Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
[...]
And of course, there are the mountain stages, where conventional wisdom
says that recumbents can not climb. The first thing is to throw out all
personal observations here, since they invariably involve recumbents
that are heavier than a state of the art CFRP lowracer and riders
considerably less able than a UCI professional.
Excuses, excuses, excuses!

Ed Dolan demonstrates his ignorance of what is and what is not a
scientifically valid comparison.

Tom Sherman likes to take everything to its extremes. Frankly, I don't give
a damn what transpires on the freaking Tour de France, but I am interested
in what transpires on week long group bike tours where you have got a nice
variety of riders, most of whom are advanced. You will never see recumbents
outpace uprights going up hills on such rides - never!

Ed Dolan conveniently ignores the absence of world class riders and
state of the art recumbents on such touring rides.

Here is a hint for Ed - if upright A is faster than recumbent B at a
power output of 150W, it does NOT follow that upright A is still faster
than recumbent B at a power output of 400W, due to drive train and
rolling resistance increasing linearly with speed, but aerodynamic
resistance increasing with the square of speed. Such is obvious to an
engineer or scientist, but not to Mr. Ed Dolan.

The key is to remember that aerodynamic resistance increases with the
square of the rider's airspeed. Therefore, for average club riders, both
upright and recumbent riders will be going slowly enough that rolling
resistance and mechanical losses in the drive train will dominate, which
favors the upright. However, with a professional level rider putting out
400W on a climb, speeds become high enough that aerodynamics does
matter, even on a relatively steep climb, and an upright rider out of
the saddle is not very aerodynamic. Is the aerodynamic advantage of the
recumbent at very high rider output levels enough to compensate for the
advantages of the upright? I do not know, and more importantly, neither
does anyone else.
Aerodynamics is only part of the story. The other part is primate anatomy
and physiology.

Of which Ed Dolan apparently knows little. Has Ed ever read any of the
papers by Danny Too addressing this issue?

More blather about primate anatomy and physiology and less blather about
bicycle aerodynamics, if you please. Either get the equation right or forget
about it.

Mr. Ed is unaware of results showing similar sustained aerobic power in
both the upright and recumbent positions.

Please rush me a telegram if and when a recumbent ever beats an upright
in a professional cycling race in the mountains.

Please rush me a telegram when the UCI allows a recumbent to compete in
such a race.

Surely there are near professional type races in the mountains which pit
uprights against recumbents. Find out the results of such races and report
back to me.

Go to the article on page 14 about the Trondheim-Oslo event:
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/oldnews/Issue51.pdf.

I am too lazy to do anything these days other than contemplate
my navel.

No argument on that point!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken /
She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.”