Go Back  Bike Forums > The Racer's Forum > "The 33"-Road Bike Racing
Reload this Page >

Before you start another TT thread, click here.

"The 33"-Road Bike Racing We set this forum up for our members to discuss their experiences in either pro or amateur racing, whether they are the big races, or even the small backyard races. Don't forget to update all the members with your own race results.

Before you start another TT thread, click here.

Old 03-06-19, 02:43 PM
  #626  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
Same meter. Moved it over. Power output now is certainly higher, my ftp is up as much from then also.

I bet the wind at that Nascar day was blocked by the grandstands when against and not blocked when with the wind.

This outting counted, did best I could so thereís that. No lolly gagging, just suffering.

I just wish I could do better with a tool to predict a time or something to work towards. It sometimes feels like a black hole of not knowing if every ounce of effort is used effectively.

Work on power/pacing but also the watts per CdA.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 03-07-19, 06:07 PM
  #627  
ntnyln
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by burnthesheep View Post
I swear I'd expect to be faster than this.
I'm just really starting to dig into TT'ing, so take my advice for what it's worth. The elevation can make a difference, but I've found that power can be highly variable depending on the course, but unless there is a ton of elevation, speed should be close. That would lead me to suggest looking into your position. If you have pictures of your old position, see if you can spot any difference. You could easily be catching wind somewhere. For reference, I did 4 TT's last year and the power was all over the place but the speed was fairly close. They looked like this:

11k, 289w ave, 262 ft elv, 26.1 mph
40k, 257w ave, 30 ft elv, 26.4 mph
14k, 311w ave, 72 ft elv, 27.6 mph
40k, 259 w ave, 30 ft elv, 26.6 mph
ntnyln is offline  
Old 03-08-19, 08:41 AM
  #628  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
Recently the elevations have been about 40 feet per mile. So not flat. And itís been really cool out.

I think I need to toss out the ďoutliersĒ for super fast and super slow days as long as the position and equipment were consistent.

Weather and time are changing soon so I should garner more data. If I canít get into 25mph on my flat route in warmer weather at current power Iíll take new video and photos.

Iíd assume perfectly flat versus 40 feet per mile I should gain a good bit of speed. Uphill the last outting there was 2 minutes out of about 20 total minutes spent at only 16mph going up.

So thereís that. You donít gain all that back downhill.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 05-10-19, 10:31 AM
  #629  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
Recently I basically worked around not being able to run GC on my work laptop by implementing the math in Excel and doing the modelling with virtual elevation. I got it much more accurate by adding in the wind vectors.

I analyzed some past looped TT's from my old road/clipon setup and the current TT bike setup with new position.

The road bike with clip ons came out to a CdA at about 0.27 to 0.29 with skinsuit, Giro Adv 2 helmet.

The TT bike with new position and same suit/helmet came out to a CdA at about 0.215 to 0.220.

Currently CRR is in the range of .400. Kinda crap, but that's an easy fix.

I have figured out that for the power outputs I'm giving it, the results aren't unreasonable.

I've got work to do on "real world" power out put on that bike. The workout numbers indoors on a trainer in "best case, controlled environ" are not going to be close to a real world TT ride.

For TT distances, I'd be down immediately to closer to hour power or ftp power solely based on duration being longer than 20min and up to an hour. So, say 285. Then, I've NEVER done actually 95% of my 20min power for an hour. So, were' down to probably 275 now. In road position.

Then, apply a penalty for not having the hours on the TT bike position and we're down even more. Say 95% and we're at 260w.

So far I'm seeing a well paced ride maxing out at about 240w AP. So, I'm realistically about 20w short.

I've done 260w for an hour without too much fanfare indoors in road position. I need to get that moved over into TT position.

I see some sucky time spent on that bike in the future.

Probably a weekly outdoor TT simulation ride at least. And one of my two HIIT workouts per week in TT stance.

240w is just anemic.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 05-10-19, 10:53 AM
  #630  
Hermes
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11,333

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 283 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 563 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 46 Posts
@burnthesheep I think you mean .004 for the Crr. Check this out https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com

IMO, I would not focus on wattage per se in self evaluation on the TT bike. Speed is where the action is. Power is your currency to buy speed but there is a cost factor as well as mental focus. How well do you hold a position over time with a perfectly turtled head? Also, your current TT helmet is pretty fast. I tested it a couple of years ago at Velo Sports Center aero testing. It is fast because it is small i.e. lower frontal area.

