is not bike racing.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.0 -
The weight limit and tube ratio was brought in 15 years or so because there were concerns that 1) Bikes were being constructed on the limits of safety and 2) They were afraid there would be a bicycle arms race and professional road racing bikes would become expensive and unaffordable for the public who actually watch the races
Similar thing in rowing, there were minimum boat weight and other design regulations introduced for both safety considerations and to make sure the sport stayed vaguely affordable for amateur boat clubs and participants and not become all about the equipment.
Now though as the technology has advanced and got cheaper we are in the weird situation where professional cycling teams have to put ballast in their frames in order to make them UCI compliant whereas the bikes they ride in the time trials and non-UCI events are becoming increasingly different in design, especially triathlons where the bikes are positively space age and Joe Public can actually buy such frames for a relatively reasonable amount of money.
Word on the street is that the UCI is going to definitely change the 3:1 rule this year (to what, not sure yet) and probably reduce or get rid of entirely the weight limit. Makes sense from a cynical point of view though as one of the main reasons for professional cycling is for bike manufacturers to flog their new bikes/components to the public and they are running out of things to legally innovate!0 -
so you dont get some mega wings lol0
