Upgraded Wheels Benefits

I remembr many years ago when I bought my Columbus SL frame bike with Dura Ace groupset and tubular tires. That bike made my commute aceoss Toronto, Ontario, Canada much more enjoyable. Acceleration from a stop was much better as was the ease of climbing hills. Acceleration around dawdling bicyclists was also much easier. I figure that better/lighter wheels allows one to reach the same speed and to maintqin that speed with considerable less effort. Another way of looking at is that you can go faster with the same amount of effort. Either less effort to maintain a given speed or more speed for the same effort can be a real advantage to acommuting bicyclist who has a long commute.

I think that there are a lot of people who commute on racing-style bicycles because they enjoy the ease of getting up to their cruising speed and the ease of maintaining that speed compared to a heavy bike. Also, a lot of people use their commute rides for training or improving the person's fitness level. When I lived in Toronto I used to do a lot of interval training on my commutes. Sprinting from one stop light to the next was great fun as was seeing just how short a time I could get my commute down to.

Different bikes and or wheels for different folks.

Cheers

On 09/26/2012 11:23 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
I remembr many years ago when I bought my Columbus SL frame bike with Dura Ace groupset and tubular tires. That bike made my commute aceoss Toronto, Ontario, Canada much more enjoyable. Acceleration from a stop was much better as was the ease of climbing hills. Acceleration around dawdling bicyclists was also much easier. I figure that better/lighter wheels allows one to reach the same speed and to maintqin that speed with considerable less effort. Another way of looking at is that you can go faster with the same amount of effort. Either less effort to maintain a given speed or more speed for the same effort can be a real advantage to acommuting bicyclist who has a long commute.

I think that there are a lot of people who commute on racing-style bicycles because they enjoy the ease of getting up to their cruising speed and the ease of maintaining that speed compared to a heavy bike. Also, a lot of people use their commute rides for training or improving the person's fitness level. When I lived in Toronto I used to do a lot of interval training on my commutes. Sprinting from one stop light to the next was great fun as was seeing just how short a time I could get my commute down to.

Different bikes and or wheels for different folks.

Cheers



Sounds spot on and very familiar to me.

Sir Ridesalot wrote:
I remembr many years ago when I bought my Columbus SL frame bike with Dura Ace groupset and tubular tires. That bike made my commute aceoss Toronto, Ontario, Canada much more enjoyable. Acceleration from a stop was much better as was the ease of climbing hills. Acceleration around dawdling bicyclists was also much easier. I figure that better/lighter wheels allows one to reach the same speed and to maintqin that speed with considerable less effort. Another way of looking at is that you can go faster with the same amount of effort. Either less effort to maintain a given speed or more speed for the same effort can be a real advantage to acommuting bicyclist who has a long commute.

I think that there are a lot of people who commute on racing-style bicycles because they enjoy the ease of getting up to their cruising speed and the ease of maintaining that speed compared to a heavy bike. Also, a lot of people use their commute rides for training or improving the person's fitness level. When I lived in Toronto I used to do a lot of interval training on my commutes. Sprinting from one stop light to the next was great fun as was seeing just how short a time I could get my commute down to.

Different bikes and or wheels for different folks.

Cheers

I think a lot of the upgrade benefit depends on what you're upgrading
from, and what you're upgrading to. And, since this discussion group is
labeled "tech," I'll mention that a lot of the benefits are reasonably
quantifiable. IOW, we can work out reasonably accurately how much extra
acceleration you'd really get, how much more speed for the same effort
you'd get, how much faster your commute would be, etc. The physics of
the bike have been worked out for at least 100 years; it's not rocket
science. Websites like Damon Rinard's (who is a respected professional
in the bike industry) make many of those calculations pretty easy and
automatic. And although it can be fun to ride a bike that feels
snappier, it's hard to pretend that the performance gains really amount
to anything practical, at least for a typical commute.