However, there could be gains with an new Giro or others.
Hermes is offline  
Old 05-11-19, 06:24 AM
  #631  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by Hermes View Post
@burnthesheep I think you mean .004 for the Crr. Check this out https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com

IMO, I would not focus on wattage per se in self evaluation on the TT bike. Speed is where the action is. Power is your currency to buy speed but there is a cost factor as well as mental focus. How well do you hold a position over time with a perfectly turtled head? Also, your current TT helmet is pretty fast. I tested it a couple of years ago at Velo Sports Center aero testing. It is fast because it is small i.e. lower frontal area.

However, there could be gains with an new Giro or others.
I was typing too quickly, yes it is .004 for crr.

I guess you are right in a way. I need to be sure to spend my watts wisely. There is a local TT Wednesday taking photos while you suffer to get positioning pics while actually racing. Thatíll be good to know.

I got my new rim glue in, tires wonít make it in time for Wednesday.

Tired of running a Sprinter rear tire.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 05-11-19, 08:53 AM
  #632  
Heathpack 
Has a magic bike
 
Heathpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,118

Bikes: 2018 Scott Spark, 2015 Fuji Norcom Straight, 2014 BMC GF01, 2013 Trek Madone

Mentioned: 680 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4037 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times in 18 Posts
@burnthesheep, for most people there is a maybe 10% power difference in TT position vs road position when you go to a new position on the TT bike. TTs are 90% preparation and 10% execution, so much TT training should be focused on decreasing that power difference between road and TT positions. That’s a huge crux of what you do to train for TTs. So of course it means riding the TT bike and doing workouts on the TT bike, plus race distance & pace simulations. I have 4 bikes and my TT bike has the 2nd highest odometer mileage, 8700 miles. You’ve gotta ride the thing a lot.

Trainer TT workouts are great because you can hit power targets more exactly. Road TT workouts are great because putting out power in varying terrain is important too, and bike handling, visibility etc.

Our club put together some TTs for fun but only 1 or 2 of us regularly race TTs. The organizer said “no TT bikes”. His rationale was to “make it fair to people without TT bikes.” Completely misunderstanding that TTing is not just about jumping on a TT bike and going fast. You may intentionally sacrifice power if that means more speed, and the crux of training- tons of time riding in TT position- is negated when you decide to make the club TTs “fair” to the crit guys. Oy.
Heathpack is offline  
Old 05-14-19, 06:55 AM
  #633  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
This is pretty close to how I'm riding right now. Only difference now is I'm messing with how I hold my head after looking at a guy's A2 tunnel test web article where he used that exact helmet there. In the tunnel he seemed to look down more than forward in his tests. I may try that on my rides if the road is good and the wind isn't too bad.

I had noticed in the video the frontal area presented by the top part of the helmet there and thought looking down a touch and tilting the lid back for the "tail" position would help.

I've no vid of that yet. Doing that part I'd say is most challenging if the road is a bumpy crap country road.

I also move the hands to a normal grip if the road gets bump. If it's smooth, the stack feels fine.

I'll do another vid after I work on the head and get my new cranks installed in a few weeks and see how I can adjust things then. I just felt watching this and feeling it that 175's were too long for me.


burnthesheep is offline  
Old 05-14-19, 09:25 AM
  #634  
Doge 
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 9,485

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2931 Post(s)
Liked 36 Times in 28 Posts
Anyone have a 31.8 TT bar recommendation for the lowest stack height? I want the forearm pads as low as possible.
Doge is offline  
Old 05-14-19, 10:10 AM
  #635  
Hermes
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11,333

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 283 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 563 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 46 Posts
@burnthesheep You position on the bike looks excellent and better than most that I see. I would check your camera angle on the front view. It looks like it might be a tad low thus giving the impression that your head is higher than it is.

My fitter / aero tester at Velo Sports Center would give you a type I back which is a back that is flat. My wife's back is flat like yours and she has 130 degrees of hamstring flexibility. I have a type II back that has a hump in it like Lance. Although, Lance's hump did not hurt him.

Bars tilted up to 10 cm may be your best position but I would check using the Chung method. They may not be. The same is true for your hands. VSC aero testing has tested hand position over and over and it varies. Some test better with the hands rolled under the bar.

Your elbows could come in a tad and round your shoulder more. I cannot do that. My shoulders are broad and my best position is with my arms straight down. It is something to play around with. As a side note, moving the arms in may cause the head to pop up such that the overall effect is more drag.
Hermes is offline  
Old 05-14-19, 10:50 AM
  #636  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by Doge View Post
Anyone have a 31.8 TT bar recommendation for the lowest stack height? I want the forearm pads as low as possible.
Older semi-integrated Vision Trimax setup? I came across those in my ebay and CL searches and the pads look close.

