Seemingly trivial things that intrigue you

morstar

So, I’ve seen quite a few evidence based bits about tyre pressures in the last month or two (not just marketing bs) and worked out that my tyre pressures needed to drop from about 90 to 78 psi based on an online calculator.

Have been for a couple of rides and have a few surprising findings.
1) The comfort difference is very noticeable.
2) I am roughly the same speed I always am.
3) My Strava uphill times are considerably slower.

Point 2 & 3 are most interesting as they are contradictory. I found this intriguing.
It is a short, very hilly figure of 8 on poor roads that I ride very regularly. I ride to heart rate and I am incredibly consistently paced ride to ride.
There isn’t a lot of flat, I haven’t pushed the flats and downhills any harder than normal and yet I am clearly making up a lot of lost time from the climbs. The climbs are steep so always feel hard work but they take noticeably longer to get up as confirmed by GPS.

I was intrigued by the slow climbing and faster fast bits.

pblakeney

Just curious, what calculator did you use?
There are many, and with varying results. 🤔

Stevo_666

pblakeney said:

diplodicus said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

.

focuszing723 said:

Has anyone here found the meaning of life?

Eat, excrete, fornicate, sleep, repeat, die.

Fornicate doesn't get repeated enough though.

You missed "drink beer"

There are a great many options to fill the time between sleeping. Some more enjoyable than others, but none are really important in the meaning of life.

As the great philosopher Homer once said, "Beer the cause of and solution to all life's problems " 😉

mrb123

morstar said:

So, I’ve seen quite a few evidence based bits about tyre pressures in the last month or two (not just marketing bs) and worked out that my tyre pressures needed to drop from about 90 to 78 psi based on an online calculator.

Have been for a couple of rides and have a few surprising findings.
1) The comfort difference is very noticeable.
2) I am roughly the same speed I always am.
3) My Strava uphill times are considerably slower.

Point 2 & 3 are most interesting as they are contradictory. I found this intriguing.
It is a short, very hilly figure of 8 on poor roads that I ride very regularly. I ride to heart rate and I am incredibly consistently paced ride to ride.
There isn’t a lot of flat, I haven’t pushed the flats and downhills any harder than normal and yet I am clearly making up a lot of lost time from the climbs. The climbs are steep so always feel hard work but they take noticeably longer to get up as confirmed by GPS.

I was intrigued by the slow climbing and faster fast bits.

So you need to start adding some air at the bottom of the climbs and then let it out again at the top?

morstar

pblakeney said:

Just curious, what calculator did you use?
There are many, and with varying results. 🤔

This one. https://silca.cc/pages/sppc-form

Says professional in the title so that makes it legit right?

I was pointed to it by a podcast interview with a guy who has worked with a lot of the pro teams on aerodynamics etc. Not Bigham, some American fella, don’t ask me for a name.

It’s quite an interesting area I find. I don’t really pay much attention to the current aero stuff and all the marketing BS as I don’t really race much anymore (coming down from not racing a lot in the first instance), but tyres are a consumable component that does get updated reasonably often and the pressure very often so it’s interesting to see the evolution.

morstar

mrb123 said:

morstar said:

So, I’ve seen quite a few evidence based bits about tyre pressures in the last month or two (not just marketing bs) and worked out that my tyre pressures needed to drop from about 90 to 78 psi based on an online calculator.

Have been for a couple of rides and have a few surprising findings.
1) The comfort difference is very noticeable.
2) I am roughly the same speed I always am.
3) My Strava uphill times are considerably slower.

Point 2 & 3 are most interesting as they are contradictory. I found this intriguing.
It is a short, very hilly figure of 8 on poor roads that I ride very regularly. I ride to heart rate and I am incredibly consistently paced ride to ride.
There isn’t a lot of flat, I haven’t pushed the flats and downhills any harder than normal and yet I am clearly making up a lot of lost time from the climbs. The climbs are steep so always feel hard work but they take noticeably longer to get up as confirmed by GPS.

I was intrigued by the slow climbing and faster fast bits.

So you need to start adding some air at the bottom of the climbs and then let it out again at the top?

Which interestingly enough, is a system that nearly debuted at PR this year.

pblakeney

morstar said:

pblakeney said:

Just curious, what calculator did you use?
There are many, and with varying results. 🤔

This one. https://silca.cc/pages/sppc-form

...

Interesting. Apparently I should reduce my pressures by 10 & 15 PSI*. Which probably corresponds with a few days after checking when they ride more comfortably.