In my case, I used to routinely treat my ride home from work as a time
trial - at least, if I caught the downtown traffic lights green. (If I
caught them red, I'd relax and ride more slowly.) By recording my
times, I proved to my satisfaction that using my lighter bike made me
faster. That was no surprise, because the ride home is mostly a climb
out of the valley.

But over the years, I did the ride with different tires (admittedly, all
clinchers), with and without fenders, with a standard vs. aero water
bottle, with ordinary or bladed spokes in the front wheel, with and
without a custom-built aero handlebar bag, with and without a rear wheel
disc cover for the spokes.

What I concluded was that the difference from any of those elements was
negligible for any practical purposes. Perhaps it might reduce my 27
minute ride to a 26 minute ride - which would be big news in a real time
trial - but it made no difference in my everyday life. In real life,
just one extra red light out in the suburbs, or two extra cars at a
four-way stop sign, would make the difference undetectable; and when I
got home, nothing I would do with the extra minute would make it really
worthwhile.

Ultimately, I stopped the practice of putting fenders on and taking them
off depending on the forecast. I had them set up so I could do it in
about three minutes, but riding without them wouldn't save me three
minutes anyway. I ditched the rear spoke covers (probably the most
effective speed increaser) because it made it that much more of a hassle
to inflate the tires or fix a flat, and I literally couldn't feel the
difference anyway.

In fact, when I was finally able to afford two road bikes and thus
devote one entirely to commuting/utility work, that bike became much
more pleasant to use for such work. I preferred the handiness of always
having fenders, lights, bags, racks, bungees, lock, mirror etc. etc. on
board and ready to go. The only adjustments I have to make are to
fasten on the front mudflap if the roads are wet, and hang the shopping
panniers if I'll be lugging something big, like the groceries.

I know there are people who have fun commuting on performance-oriented
road bikes. That's fine, if that's what they enjoy. However, I doubt
that many of them gain significant time from, say, riding a carbon fiber
Dura-Ace bike with aero wheels, compared to riding, say, a Long Haul
Trucker with fenders, a rack, a handlebar bag and decent road tires.
And groceries? My guess is they always use the car.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sep 26, 10:56*am, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
I remembr many years ago when I bought my Columbus SL frame bike with Dura Ace groupset and tubular tires. That bike made my commute aceoss Toronto, Ontario, Canada much more enjoyable. Acceleration from a stop was much better as *was the ease of climbing hills. Acceleration around dawdling bicyclists was also much easier. I figure that better/lighter wheels allows one to reach the same speed and to maintqin that speed with considerable less effort. Another way of looking at is that you can go faster with the same amount of effort. Either less effort to maintain a given speed or more speed for the same effort can be a real advantage to acommuting bicyclist who has a long commute.

I think that there are a lot of people who commute on racing-style bicycles because they enjoy the ease of getting up to their cruising speed and the ease of maintaining that speed compared to a heavy bike. Also, a lot of people use their commute rides for training or improving the person's fitness level. When I lived in Toronto I used to do a lot of interval training on my commutes. Sprinting from one stop light to the next was great fun as was seeing just how short a time I could get my commute down to.

Different bikes and or wheels for different folks.

Cheers

I think a lot of the upgrade benefit depends ...
[crap snipped ]-
- Frank Krygowski

Man! We could save a lot of bandwidth by just cutting out all the
crap, especially the opinion that Frank attempts to interject as
somehow being relevant or technical.
The OP stated it clearly and succinctly.
"Different bikes and or wheels for different folks."
Frank you added NOTHING!
DR

On 09/26/2012 01:29 PM, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Sep 26, 10:56 am, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
I remembr many years ago when I bought my Columbus SL frame bike with Dura Ace groupset and tubular tires. That bike made my commute aceoss Toronto, Ontario, Canada much more enjoyable. Acceleration from a stop was much better as was the ease of climbing hills. Acceleration around dawdling bicyclists was also much easier. I figure that better/lighter wheels allows one to reach the same speed and to maintqin that speed with considerable less effort. Another way of looking at is that you can go faster with the same amount of effort. Either less effort to maintain a given speed or more speed for the same effort can be a real advantage to acommuting bicyclist who has a long commute.

