On Aug 15, 2009, at 10:47 PM, Anne Paulson wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 8:25 PM, cm <[email protected]> wrote: > > 1) In a scientific test (at least sorta), attempting to isolate all > other factors, a modern carbon "superbike" saved the average pro > cyclist 18 seconds in a 3 km uphill time trial vs a 25 year old steel > bike. That doesnt even take into account the riders' inexperience with > the older technology ( downtubes, brakes, etc). What would the > difference be on the Roadeo? 5 seconds? less? Would there even be a > difference for a non-pro? > > It has nothing to do with familiarity with equipment. You don't > need a scientific test to do the calculation. You just need a tiny > bit of physics. Let's say I have a Roadeo at 20 pounds, and my best > friend, who weighs exactly the same as I do, has a Ridiculous bike > at 15 pounds (which he does). What with water and stuff, my bike + > rider weight is 180, and his is 175. Climbing speed is proportional > to weight. So if we were equally strong, on a hill where I take 30 > minutes, he'd beat me by 45 seconds. Which is actually quite a bit: > he'd be around a couple of bends and out of sight. Meaningful in a professional bike race. Practically imperceptible for Joe Average. Unfortunately the professional peloton is used as the metric for bike reviews and marketing palaver. It's about as useful as comparing McLaren and Ferrari F1 cars and trying to use that as a basis for deciding between a Toyota Camry and a Volvo s70. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
