One of the things that strikes me most about the English is they don’t appear to have developed any sort of “inner dialog”. It seems anything that passes through the brain is parlayed directly to the tongue; if the thought being expressed is an insult to you, it will generally include a query for confirmation: “You’re not terribly clever, are you?” At least the English have developed the sophistication to keep their voices down which is a skill English children apparently don’t develop until adolescence. I recently spent some time on a small aircraft sitting opposite a young English girl who loudly narrated the progress of her camera’s zoom functionality which, due to the plane’s low cruising altitude, meant it was pointed out the window and in constant operation for the duration of the two-hour flight.
While I don’t consider myself a savage, I also don’t possess the dignity of soft speech; my voice carries as it is, let alone if I’m enthusiastic or angry, which between the two covers about 99.93% of my existance. I’m not sure why people place value on speaking quietly or, for that matter, having any sort of inner dialog. I think this is why I get on well with the English: I spend most of my life trying to sort out what the living beings around me are thinking; if they all had a readout on their forehead or spoke every thought that ever crossed their mind out loud, it would save me loads of time which would free me up for riding my bike.
Riding tubular tires is kind of like riding the tire equivalent of the English, except less cold. Riding tubular tires on deep-section rims is like riding the tire equivalent of English pre-adolescents. (I realized during proofing that I am getting dangerously close to pedaphile territory; this analogy isn’t as clever as it seems, is it? New paragraph, then.)
A well-made, hand-stitched tubular tire is a revelation to ride. The first time I rode tubs, it was aboard a set of Vredesteins which are excellent tires. I was immediately struck by how responsive they were, and how well they cornered. Then I rode a set of FMB Paris-Roubaixs and was struck by all those same things except they also felt like two cushions under my rims, carrying my smoothly from one imperfection to the next as I floated over the tarmac. The most striking thing was the sound: a hypnotic hum that brings the mind inexorably closer to becoming One with The V, the hum sooths and makes you more alert in equal measure; its pulsation reveals the smoothness or imperfections of your stroke with every revolution of the pedals. Clinchers can do much of the same, particularly when ridden with latex tubes, but nothing compares to a well-made tubular to sing the praises or holler the frailties of your stroke.
The Hum whispers to me when I’m climbing well; it shouts at me when I’m suffering worst (read: climbing badly), reminding me to stop pedalling squares and focus on the fluidity of the stroke. The more V is channeled into the pedals, the more difficult it becomes to achieve a Magnificent Stroke. It also hints that its easier to push round smoothly at a low cadence than it in in a high cadence; track racers who can turn round at 160rpm while delivering full power astound me.
The Hum has brought me closer to a Magnificent Stroke. It calls out when I stray, it soothes when I am near. I seek it, I embrace it. Always.
Vive la Vie Velominatus.
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
@tessar
There a reason for everything. For a ridiculously long stages with more and more climbing every year R series are simply better bikes. They are more comfortable and when you sit all day in the peloton behind other riders benefits of an aero bike are minimal. Up to an introduction of S5 and the new S2/S3 series I have tried different Cervelos and if I had to keep just one bike it would have been an R3.
As far as shallow wheels go I don't know where to start. Do you think rider as slim and narrow as 'Narrow' Quintana doesn't benefit from lower profile wheels? When climbing you want your wheels to be as light as possible, I thought that was obvious. Where do you want mechanics to add weight to make a limit? Surely not by dropping dead weight into rims, no? Maybe Frank knows something that you don't?
@tessar
The best engineers in the industry have constant disagreements about it so how come you are so convinced? Average weekend riders benefit more from a lighter bike than from an aero bike simply because most bikes these days have long head tubes, people run lots of spacers (still) plus they are not flexible enough to get low so benefits of an aero frame go out the window.
@tessar
Again the Crr numbers are useless for an average user. You can't be talking about the benefit of one tire over another if you're not adding type of wheelset and your weight with the bike into discussion plus environment/area and weather you're going to ride in. Based on your total weight, the best possible pressure for given tire can be calculated for you.
The guy does the tests in a closed environment on rollers. Turbo cotton is useless in a wet. They reduced puncture protection to a minimum which gave them good rolling results. Nothing new. Good tire is a balance of everything - puncture protection, rolling, weight, price etc. What's the benefit of a low rolling resistance if I ride over a half-rotten leaf and I get a puncture?
@TommyTubolare
I wasn't doing that. I was simply giving one example of a test that shows that a wide tyre ridden at a pretty standard pressure will still, often, have lower resistance than the narrower version at that version's typical pressure. 100psi for 23mm and 85psi for 26mm tyres is not at all unusual.
I never claimed optimal, and I wouldn't ride the Turbo Cotton either - but there's no denying it's a fast tyre. All tyres have to sacrifice something, and it's up to us to choose what: At the end of the day, I have Conti 4 Seasons on my training wheels because I value their protection but they still grip well, for a training tyre. On my race wheels I have Vittoria Corsa Evo CX because they roll fast and give me confidence in the corners. On my TT wheels I run GP4000s because they roll fast and turn out to be aero, but feel a bit "dead" compared to cotton casings.