I think that there are a lot of people who commute on racing-style bicycles because they enjoy the ease of getting up to their cruising speed and the ease of maintaining that speed compared to a heavy bike. Also, a lot of people use their commute rides for training or improving the person's fitness level. When I lived in Toronto I used to do a lot of interval training on my commutes. Sprinting from one stop light to the next was great fun as was seeing just how short a time I could get my commute down to.

Different bikes and or wheels for different folks.

Cheers

I think a lot of the upgrade benefit depends ...
[crap snipped ]-
- Frank Krygowski

Man! We could save a lot of bandwidth by just cutting out all the
crap, especially the opinion that Frank attempts to interject as
somehow being relevant or technical.
The OP stated it clearly and succinctly.
"Different bikes and or wheels for different folks."
Frank you added NOTHING!

See, if someone would always do that, then I wouldn't have to see all
the crap. DR, you looking for a job? At least until I get the time to
write some software to purge the quoted text from kill-filed posters...

On Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:56:41 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Sir Ridesalot wrote:

I remembr many years ago when I bought my Columbus SL frame bike with Dura Ace groupset and tubular tires. That bike made my commute aceoss Toronto, Ontario, Canada much more enjoyable. Acceleration from a stop was much better as was the ease of climbing hills. Acceleration around dawdling bicyclists was also much easier. I figure that better/lighter wheels allows one to reach the same speed and to maintqin that speed with considerable less effort. Another way of looking at is that you can go faster with the same amount of effort. Either less effort to maintain a given speed or more speed for the same effort can be a real advantage to acommuting bicyclist who has a long commute.



I think that there are a lot of people who commute on racing-style bicycles because they enjoy the ease of getting up to their cruising speed and the ease of maintaining that speed compared to a heavy bike. Also, a lot of people use their commute rides for training or improving the person's fitness level. When I lived in Toronto I used to do a lot of interval training on my commutes. Sprinting from one stop light to the next was great fun as was seeing just how short a time I could get my commute down to.



Different bikes and or wheels for different folks.



Cheers



I think a lot of the upgrade benefit depends on what you're upgrading

from, and what you're upgrading to. And, since this discussion group is

labeled "tech," I'll mention that a lot of the benefits are reasonably

quantifiable. IOW, we can work out reasonably accurately how much extra

acceleration you'd really get, how much more speed for the same effort

you'd get, how much faster your commute would be, etc. The physics of

the bike have been worked out for at least 100 years; it's not rocket

science. Websites like Damon Rinard's (who is a respected professional

in the bike industry) make many of those calculations pretty easy and

automatic. And although it can be fun to ride a bike that feels

snappier, it's hard to pretend that the performance gains really amount

to anything practical, at least for a typical commute.
Snipped
I know there are people who have fun commuting on performance-oriented

road bikes. That's fine, if that's what they enjoy. However, I doubt

that many of them gain significant time from, say, riding a carbon fiber

Dura-Ace bike with aero wheels, compared to riding, say, a Long Haul

Trucker with fenders, a rack, a handlebar bag and decent road tires.

And groceries? My guess is they always use the car.



--

- Frank Krygowski

Crikey!

I find it astounding that a person can think that a Dua Ace groupset Carbon Fibre frame bicycle will be comparable to a Surly Long Haul Trucker in performance and trip time and ease on a commuting distance of over 15 miles and especially in distances of 30 miles or more.

The difference in the effort required to pedal a LHT compared to the effort to pedal a high-end groupset on a carbon frame (or even a Columbus SL frame) is quit noticeable. Compared to my 1985 vintage MIELE Sport-Touring bicycle my 1985 vintage MIELE Columbus SL bike *IS* both much faster and much easier to pedal. The SL flies along the flats and climbs like a homesick angel compared to the ST bike.

Grocery shopping? In my case I use my Sport-Touring bike with 56 litres capacity rear panniers and smaller front ones for a major shopping trip. It also has a handlebar bag for small delicate items.

