Jipe

Sentinel1

That's it Jipe educate these ignorant people. That X30 is like a rocket if you are young and fit. It will run down a road bike easily. Over shorter distances small wheel performance bikes are superior to large wheel bikes. A Moulton 17 inched wheel bike is the fastest bike of ALLTIME. On an in door track. And that record has stood for 38 YEARS.

Sentinel1

Small wheels rule for sheer speed.

Schwinnsta

You would not know it from the picture, but the record was set with a full fairing. Neither the picture nor the bike is right. This is a disingenuous post at best. The record was set with a modified Moulton and super low fairing. But that is not what the picture shows or suggests.

Here are the pics of what set that record



Now, maybe the poster knows this or maybe not. The fact that he calls us ignorant makes me think he does.

Now, I am not saying Moultons are a bad bikes. They are interesting. Moultons place in bike history is set but more for his influence in small wheels. I owned two of them for years but sold both of mine. Suspension is double-edged at best, but they were nice bikes but not as good as I have now.

In one of the post above, the Moulton Speed was mentioned. Perhaps in the context of price, $10,000 +. If you want to see a fair review of that bike, check out Bike Quarterly Review of it. I copied and posted that review in part in an older post a few years ago.

Sentinel1

I didnt say that picture I posted was him setting the record did I? The only criteria I made clear was it was a small wheeled Moulton responsible. And Jim Glover was the rider.

Duragrouch

BB height: In what way? (not challenging your statement, just asking). If I recall, a generally low BB means a bit more stable, but a higher BB allows better pedal clearance if powering through turns. In terms of power, I would think the most important thing is relationship of the BB to the seat, both vertical, and fore/aft, the latter of which may be more limited based on the particular frame geometry. IIRC, 32cm BB height sounds high. Do tell, thanks.

EDIT: Ah, if Tern uses the same frame for 406 and 451, that would explain the higher BB.

If you're only talking about 3cm higher rider so less optimum aerodynamics, I think matters on a time-trial bike, but on a rec bike, that's fly specks in pepper. But again, do tell, thanks.

Sentinel1

He doesn't know what he is saying PERIOD. What he was trying to do is say a 23lb X11 isnt a fast or EFFICIENT. As a fully specked 16lb Carbon road bike like a Pinarello. For what the X11 is. It's as fast as it gets. Any folder that goes over 20mph is fast. Any that can go over 25mph is very fast.

And the premium Tern verges

X10
X11
X18
X20
X30

Are all capable of breaking 25mph on the flat. The X11 and X30 can break 30mph. If the rider is fit and strong.

Duragrouch

(above) Not challenging you either. It's just always good to know reasons and rationale for things. If there's a reason why that BB height is not fast, good to listen and evaluate.

EDIT: Verge X30 (I was hoping to see a road triple, but not), is a SRAM 3x10 Dual Drive; In middle gear on the IGH, direct drive, no loss in efficiency. In low or high on the IGH, reduction and overdrive respectively, with resulting gear friction losses in efficiency, most critical in the high range because that is the speed range. The hub is also heavy. I'd expect it to be blown away by an X11 in top gear, UNLESS, the X30 has a lot taller top gear (I think it does) and the rider is capable of using it fully. But it will still be slower than a non-IGH race bike, if only for no other reason than the IGH. This is a fundamental problem on small wheelers, you need a pie-plate chainring or tiny cogs for race-high gears without an IGH or Schlumpf drive.

Sentinel1

But it has no bearing (no pun intended) of the speed of the bike. The wattage expended from the rider is the biggest factor. Then the efficiency of the machine he is sitting on. And the next factor is the rotational weight of the wheels.

I have a Tern Verge X18. The front wheel SPINS for like 13 minutes. Basically frictionless. You get a cheap bike and spin the front wheel. You will be lucky to get 2 minutes.

Quality bearings hubs. Rotational weight. And the overall weight and fitness of the rider determine speed. Not how high the bottom bracket is off the ground. What is this guy smoking?

Duragrouch

Sounds like you are making sense, but the better strategy is simply allow them to justify their argument.

Please see my edit above about the X30, which has no bearing on the other Xs.