@TommyTubolare
The best engineers or the best marketing departments?
Let me rephrase your argument:
Average weekend riders would benefit from a healthy diet and/or a doubling of their weekly mileage. Neither bike aerodynamics nor bike weight matters when you're 10kg overweight and run a 3cm stack of spacers - nor should they matter when a person's biggest riding goals are to beat his mate to the pub at the next club ride (however noble that goal is). However pros who have everything else maximised, are a different kettle of fish.
@tessar @TommyTubolare
So what do you guys think of helmets?
... and nipple lube.
Seriously, it's good to see some informed debate, thanks.
And perhaps an appropriate place to mark the passing of Steve Hed. RIP. Someone who can genuinely and productively claim to have re-invented the wheel.
@TommyTubolare
The comfort thing has been debunked several times in blind testing. Josh Poertner, formerly head engineer at Zipp and now Silca's reviver, wrote an article about this. It's a useful read for most of the Velominati, being a passionate community with a preference for all that is classic which leads to quite a bit of bro-science (or pro-science?) passed around as cycling lore.
As for aerodynamics, that's plain maths. In a peloton the magnitude of any aerodynamic effect is lessened, but that doesn't mean it's not present. In fact, the proportional part of frame and wheel aerodynamics is higher, because the rider body is more shielded than the bottom is. If rider A has to put out ~250W cruising inside the bunch over the flat stage, and identical rider B ~243W because he went aero on his frame and wheels - who has the advantage? That's "free speed" for a pro, less "free" for us non-sponsored folks.
Let's take "Narrow" as an example (great nickname, by the way). Or his rival Contador. Both are small, light, and with the help of their sponsors could get a 6.3kg bike with 50mm tubs (there's also a 6.1kg version with alu clinchers), before any weight-weenie custom jobs. Even adding 200g for a power-meter, that's still 300g under the weight minimum. Guess what weighs 300g more? The Canyon Aeroad! Aero frame and 50mm tubs at the weight limit? Sign me up.
In fact, it was calculated that for a Saxobank rider, the weight penalty of choosing a McLaren-edition Venge, Zipp 404s and an aero handlebar (over the Tarmac, shallow tubs and round bar) would still leave them under the weight limit and save them a healthy 10-15W.
These guys reach pretty high speeds when climbing, and on narrow, exposed high mountains there's often quite a gale blowing around. When going on a hard solo attack to win, there's nothing better than saving a few watts against the wind, because you can put them up against gravity instead. I'm advocating not adding any dead weight. Lead in the BB is dead weight that provides no benefit whatsoever, while aero rims actually provide a tangible benefit.
As for the "light rims accelerate better" - well, again if you look at the mathematics of it, and the blind-tested studies, you'll see how much of a red herring that argument is - those 150-200g at the rim are truly insignificant. In road cycling we don't really have any sprung weight (biggest spring, and thus most influential, is the tyre), so the classic motorsports concept of minimizing wheel weight doesn't apply. We also don't have the frantic cornering and handlebar wrestling that MTB racing sees, so the inertia argument again becomes insignificant.
@ChrisO
We own five of his products in my family. A great innovator and one of the first tech-heads (tech-Heds?) in this sport.
What the hell are you guys on about. I'm using 19mm Vittoria Evo Corsas at 120psi. If I look at a twig on the road or a pothole the back wheel jumps a foot in the air. Plus, they'e on a pair of Ksyriums, otherwise known as the harshest riding wheel in the history of the world.
As for light rims accelerating better, to say light rims aren't faster is just dumb. I have a pair of Zipp 303 tubs, at 1100 grams, and they get up and go body quick. To say lighter rims is a red herring is to say I can accelerate as quickly on my 32 spoke, 3 cross open pros. I'm not blind, so I don't think I qualify for whatever test you're talking about but I'm pretty sure that assertion is wrong.
@tessar
Appreciate your lengthy replies and thanks for your input. I will try to keep it very simple and short.
As far as article from Josh Poertner goes comfort is a very personal thing and simply can't agree with this. How can you debunk comfort? Does that apply to saddles too? You want me to believe that I will not know the difference between my R3 and Soloist Carbon? Is he taking people for fools? Given what they can sell today probably yes.
If you think 200 g of rotating mass added to a wheel weight is insignificant I really don't know what else to tell you. Forget climbing advantages but this is an industry that on average charges people 1000 Euro for 100 g lighter frame for example. Plus I meant real engineers, not marketing department but last time I checked I never had a problem selling lightweight stem or seatpost but you really have to try hard to sell an ugly aero frame using 5W savings as an argument. The point is public has no 6.8 kg limit, if you have money you can ride on a 4kg bike with ease. So which department needs more marketing then?