My SL bike is my version of a sports car and my Sport-Touring bike is my version of a heavy duty pickup truck. I'll say it again - Different strokes for different folks.

A rhetorical question that I asked myself after reading the reply: If a LHT is as efficient as a carbon fibre frame bike with a quality road groupset on it, I wonder why we don't see any LHTers in the pro races?

Cheers

fail seeing urpoint...
marketplace dictates weights for frame type.
beyond that, its urmoney urtime.

outside of the climbers, uh what's that french word for long mileage maniacs ?,
robilard ? more $$$ less weight less durability more maint is analanalanalagous to speeding in the burbs on a 3 mile route 'like' where's the gain ?

3500 maybe faster than 2000 but if uronit who would notice after 20 miles ?

On 09/26/2012 02:43 PM, datakoll wrote:
fail seeing urpoint...
marketplace dictates weights for frame type.
beyond that, its urmoney urtime.

outside of the climbers, uh what's that french word for long mileage maniacs ?,
robilard ? more $$$ less weight less durability more maint is analanalanalagous to speeding in the burbs on a 3 mile route 'like' where's the gain ?


My French is not so bad but I don't know the word except that it's the
name of a run with some nice rollers not far from he
http://ridewithgps.com/segments/Mont...-Joseph-du-Lac


3500 maybe faster than 2000 but if uronit who would notice after 20 miles ?

don't get your point but wouldn't want to ride those rollers on a paper
boy bike. YMMV

On Sep 26, 12:38*pm, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:56:41 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Sir Ridesalot wrote:

I remembr many years ago when I bought my Columbus SL frame bike with Dura Ace groupset and tubular tires. That bike made my commute aceoss Toronto, Ontario, Canada much more enjoyable. Acceleration from a stop was much better as *was the ease of climbing hills. Acceleration around dawdling bicyclists was also much easier. I figure that better/lighter wheels allows one to reach the same speed and to maintqin that speed with considerable less effort. Another way of looking at is that you can go faster with the same amount of effort. Either less effort to maintain a given speed or more speed for the same effort can be a real advantage to acommuting bicyclist who has a long commute.

I think that there are a lot of people who commute on racing-style bicycles because they enjoy the ease of getting up to their cruising speed and the ease of maintaining that speed compared to a heavy bike. Also, a lot of people use their commute rides for training or improving the person's fitness level. When I lived in Toronto I used to do a lot of interval training on my commutes. Sprinting from one stop light to the next was great fun as was seeing just how short a time I could get my commute down to.

Different bikes and or wheels for different folks.

Cheers

I think a lot of the upgrade benefit depends on what you're upgrading

from, and what you're upgrading to. *And, since this discussion group is

labeled "tech," I'll mention that a lot of the benefits are reasonably

quantifiable. *IOW, we can work out reasonably accurately how much extra

acceleration you'd really get, how much more speed for the same effort

you'd get, how much faster your commute would be, etc. *The physics of

the bike have been worked out for at least 100 years; it's not rocket

science. *Websites like Damon Rinard's (who is a respected professional

in the bike industry) make many of those calculations pretty easy and

automatic. And although it can be fun to ride a bike that feels

snappier, it's hard to pretend that the performance gains really amount

to anything practical, at least for a typical commute.
Snipped
I know there are people who have fun commuting on performance-oriented

road bikes. *That's fine, if that's what they enjoy. *However, I doubt

that many of them gain significant time from, say, riding a carbon fiber

Dura-Ace bike with aero wheels, compared to riding, say, a Long Haul

Trucker with fenders, a rack, a handlebar bag and decent road tires.

And groceries? *My guess is they always use the car.

--

- Frank Krygowski

Crikey!

I find it astounding that a person can think that a Dua Ace groupset Carbon Fibre frame bicycle will be comparable to a Surly Long Haul Trucker in performance and trip time and ease on a commuting distance of over 15 miles and especially in distances of 30 miles or more.