Sentinel1

They are not gonna. These people are ANTI BIG BIKE. They get off on antagonising people who buy premium level bikes. Because they either couldnt afford to do so. Or are so tight they didn't want to part with the money.

So enter stage two. They now have to try and rubbish anyone who praises BIG BIKE. It will either be my customised £100 bike overhere is better than yours. Or some nonsense about the frame is no good or its not as good as a purist road bike like a Specialized or Pinarello.

Anything to try and score browny points. And make people who shelled out on a premium priced folder look stupid and not as smart as their mean assed self's. I'm too old and wise to fall for their nonsense. But there's those that will. And will be influenced by their nonsense too.

Duragrouch

From wiki on Ferdinand Waldo Demara, infamous con-man:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Waldo_Demara

Sound like any USA politician in the news?

Don't be that.

Ron Damon

Getting educated by J!pe, that's a scary thought.

Lesson Plan
1. The Smug European male's guide to the Birdy
2. Exorbitantly priced folders designed and manufactured by the White Man.
(This advanced seminar involves a field trip to an Apartheid era bicycle maker plant in South Africa)
3. FnTrash. Don't get bamboozled by Asiatic bikes
😂😂😂
​​​

Duragrouch

Well... his part of the world, most notably countries to his north, actually ARE functioning better and the population as a whole much better educated than MY country, especially comparing the least educated. There's just no escaping that fact, I'm sorry to say. Socialized medicine. Housing. Dedicated bike paths. But versus us, it's a pretty low bar to cross.

Sentinel1

Oh Mr know it all enters the chat again. Too tight and too bright. Let us lessor heathens all bow to Ramon. And his unequalled ability to buy cheap bike components. And build a better bike than the BIG BOYS. And still have money left over to put in his piggy bank and support his family in Manila. Then come on here and tell us we are all stupid for spending more on premium out of the box bikes. All bow down now.

splithub

BB height is a trade off between pedal clearance and center of gravity height. The higher the CG, the slower you corner, because you have to move the CG a longer distance between cornering positions. And since cornering ist part of being fast, it is very important. 99.9% of RR bikes have a BB height between 26 and 28cm, because it's one main parameter of being fast. Roll rate gets slower the higher it is.

splithub

With roll rate i mean the movement of the bike around the length axis, which is at the contact point between tarmac and tires. The more far from there the CG is, the more energy you lose moving around that axis. You even lose a lot while pedaling standing compared to bikes closer to the sweet spot.
So not just cornering, also power transfer is unnecessarily impacted, when a bike designed for skinny 406 tires was equipped with mid-size 451 wheels/tires

Duragrouch

Thanks. Makes sense. Though it really seems to be splitting hairs, but then, that's what road racing is about these days. Now my mind is thinking about the whole bike in that respect; for automobiles in tight turns, the front end is having to translate laterally more than the rear end, so generally more mass on the rear axle is better, on a rear drive car, thus the front has more leverage to rotate that mass about the rear axle. Applying this to bikes, I would think the rider mass wants to be as far back as possible, while still having enough forward weight to not lift the front wheel while climbing. You can't move the rider too far aft of the crank center, need best power position, but this does explain the rear tire as forward as possible, barely clearing the seat tube, sometimes the seat tube curved to allow the rear tire to be that much more forward and under the rider. Smaller wheel bikes might be better in that regard, plus vastly better toe clearance in front, and less gyroscopic momentum fighting rapid tilting of the bike, more agile. But that can't provide racer-high gears without a massive chainring, tiny cog (more friction loss), or an IGH (a lot more friction loss, never used in racing). I'll have to research if any road race bikes used a large rear wheel and smaller front wheel for greater agility. I think the current UCI rules prohibit any smaller wheels than 700c. Interesting.

Jipe

Exorbitantly priced folders designed and manufactured by the White Man are mainly bought by the Yellow Man since the main market for high end Moulton is Japan

BTW, you can add a number 4 very expensive bike in your list, designed, build and mainly bought by the Yellow Man: Tyrell XF 14990€

BillyD

This thread has turned ugly and strayed off topic. Before I start handing out infractions let's close it, shall we?

Closed.