*The biggest factor apparently being road surface condition.

pinno

The big unknowns are:

1. Does the rim width make a difference?
2. Would a different compound running those pressures make a difference?
3. Would tubulars or tube less also make a difference?

Add all the above together and you have a cocktail of variables.

So, can you split the difference and ride @ 84psi and see how that affects your averages?

The 4th variable is the optimum for your weight and those tyres. Hypothetically, what if the optimum is 80psi and you're just under?

The 5th element variable is that you are not a machine and whilst you say you are pretty consistent, the only way to truly measure your output to speed to tyre pressure would be through a power meter.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

morstar said:

So, I’ve seen quite a few evidence based bits about tyre pressures in the last month or two (not just marketing bs) and worked out that my tyre pressures needed to drop from about 90 to 78 psi based on an online calculator.

Have been for a couple of rides and have a few surprising findings.
1) The comfort difference is very noticeable.
2) I am roughly the same speed I always am.
3) My Strava uphill times are considerably slower.

Point 2 & 3 are most interesting as they are contradictory. I found this intriguing.
It is a short, very hilly figure of 8 on poor roads that I ride very regularly. I ride to heart rate and I am incredibly consistently paced ride to ride.
There isn’t a lot of flat, I haven’t pushed the flats and downhills any harder than normal and yet I am clearly making up a lot of lost time from the climbs. The climbs are steep so always feel hard work but they take noticeably longer to get up as confirmed by GPS.

I was intrigued by the slow climbing and faster fast bits.

My theory is that on rough falt/downhill road, more of your easy/moderate effort (power) is giving you more speed, as the tyre/tube is deforming to absorb the bumps. But on climbs, where your power will probably be greater, the lower pressure is making your rear tyre compress/bounce with each downward pedal stroke and consequently forward propulsion drops.

I'm ~80Kg; my road bike is ~9Kg; kit/helmet/shoes ~2Kg; mobile/snacks/pump/repair kit etc. ~1Kg; ~0.8-1.6Kg from bidons... Typically ~93/94Kg total.
Typically I run my 32mm GP5000 rear @ 82-85PSI and my 23mm GP5000 front @ 95-98 PSI with latex tubes.
The South Downs lanes aren't in great condition these days compared to '17, but only a few lanes make me wish I was running the small 32mm at 70-75 PSI. GP5000s wear quicker than GP4000S IIs even at my pressures, lower pressures with more comfort would wear them even quicker.

pinno

N0bodyOfTheGoat said:

The South Downs lanes aren't in great condition these days ....

What's it like between Friston and Polegate?

morstar

pinno said:

The big unknowns are:

1. Does the rim width make a difference?
2. Would a different compound running those pressures make a difference?
3. Would tubulars or tube less also make a difference?

Add all the above together and you have a cocktail of variables.

So, can you split the difference and ride @ 84psi and see how that affects your averages?

The 4th variable is the optimum for your weight and those tyres. Hypothetically, what if the optimum is 80psi and you're just under?

The 5th element variable is that you are not a machine and whilst you say you are pretty consistent, the only way to truly measure your output to speed to tyre pressure would be through a power meter.

To be fair, the calculator I’ve referenced does include most of the variables you mention.

As for me, yes, I’m not claiming to have scientifically rigorous evidence and it’s literally only a couple of rides. I’m interested to see how the data builds up over time.

However, I can assure you I am absurdly consistent on climbing times, quite staggeringly so. The difference on the last couple of rides was itself consistent and sizeable enough to put beyond minor variances.

I am going back up to 90 to do some controls and will then start playing around in between. Will add some nerdy interest to my rides.

pinno

morstar said:

...more blah...

What was the overall time for the same course and distance?
i.e are the swings and roundabouts negating any gains (or losses) and you are therefore, in equilibrium?

morstar

N0bodyOfTheGoat said:

morstar said:

So, I’ve seen quite a few evidence based bits about tyre pressures in the last month or two (not just marketing bs) and worked out that my tyre pressures needed to drop from about 90 to 78 psi based on an online calculator.

Have been for a couple of rides and have a few surprising findings.
1) The comfort difference is very noticeable.
2) I am roughly the same speed I always am.
3) My Strava uphill times are considerably slower.

Point 2 & 3 are most interesting as they are contradictory. I found this intriguing.
It is a short, very hilly figure of 8 on poor roads that I ride very regularly. I ride to heart rate and I am incredibly consistently paced ride to ride.
There isn’t a lot of flat, I haven’t pushed the flats and downhills any harder than normal and yet I am clearly making up a lot of lost time from the climbs. The climbs are steep so always feel hard work but they take noticeably longer to get up as confirmed by GPS.

