Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.

On Nov 11, 12:04*am, James wrote:
On Nov 11, 3:29*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Or to do numbers: *In your case, 100 grams off the frame would
increase acceleration by about 0.12%, and 100 grams off the wheels by
maybe 0.2%. *A difference of 0.08% or so. *Wow!

And the effect will exist for less than one percent of the time a road
race is in progress.

But most often at the most important 1%. *You seem to forget that it's
not about whether you were only 0.0001% slower and finished 2" behind
the winner, it's about being the winner.

OK, James. Please, buy yourself a 100 g lighter set of wheels. Keep
everything else the same. And report back to us next fall about your
number of times you were the winner, this year and next year.

- Frank Krygowski

On Nov 11, 8:27*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Nov 11, 12:04*am, James wrote:

On Nov 11, 3:29*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Or to do numbers: *In your case, 100 grams off the frame would
increase acceleration by about 0.12%, and 100 grams off the wheels by
maybe 0.2%. *A difference of 0.08% or so. *Wow!

And the effect will exist for less than one percent of the time a road
race is in progress.

But most often at the most important 1%. *You seem to forget that it's
not about whether you were only 0.0001% slower and finished 2" behind
the winner, it's about being the winner.

OK, James. *Please, buy yourself a 100 g lighter set of wheels. *Keep
everything else the same. *And report back to us next fall about your
number of times you were the winner, this year and next year.

Frank - You're an idiot. An arrogant, ignorant, complete ****ing
idiot.
DR

On Nov 11, 12:10*am, DirtRoadie wrote:
The point of this is that in a six and a half hour race like MSR,
NOBODY is going all out from beginning to end. The critical thing is
to be the first one to the finish line. It's a race BECAUSE there are
so many factors in play, every rider and/or team has to preserve its
own energy while trying to outlast the other teams and seizing
opportunties to gain advantage in a meaningful fashion. Leading most
of the race means nothing if you are not first across the line.
A tactic that you will *NEVER see is an individual or *team using all
its energy right from the start.

I understand all of that, DR. And if you re-read carefully, you'll
find that I never, not once, claimed anyone was going "all out from
beginning to end."

There's NO incentive for anyone to do anything which would establish a
high "average speed" even if they could readily do so.

Yet there absolutely are times when racers purposely pick up the
pace. For example, it's not unusual for several racers to break out
and hope to stay away until the end, grabbing some glory. Most often
they're caught; but they're not caught by a pack that's lollygagging
along at my touring pace. Unless it's obvious the breakaway riders
are so weak as to blow up soon, a pack chasing down a breakaway will
be working a _little_ hard. And you can bet your life the breakaway
is working hard, no matter what.

So the question remains: If the tech tricks are doing anything
significant, then why is that M-SR race still run at the same average
speed?

Are you telling me that racers have gotten lazier over the years, in
exactly the amount necessary to cancel out the wonderful advantages of
modern bikes?

It seems much more likely to me that having a bike that accelerates
0.1% faster, or has 0.2% less aero drag, just doesn't make a
detectable difference. Those tiny differences get lost in the noise.
This is what the math says, it's what the physics says, and it's what
the race results say.

(And again, I'm talking about anything other than a time trial on an
extreme bike, where we all agree aero tricks, especially aero bars,
have really helped.)

- Frank Krygowski

On Nov 11, 8:51*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Frank-
You're an idiot. An ignorant, arrogant complete ****ing idiot.
And since you cannot PROVE otherwise, it is established fact.

DR

On Nov 11, 8:51*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

So the question remains: *If the tech tricks are doing anything
significant, then why is that M-SR race still run at the same average
speed?

Only in your mind. Sorry, we've tried. We probably can't help you any
more.

DR

So the question remains: If the tech tricks are doing anything
significant, then why is that M-SR race still run at the same average
speed?

Here are the average speeds from 2005 to 2009, in km/hr:

40.8 45.2 43.6 41.1 44.4

With such large variations, the average speed is not useful here, one way or
the other.

On Nov 11, 9:27*am, "Barry" wrote:
So the question remains: If the tech tricks are doing anything
significant, then why is that M-SR race still run at the same average
speed?

Here are the average speeds from 2005 to 2009, in km/hr:

40.8 *45.2 *43.6 * 41.1 * 44.4

With such large variations, the average speed is not useful here, one way or
the other.

Yes, fast or slow, the speed on the road has little bearing on the
fact that the race is won at the finish whether by a breakaway, a
sprint or a combination of the two.
DR

On Nov 12, 2:27*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

OK, James. *Please, buy yourself a 100 g lighter set of wheels. *Keep
everything else the same. *And report back to us next fall about your
number of times you were the winner, this year and next year.

Ok, Frank. As far as I know, the wheels I'm riding are already quite
light and strong (enough for me). Mavic Ksyrium Elite 2010 claimed
weight of 1550g.

Everything I've looked at is either likely weaker, or carbon deep
section, or doesn't have bladed spokes, or doesn't use clinchers, or
costs the earth, so hardly equivalent.

You find me an otherwise equivalent wheel set that's 100g lighter, I
might just try them and thank you for your research.

James.

On Nov 11, 4:11*pm, James wrote:
On Nov 12, 2:27*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

OK, James. *Please, buy yourself a 100 g lighter set of wheels. *Keep
everything else the same. *And report back to us next fall about your
number of times you were the winner, this year and next year.

Ok, Frank. *As far as I know, the wheels I'm riding are already quite
light and strong (enough for me). *Mavic Ksyrium Elite 2010 claimed
weight of 1550g.

Everything I've looked at is either likely weaker, or carbon deep
section, or doesn't have bladed spokes, or doesn't use clinchers, or
costs the earth, so hardly equivalent.

You find me an otherwise equivalent wheel set that's 100g lighter, I
might just try them and thank you for your research.

James.

Your patience is admirable.
DR

On Nov 11, 11:27*am, "Barry" wrote:
So the question remains: If the tech tricks are doing anything
significant, then why is that M-SR race still run at the same average
speed?

Here are the average speeds from 2005 to 2009, in km/hr:

40.8 *45.2 *43.6 * 41.1 * 44.4

With such large variations, the average speed is not useful here, one way or
the other.

The article I cited, in Bicycle Quarterly's Summer 2010 issue, has a
graph showing the average speed of M-SR and the Tour de France going
back to 1910. Superimposed is a line showing what the author claims
is the linear best fit to "athlete performance" based on results of
middle distance (5k and 10k) running.

There are definitely big speed increases for earlier years, probably
corresponding to use of multiple gears, use of derailleurs, etc. and
nobody here would deny those benefits. There are increases in TdF
speed since 1970, although not as great as the "athlete performance"
line. But there's no increase in M-SR speed, at least according to
the graph. (It looks like 1970 was faster than any year except 2009,
for example.) Lots of variation, but if you were to do a best-fit
straight line to the post-1970 data, it would be horizontal.

Unlike the TdF, M-SR is held on pretty much the same course, year
after year. That would seem to make it good for comparisons.

- Frank Krygowski