Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area (https://www.bikeforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=210)
-   -   Interesting finds around the web (https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=929230)

bitingduck 08-23-17 06:09 PM


Originally Posted by carleton (Post 19812762)
I think they are preparing a formal bid. As part of the bid process, they have to provide proof that if they win the bid, there is funding for the things that need to be funded.

Basically, "Hey, I'm gonna ask if we can host the 2028 Olympics. If the IOC says OK, will you guys pay for the stuff that needs to be built?"

I think it's a bit farther than that. They've got an agreement at the level of how much IOC is going to throw in and how much LA can keep of sponsorship they bring in (*much* more than usual). They'll be working out final contractual details for a while, but they're basically in negotiations to make it a done deal.

The formal bid was for 2024, and IOC is realizing that summer olympics have a tendency to destroy the host cities and countries and that cities are finally figuring that out, so they offered LA a very good deal to take 2028 without a separate competition if they'd let Paris have 2024.

Except for maybe a few of the water facilities (e.g. whitewater canoe) you could probably just walk into LA and put on an olympics without having to do much facility-wise. AEG has been building out LA for a couple decades as if they (AEG) were going to put in their own bid for the games.

carleton 08-23-17 06:39 PM

Thanks for explaining!

topflightpro 08-24-17 06:23 AM

Yeah, I thought LA was a done deal. My understanding was that LA and Paris were both going for 2024, and they got together with the IOC and said, how about Paris takes 2024 and LA gets 2028. No one else wanted it, so the IOC didn't have many options.

And there are several cities in the US where they could easily put on the Olympics. Pretty much any city with a pro team or two and several colleges could do it. Boston is an example, given the wealth of athletic facilities and housing options provided by the professional teams and colleges. But the Boston residents didn't want it. They could go back to Atlanta pretty easily too.

The big issue is that the IOC demands all new stuff, which tends to bankrupt a lot of cities that cannot reuse the facilities. LA and Atlanta are great examples of how to use existing facilities and re-purpose new ones after the games.

1incpa 08-24-17 09:53 AM

A friend got these bars: Full Carbon Bicycle Handlebars 31.8mm Time Trial/Triathlon Bike Drop Bars Racing | eBay
Anybody here have any experience with them? I'm kind of leery, myself. He's had them a couple weeks now, and every time I see him I act surprised they haven't broken yet.
PI

queerpunk 08-24-17 10:10 AM


Originally Posted by 1incpa (Post 19814890)
A friend got these bars: Full Carbon Bicycle Handlebars 31.8mm Time Trial/Triathlon Bike Drop Bars Racing | eBay
Anybody here have any experience with them? I'm kind of leery, myself. He's had them a couple weeks now, and every time I see him I act surprised they haven't broken yet.
PI

There are plenty of greymarket carbon parts out there. It's hard to tell how reliable they are. Rims are in common use, though there are some people who won't touch 'em.

I wouldn't buy these, but if somebody had them I'd be curious to test them out a little bit. i wouldn't expect them to just up and break or anything, but I wouldn't expect them to survive the abuse that Scattos can survive: curiously (concerningly) these are 100g lighter than Scattos. That's the biggest problem I have with em.

taras0000 08-24-17 04:51 PM

I wouldn't trust those bars, unless you were riding a shallow track and you weigh 110lbs. They look like Scattos, but are 100g lighter. Take a product that is engineered to be as stiff and light as possible, then pare it down some more with questionable materials and methods...?

I'll pass.

Clythio 08-24-17 09:08 PM

Scattos are heavy for a carbon handlebar - 400+g.
But road top brand handlebars handle big road impacts and big sprinters efforts for hundreds cycles without a problem, being much lighter than Scattos.
So, I believe it's possible to build such huge/compact geometry piece with 300g and keep it safe. But not in this case.
I wouldn't trust this copy. A friend of mine has one - low quality finishing, etc.