I was intrigued by the slow climbing and faster fast bits.

My theory is that on rough falt/downhill road, more of your easy/moderate effort (power) is giving you more speed, as the tyre/tube is deforming to absorb the bumps. But on climbs, where your power will probably be greater, the lower pressure is making your rear tyre compress/bounce with each downward pedal stroke and consequently forward propulsion drops.

I'm ~80Kg; my road bike is ~9Kg; kit/helmet/shoes ~2Kg; mobile/snacks/pump/repair kit etc. ~1Kg; ~0.8-1.6Kg from bidons... Typically ~93/94Kg total.
Typically I run my 32mm GP5000 rear @ 82-85PSI and my 23mm GP5000 front @ 95-98 PSI with latex tubes.
The South Downs lanes aren't in great condition these days compared to '17, but only a few lanes make me wish I was running the small 32mm at 70-75 PSI. GP5000s wear quicker than GP4000S IIs even at my pressures, lower pressures with more comfort would wear them even quicker.

Yes, I’m thinking along similar lines about the smother rolling.
Interesting what you say about 5000’s and wear rates. I’m about to update my 4000’s. They have long outlived their expected life. I was being a bit miserly on tyre expenditure thinking I may upgrade the whole bike but have decided to spend a few bob on tarting up the current beastie.

Now struggling to choose between 23’s and 25’s. The frame supposedly only takes 23’s but I have been running 25’s with a couple of compromises. Getting the wheel out is a pain as the tyres need a wiggle through the brakes. (yes, I do open the callipers) and the derailleur band catches any debris picked up off the road with only 2-3mm clearance. Wider rims have helped here to give a better tyre profile.

I need to buy assorted tyres and wheels and ride the same route several times a day, every day to work out optimal configuration.

pinno

10 sets of wheels and 10 pairs of tyres and that'll give you... hang on - 3 different pressures for each, so that's 300 different combinations to give an authentic nerdy feel to your rides.

morstar

pinno said:

morstar said:

...more blah...

What was the overall time for the same course and distance?
i.e are the swings and roundabouts negating any gains (or losses) and you are therefore, in equilibrium?

I do seem to be in equilibrium on this route. It’s not a typical route though, it’s designed purely to do as much climbing as possible in as short a distance as possible.

In theory, I can see how the lower pressure could well win out on a more typical route. I simply won’t have the same volume of data on any other route to make meaningful comparisons though.

So now i need to double up my testing volume to about 600 rides.

briantrumpet

Whether I can re-purpose the old septic tank in France to store rain & shower water... I was thinking about purpose-made water butts, when I realised I had a tank already under the shower room. Just need to have the diverting bits, an overflow into the mains drainage, and a pump to draw off the water.

Not sure if it could work, but I like the notion... anyone any experience of stuff like that?

masjer

briantrumpet said:

Whether I can re-purpose the old septic tank in France to store rain & shower water... I was thinking about purpose-made water butts, when I realised I had a tank already under the shower room. Just need to have the diverting bits, an overflow into the mains drainage, and a pump to draw off the water.

Not sure if it could work, but I like the notion... anyone any experience of stuff like that?

It sounds feasible enough. The only thing I'd change is to just use rainwater. If you add shower water, it then becomes greywater. I'm not saying you aren't clean, but the shower water would stagnate if you were storing the water for any length of time.

briantrumpet

masjer said:

briantrumpet said:

Whether I can re-purpose the old septic tank in France to store rain & shower water... I was thinking about purpose-made water butts, when I realised I had a tank already under the shower room. Just need to have the diverting bits, an overflow into the mains drainage, and a pump to draw off the water.

Not sure if it could work, but I like the notion... anyone any experience of stuff like that?

It sounds feasible enough. The only thing I'd change is to just use rainwater. If you add shower water, it then becomes greywater. I'm not saying you aren't clean, but the shower water would stagnate if you were storing the water for any length of time.

That might be a plan, with a temporary butt for shower water that I can empty when I'm not there, though trickeir to divert into the mains drains if it overflows. Just a pity to waste it, as it's the primary source of waste water in July/August, when it's most needed.

rick_chasey

How much, if at all, a difference it makes to a child if you stick your child into Mon-Fri all day childcare/nursery vs being looked after by their parents all week.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

pinno said:

N0bodyOfTheGoat said:

The South Downs lanes aren't in great condition these days ....

