On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 9:08:26 PM UTC-4, James wrote:
On 20/3/19 8:21 am, JC wrote:
On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 at 4:48:11 PM UTC-4, James wrote:
On 20/3/19 1:16 am, wrote:

I believe John is focused on the efficiency of the chain drive
system alone, not the biomechanical efficiency of the person plus
the chain.

He was, and I explained why it was irrelvant - biomechanical
efficiency.

3. Make matters worse by introducing a spring tension system. Now
in addition to the bio mechanical inefficiencies, you're adding
the ability of the chain drive to take up slack in the system,
which allows _you_ to pedal even more inefficiently.

Here's a graphic representation:

https://hanswinter.wordpress.com/200...your-spinscan/


I think that, and the rest of your post is complete ********.

Anything to add?

No.

Any mechanical or bio mechanical counterpoints you
wish to address? I think we'd all be interested in reading what
exactly it is you disagree with, and why.

*You* might be interested, but I doubt the royal "we" is interested.

You may be right.


You made a whole lot of statements that are ********, and irrelevant.

Both of those claims are demonstrably false.