The difference in the effort required to pedal a LHT compared to the effort to pedal a high-end groupset on a carbon frame (or even a Columbus SL frame) is quit noticeable. Compared to my 1985 vintage MIELE Sport-Touring bicycle my 1985 vintage MIELE Columbus SL bike *IS* both much faster and much easier to pedal. The SL flies along the flats and climbs like a homesick angel compared to the ST bike.

Grocery shopping? In my case I use my Sport-Touring bike with 56 litres capacity rear panniers and smaller front ones for a major shopping trip. It also has a handlebar bag for small delicate items.

My SL bike is my version of a sports car and my Sport-Touring bike is my version of a heavy duty pickup truck. I'll say it again - Different strokes *for different folks.

A rhetorical question that I asked myself after reading the reply: If a LHT is as efficient as a carbon fibre frame bike with a quality road groupset on it, I wonder why we don't see any LHTers in the pro races?

Cheers

I have previously posed to Frank the query that, since he thinks he is
so knowledgeable, how would he outfit a pro race team?
Of course he never answers. He just goes off on another rant somewhere
else about things like how his Lyotard mod 23's being the best pedals
ever made.
I don't get the impression he has ever developed any appreciation and/
or enjoyment for the physical sensation of riding a bike and that some
bikes can actually enhance that, aside from any objective measurement
of something like speed.

DR

On Sep 26, 8:23*am, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
I remembr many years ago when I bought my Columbus SL frame bike with Dura Ace groupset and tubular tires. That bike made my commute aceoss Toronto, Ontario, Canada much more enjoyable. Acceleration from a stop was much better as *was the ease of climbing hills. Acceleration around dawdling bicyclists was also much easier. I figure that better/lighter wheels allows one to reach the same speed and to maintqin that speed with considerable less effort. Another way of looking at is that you can go faster with the same amount of effort. Either less effort to maintain a given speed or more speed for the same effort can be a real advantage to acommuting bicyclist who has a long commute.

I think that there are a lot of people who commute on racing-style bicycles because they enjoy the ease of getting up to their cruising speed and the ease of maintaining that speed compared to a heavy bike. Also, a lot of people use their commute rides for training or improving the person's fitness level. When I lived in Toronto I used to do a lot of interval training on my commutes. Sprinting from one stop light to the next was great fun as was seeing just how short a time I could get my commute down to.

Different bikes and or wheels for different folks.

Cheers

Around here, a lot of people race after work or train, so there is an
excuse for bringing a racing bike to work. For me, I like to ride
home through the hills, and I appreciate having a relatively light
commuting bike that can equip with "racing tires" if I want to waste
expensive rubber. Just a tire swap makes a huge difference. I don't
often bring my racing bike to work because I don't want it to get
banged up, tires worn out, swapping lights back and forth, etc, and I
don't like walking in Look-type cleats. And during winter, the disc
brakes on my cross bike give me much better stopping, and that bike
has fenders. I also use wider rubber which gives me much better
footing on wet or snowy pavement. Commuting on a racing bike doesn't
make much sense around here in winter, and riding a bike with fatter
rubber gives me some other options to get home -- maybe somewhat
slower, but after 25 years of commuting in the same place, the minor
off road sections help beat the boredom.

Another reason why I wouldn't use expensive wheels is because during
the fall/winter/spring, the rims would get ground down by the road
grime and rain, and fussy lightweight stuff may lack reliability --
and the last thing I want to do is get stuck in the rain or snow at
night dealing with a mechanical problem. Not saying that light wheels
necessarily lack reliability, but there is that issue. I also don't
like exposing expensive equipment to the types of hazards seen by my
cross bike during the fall/winter/spring -- like riding through
puddles that are over the BB or hitting pot holes in the dark.
http://bikeportland.org/2011/05/31/h...ocations-53967
I don't mind getting stuck in the rain on my racing bike, but if it is
raining, I take my cross bike because I don't want to go through the
fuss of clean-up.

-- Jay Beattie.