What's it like between Friston and Polegate?

Sorry, only just seen this q, forum notification missed or not given!

My riding of the South Downs lanes only goes as east as North Marden, just past Harting Hill, so help from me.

Pross

Why my bedroom TV just exploded. It was switched off (on standby) and I was lying in bed when there was a loud bang, flash of blue light and the smell of burnt plastic. Only two years old at most.

We also had a random powercut about an hour ago (local area not just my house), it only lasted a couple of minutes at most but we also had one in the early hours of yesterday morning so not sure if this was a pure coincidence or linked in someway. Can't see how it could be though.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

How much, if at all, a difference it makes to a child if you stick your child into Mon-Fri all day childcare/nursery vs being looked after by their parents all week.

Presumably depends on the parents.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

How much, if at all, a difference it makes to a child if you stick your child into Mon-Fri all day childcare/nursery vs being looked after by their parents all week.

Presumably depends on the parents.

Sure but say the parents (and the child) are a constant.

Pross

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

How much, if at all, a difference it makes to a child if you stick your child into Mon-Fri all day childcare/nursery vs being looked after by their parents all week.

Presumably depends on the parents.

Sure but say the parents (and the child) are a constant.

I assume what TBB is saying is it depends on how the parents approach their time with the child. If you stick them in a bouncy chair in front of CBeebies all day then the impact would be different to if you are doing various activities with them. Likewise, they could be in a nursery where the are just left to play or they could be given various 'enrichment' activities every day. The issue isn't whether they are home or in nursery it is to do with the quality of that time surely?

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

How much, if at all, a difference it makes to a child if you stick your child into Mon-Fri all day childcare/nursery vs being looked after by their parents all week.

Presumably depends on the parents.

Sure but say the parents (and the child) are a constant.

But the childcare/nursery isn't.
Not sure how you can measure that. 🤔

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

How much, if at all, a difference it makes to a child if you stick your child into Mon-Fri all day childcare/nursery vs being looked after by their parents all week.

Presumably depends on the parents.

Sure but say the parents (and the child) are a constant.

There is evidence that a disadvantaged child does much better if they go to nursery. This is why some councils offer free places to disadvantaged two year olds.

Presumably some parents will be able to offer more at home. For example, home schooling isn't a disaster for all at any age.

If you want some actual advice for yourself based on no science, then I would definitely opt for nursery, but not 50 hours a week. Maybe 30 hours for 3/4 year old.

rick_chasey

My instinct says the opposite (better for kids to be at home with parents) until they’re at school age, on the assumption find parents are actually looking after them, seeing people with other kids, going out etc.

I suspect it’s just different and they come out slightly differently.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

My instinct says the opposite (better for kids to be at home with parents) until they’re at school age, on the assumption find parents are actually looking after them, seeing people with other kids, going out etc.

I suspect it’s just different and they come out slightly differently.

I think yours is probably quite a niche view. Why not do a free 15 hours term time only?

briantrumpet

rick_chasey said:

My instinct says the opposite (better for kids to be at home with parents) until they’re at school age, on the assumption find parents are actually looking after them, seeing people with other kids, going out etc.

I suspect it’s just different and they come out slightly differently.

I can't remember where it was (I think a book on childhood brain development) that I read that actually early development of social skills outside of the home can bring big benefits. It kind of goes against what I'd like to be true (and I'd find it hard to entrust a bundle of my own genes to strangers), but many societies around the world, and other animals too, effectively have well-developed creche systems where childrem mix and learn to interract with their peers from a young age.

My hunch would be that between sending children away from home full time, and keeping them t home full time, there's a reasonably wide margin for optimal balance between home and nursery.

shirley_basso

Anecdotally at my nursery which is probably a bit far from you but one mum used to come over with her baby as she teaches nearby.

Noisy, boisterous kids generally do well.

Wallflowers are neglected - lots of parents who have quiet children have taken them out.

What you don't have is the really intense one-to-one that a parent can give while at home. My niece had a nanny who only looks after 2 kids and has probably learned more - better motor skills (painting, dancing, a few yoga poses etc) whereas my son (nursery since 4 months) is extremely energetic and boisterous and great fun, less patient, perhaps

The catch is you need to focus your time on your child as if you were a teacher rather than just dragging them around all the time - and really enjoy teaching them new things, having diverse days etc, and managing the social aspect - sharing and not fighting.

Both ours love it as they are quite outgoing, so get lots of attention and the whole setup is designed to give them really good, interactive days and wipe clean the next day. Unlike home.