TdF and recumbents

Tom Sherman writes:

Tim McNamara wrote:
Pat writes:

How would a recumbent handle the Tour?

You mean, if the UCI rules permitted the use of recumbents?

They'd like have some advantage on flat breakaways and time trials,
but the disadvantages in sprinting and climbing would scupper them
compared to regular bikes.

Would the upright sprinter ever catch the recumbent breakaway so as
to be able to use their greater [1] sprinting power?

The sprinters don't always catch the breakaway on upright bikes, as we
saw several times on this Tour. So there is no way to answer that
question.

On Jul 27, 1:23*am, Pat wrote:
How would a recumbent handle the Tour?

This reminds me of discussions about Ali vs Tyson.

1) It could never happen anyway.
2) Everyone with a brain knows the answer before the discussion
begins.

ABS

"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!

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.

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

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

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.

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?

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.

--
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.”

On Jul 27, 5:04 am, pm wrote:
"Anyone know the last year a steel frame was used by a racing cyclist
in the TdF?"

FWIW, it was a legitimate question. And, yes, I'm sorry that I asked.

aka Alan Stew wrote:
On Jul 27, 1:23 am, Pat wrote:
How would a recumbent handle the Tour?

This reminds me of discussions about Ali vs Tyson.

1) It could never happen anyway.

Comparing a boxer to a chicken processor is strange indeed.

2) Everyone with a brain knows the answer before the discussion
begins.

Ali punching out a over-head conveyor line of chicken carcasses?

--
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.”

"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!

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.

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

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

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.”

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
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.

Who cares about them. I only care about us amateurs. And among us amateurs,
it is no contest. Uprights win every time because of hills.

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.

I am only interested in what a professor of human anatomy and physiology has
to say about it.

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.

That is impossible. We did not evolve to be recumbent, but to be upright.
You have got humans confused with slugs.

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.

Some other time as I am presently having an attack of lethargy.

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

No argument on that point!

I am becoming a Brooding Buddha in my old age.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

On 27 jul, 13:48, Tom Sherman
wrote:
Pat ? wrote:
How would a recumbent handle the Tour?

Anyone that claims to provide a definitive answer is blowing smoke up
your backside, since the information does not exist to provide the
answer. You will find a lot a negative answers based on misinformation
by "experts" who have no experience or knowledge, however.
snip

Hello,
i would not like to give an answer but i would like to give the world
to one of the people who should have some experience and knowledge
about the Tour, and with that riding long distances in mountainous
terrain, mr. Lance Armstrong
http://velonews.com/article/3437
greetings,
Jack