Also, the older Selcof (Planet X cheap brand) I think was a semi integrated style with the pads right on the base bar almost.

For some reason the older stuff was like that.

The new stuff has the risers for stack I think because of all the lower headsets/stems/forks on the newer bikes. If you look at my Felt DA versus a newer one with a Bayonet 4 you can tell the Bayonet 4 is easily 2" lower.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 05-14-19, 12:28 PM
  #637  
Doge 
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 9,485

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2931 Post(s)
Liked 36 Times in 28 Posts
Originally Posted by burnthesheep View Post
Older semi-integrated Vision Trimax setup? I came across those in my ebay and CL searches and the pads look close.

Also, the older Selcof (Planet X cheap brand) I think was a semi integrated style with the pads right on the base bar almost.

For some reason the older stuff was like that.

The new stuff has the risers for stack I think because of all the lower headsets/stems/forks on the newer bikes. If you look at my Felt DA versus a newer one with a Bayonet 4 you can tell the Bayonet 4 is easily 2" lower.
This is for a DA2 with the Bayonet 3. Do you know if the Bayonet 4 will work? He's comfortable/prefers lower.


The road setup he can get low. Below the TT bars are as low as they can go on the Bayonet 2 swivel stem 120mm, rotated as far as it will go.




The TT setup could go down.

Last edited by Doge; 05-14-19 at 01:56 PM.
Doge is offline  
Old 05-15-19, 06:35 AM
  #638  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by Doge View Post
This is for a DA2 with the Bayonet 3. Do you know if the Bayonet 4 will work? He's comfortable/prefers lower.

The road setup he can get low. Below the TT bars are as low as they can go on the Bayonet 2 swivel stem 120mm, rotated as far as it will go.

The TT setup could go down.
I've cruised the Felt replacement parts pages a bit trying to see which newer parts would work on my older DA.

It looks to me over time that they've made a little lower "inset" into the frame at the headset where the fork comes in and the integrated rotating stem mount thing goes.

Meaning, I don't think my older DA can do it. Yours might. Looking at their replacement parts pages, the geometry of the stems in that mounting point look similar. Might be worth exploring. It already ended I think, but there was a used Bayonet 4 fork on Ebay recently for like $250.

As for the fit overall? I have to feign ignorance. I post a lot on Slowtwitch and got lucky and had a local fitter and an accomplished tri/TT racer comment on my earlier videos and I made adjustments accordingly. I basically knew I was young enough or flexy enough to get into most TT positions, so I watched tunnel videos and old topics finding something to copy. Copying someone in aero isn't always good, people are different. But, I emulated golf swings growing up as I was too "middle class" to afford lessons. So I'd video myself then find a pro with a "close enough" swing style in the magazine fold outs from Golf Digest, then adjust accordingly.

Same on the bike so far. I can emulate a fast rider, try it out on-road a few times, run some Chung data on it.......then try again.

Given that.......not sure the crank size, but that's a cheat to be able to raise the saddle if you want. If you're on 175's or 172.5's and go to 170 or 165mm, that's not 1:1 for raising the saddle......but you can raise it some of that. That would bring the hind end up and back more level.

Again, not an expert, that's just how I'd do it outside of using a basebar that would allow it.

Also, if you're within any rules you might have to abide by.........if you think of the legs of a triangle, the longer your reach the lower your shoulders/head will be. I'm guessing that's why the UCI dictates the "angle" rule for your arms. Also my guess to why they have the max height of skis above pads, cause you're rotating the triangle to get lower while keeping the angle "allowable".

I'd try the basebar with minimal stack first, and maybe cranks if that isn't too much a pain to swap between for a TT versus road. I'm guessing you must run Di2 to swap those over from road to TT.


I found this: recommending a Felt Devox in this topic for lowest stack base bar

https://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/S...s%3F_P4481022/
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 05-15-19, 07:16 AM
  #639  
Doge 
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 9,485

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2931 Post(s)
Liked 36 Times in 28 Posts
Originally Posted by burnthesheep View Post
I've cruised the Felt replacement parts pages a bit trying to see which newer parts would work on my older DA.

It looks to me over time that they've made a little lower "inset" into the frame at the headset where the fork comes in and the integrated rotating stem mount thing goes.

Meaning, I don't think my older DA can do it. Yours might. Looking at their replacement parts pages, the geometry of the stems in that mounting point look similar. Might be worth exploring. It already ended I think, but there was a used Bayonet 4 fork on Ebay recently for like $250.

As for the fit overall? I have to feign ignorance. I post a lot on Slowtwitch and got lucky and had a local fitter and an accomplished tri/TT racer comment on my earlier videos and I made adjustments accordingly. I basically knew I was young enough or flexy enough to get into most TT positions, so I watched tunnel videos and old topics finding something to copy. Copying someone in aero isn't always good, people are different. But, I emulated golf swings growing up as I was too "middle class" to afford lessons. So I'd video myself then find a pro with a "close enough" swing style in the magazine fold outs from Golf Digest, then adjust accordingly.

Same on the bike so far. I can emulate a fast rider, try it out on-road a few times, run some Chung data on it.......then try again.

Given that.......not sure the crank size, but that's a cheat to be able to raise the saddle if you want. If you're on 175's or 172.5's and go to 170 or 165mm, that's not 1:1 for raising the saddle......but you can raise it some of that. That would bring the hind end up and back more level.

Again, not an expert, that's just how I'd do it outside of using a basebar that would allow it.

Also, if you're within any rules you might have to abide by.........if you think of the legs of a triangle, the longer your reach the lower your shoulders/head will be. I'm guessing that's why the UCI dictates the "angle" rule for your arms. Also my guess to why they have the max height of skis above pads, cause you're rotating the triangle to get lower while keeping the angle "allowable".

I'd try the basebar with minimal stack first, and maybe cranks if that isn't too much a pain to swap between for a TT versus road. I'm guessing you must run Di2 to swap those over from road to TT.


I found this: recommending a Felt Devox in this topic for lowest stack base bar

https://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/S...s%3F_P4481022/
Good stuff to try. Felt Devox UCI illegal aerobar and talk to someone at felt about the Bayonet 4 / fork replacement. Getting near new frame cost.
This is not Tri stuff, so UCI legal matters (U23).
Doge is offline  
Old 05-15-19, 07:33 AM
  #640  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
Ahhh dang. That makes it a bit tougher then.

I'm a hobbyist at TT and if I did do an event everything is close enough I'd be fine for a USAC race. Shoot, even obviously "tri only" stuff often is in the slower fields.

Good luck. That's a tougher formula to crack being within that UCI scrutiny.

How much leeway do you have to using a UCI legal base bar but perhaps having "custom touches" to get extensions the way you want? Like if you modified off-the-shelf clip-ons to get them lower? Or you had a machine shop make your clamp for the pads/extension?

I've no idea. It would be interesting to know. I thought the big boys pretty much had to use stuff "available" for sale within 1 year. But, you often see custom little touches on bikes it seems.

Let us know what you wind up with.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 05-21-19, 01:16 PM
  #641  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
I was shocked to see some tunnel testing using my EXACT (not numerically identical, but same frame) model of Felt DA showed 6 watts gain from aero front brake versus a generic Ultegra. And.....they even got the test right, as Coggan had said that the brakes are faster with keeping the brake lining instead of running no-liner. Something about having a cylinder in front of the head tube being better aero.

Also excited to try out the 167.5 crank.

Geeeesh. 6w ain't bad.

Kinda excited to get the entire freshened setup rolling:
-1x conversion (ring in mail now)
-new race tires (from Conti sprinter tub to Vittoria Corsa Speed)
-Giro Empires with Speedplay zero/aero covers and soccer lace cover (copy the fast Specialized shoe cover thing for cheap)
-aero front brake

My wallet says those should total about 15 watts saved I was throwing away.

Still need to take the heel step/support off the shoes though.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 05-22-19, 08:45 AM
  #642  
Hermes
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11,333

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 283 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 563 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 46 Posts
UCI compliance for equipment is easy. Buy UCI compliant components and go to a fitter who knows how to set up the bike. What is hard is developing strength and adaptation in the UCI position that may be a bad fit. Ostensibly, UCI put the majority of racers, independent of morphology on the same setup for time trial. And we are allowed one morphological exception. I set the nose of my saddle 5cm back from the centerline of the cranks and then moved the bar extensions to 80 cm versus 75 cm since I am taller with long arms.

That setup means I ride on the nose of the saddle that is not that comfortable and I am limited in the amount I can slide forward and back.

Enforcement of UCI tech rules by USAC is a function of the race promoter and head USAC official. At the LAVRA track time trials, we are not allowed to have any visual indication of metrics while racing. I tape over the head unit but the preferred way is to mount the head unit under the saddle. These are USAC sectioned events but follow this UCI rule but not bike compliance.

What UCI takes off the table are modifications or MacGiver stuff. So clipping on anything or putting on tape or whatever is not compliant.
Hermes is offline  
Old 05-31-19, 11:50 AM
  #643  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
No data yet, but really feeling the Giro laceup with the soccer lace cover is slippery AF with the Speedplays compared to a normal Boa road shoe with SPD-SL cleats.

Just on looks alone.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 06-04-19, 07:15 AM
  #644  
Tyrell
Senior Member
 
Tyrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Central TX
Posts: 579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by burnthesheep View Post
No data yet, but really feeling the Giro laceup with the soccer lace cover is slippery AF with the Speedplays compared to a normal Boa road shoe with SPD-SL cleats.

Just on looks alone.
Got a picture of this setup? I have S-works Sub-6 with the "Warp Sleeve" and interested to see the comparison.
Tyrell is offline  
Old 06-04-19, 11:12 AM
  #645  
Hermes
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11,333

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 283 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 563 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 46 Posts
A little dated but interesting comparison of speed suits. https://www.cyclingweekly.com/group-...cycling-360975
Hermes is offline  
Old 06-04-19, 12:06 PM
  #646  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by Tyrell View Post
Got a picture of this setup? I have S-works Sub-6 with the "Warp Sleeve" and interested to see the comparison.
Tried to get the Speedplay aero cleat cover in view and the "soccer lace cover". I use two of them to spread the full width of the laces. Also works AWESOME in terms of hugging your foot and making the midsection of the shoe pretty snug/narrow to wind. After taking the picture, I noticed the bit of lace sneaking out front and adjusted the lace bands accordingly. Two together cover the entire laces area.



And some 1x setup bling bling......did some net downhill 4k pursuit intervals (yes, start from stopped) into a little headwind and had to take a pic after. I mention the net downhill because I cannot turn a 30mph 4km pursuit on my own! Ha ha! But, gotta train at fast speeds to get used to being fast if you want to be fast. My rationale. Also, it's fun and almost scary holding 35mph for good parts of the segment. Yikes. Getting that big gold colored ring a spinning.

burnthesheep is offline  
Old 06-04-19, 12:12 PM
  #647  
Voodoo76
Blast from the Past
 
Voodoo76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Schertz TX
Posts: 3,101

Bikes: Ridley Excal, CAAD10, CAAD12, Felt DA, Dolan

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 170 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by Hermes View Post
A little dated but interesting comparison of speed suits. https://www.cyclingweekly.com/group-...cycling-360975
Interesting comparison. I picked up a Bioracer suit for this season, replacing an Assos. Like the fit and seems well made. Due to the way the season has gone it hasnít been tested yet.

Planning on a run during Saturdays training to plug into Best Bike Splitís aero analyzer.
Voodoo76 is offline  
Likes For Voodoo76:
Old 06-05-19, 06:28 AM
  #648  
topflightpro
Senior Member
 
topflightpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,263
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1223 Post(s)
Liked 20 Times in 14 Posts
I've got the Velotec.
topflightpro is offline  
Old 06-05-19, 06:46 AM
  #649  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 870

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 40 Posts
I've seen that article. I think a careful consideration, other than cost, is what speed range you're in. It seems some suits do better at some speeds versus others. And the whole "open vs. closed" idea as well. Those assumptions drive where and what fabrics they place.

For me, some of those suits aren't so good as my avg speed for anything with rollers is going to be lower than 45 kph. Unless the idea is that you do exceed that speed downhill at some point and it matters then (downwind isn't the equivalent airspeed, just ground speed).

I'm cruising Ebay looking to upgrade. I've got a Galibier suit. It apparently is ok-ish entry level suit for someone.

I'm looking at used BP 3.0's or 3.3's. Apparently the 3.3 is worth it if you can.

I do hear some of the newer ones are even worse for not being able to stand in them. Maybe keep my Galibier for "fast simulated training" and own a used BP for rides I care about.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 06-05-19, 08:11 AM
  #650  
Tyrell
Senior Member
 
Tyrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Central TX
Posts: 579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by burnthesheep View Post
Tried to get the Speedplay aero cleat cover in view and the "soccer lace cover". I use two of them to spread the full width of the laces. Also works AWESOME in terms of hugging your foot and making the midsection of the shoe pretty snug/narrow to wind. After taking the picture, I noticed the bit of lace sneaking out front and adjusted the lace bands accordingly. Two together cover the entire laces area.

Thanks! I was curious how much of the laces would be covered by one of those soccer sleeves. Seems like a decent alternative to warp sleeves at the cost of an additional seam. No idea how much the soccer sleeves cost vs. warp sleeves but having to buy twice as many soccer sleeves as warp sleeves may make it close to even cost-wise?
Tyrell is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.