1incpa 08-25-17 03:42 AM

I'm with you guys on this! I have no intention to get them, I was just curious about the general consensus. I like my handlebars to be made of metal!
For what it's worth, my buddy who has them loves them. He says they are really stiff and comfortable. I'll still pass!
Paul

topflightpro 08-25-17 06:36 AM

If you're interested, Planet X now offers a Scatto knock off. It's only available in the 37.

It may be the same bar as that one on eBay, but Planet X at least has a decent reputation.

queerpunk 08-25-17 06:49 AM


Originally Posted by topflightpro (Post 19816788)
If you're interested, Planet X now offers a Scatto knock off. It's only available in the 37.

It may be the same bar as that one on eBay, but Planet X at least has a decent reputation.

oh snap - interesting. it doesn't look like an ebay one - it's not quiiiiiiite a scatto knockoff. it looks a little rounder, a little bit more traditional - with reach and drop in between the 35 and 37cm scatto models.

it looks very desirable.

https://d2plslj6xljffa.cloudfront.ne...LVT_P4.jpg?v=b

https://d2plslj6xljffa.cloudfront.ne...LVT_P1.jpg?v=b

carleton 08-25-17 08:25 AM

The bars sold by Planet X are made by a company called Selcof, who seems to have a range of carbon products: Selcof

sarals 08-25-17 12:17 PM

FWIW, I have the Planet X five spoke front wheel. I've ridden it and raced it now for a couple of months. I have zero complaints.

rustymongrel 08-25-17 01:54 PM

looks more like the look sprint bar than the scatto.

https://cdn-bk.niceshops.com/upload/...-574253-en.jpg

I recently got a set in 40cm for enduro stuff because I wanted a very shallow drop to go with a long and low custom frame.

carleton 08-26-17 07:54 AM


Originally Posted by rustymongrel (Post 19817878)
looks more like the look sprint bar than the scatto.

Good call.

Also, did you folks notice that LOOK has changed their bars again?


Originally Posted by rustymongrel (Post 19817878)
I recently got a set in 40cm for enduro stuff because I wanted a very shallow drop to go with a long and low custom frame.

Yeah, I think a lot of people are going "long and low" with their frame choices, riding much longer top tubes that they'd ride on their road bikes...especially Sprinters. Or maybe it's primarily Sprinters that I talk geometry with.

queerpunk 08-26-17 08:29 AM

I've actually started to see "long and high" a bit more than long and low. Low and tight seemed to be the old order of the day. These days, longer is definitely in style - given that a lot of road bikes are set up to accommodate as much a hood position (longer than a drop position) as they are a drop position. Plus, with narrower bars, you can get even longer.

carleton 08-26-17 11:51 AM


Originally Posted by queerpunk (Post 19819189)
I've actually started to see "long and high" a bit more than long and low. Low and tight seemed to be the old order of the day. These days, longer is definitely in style - given that a lot of road bikes are set up to accommodate as much a hood position (longer than a drop position) as they are a drop position. Plus, with narrower bars, you can get even longer.

Good point.

I think that having the arms make an angled "ramp" for the air to travel over instead of a vertical "wall" butt against is an improvement.

SyntaxMonstr 08-26-17 02:55 PM


Originally Posted by carleton (Post 19819130)
Good call.

Yeah, I think a lot of people are going "long and low" with their frame choices, riding much longer top tubes that they'd ride on their road bikes...especially Sprinters. Or maybe it's primarily Sprinters that I talk geometry with.

This! I ride a 51 on the road and bought a 53 DF4, thinking I was probably flirting with the upper limit of how big a bike I could ride. About a month in, my coach was watching me do an effort and goes "You need to go at least 2 sizes up; try a 57." Low and behold, a 57 fits like a dream (although I have a harder time standing over the bike).

rustymongrel 08-26-17 08:58 PM

I built a track frame for myself 2 years ago not long after I started racing. At the time I thought it was just right with the same stack as I ride on the road and about 2cm longer reach.

Ended up having to buy a 150mm stem after a year of training and racing to get it just right. Also found myself unable to get low enough when using aerobars for pursuit.

New frame will be 3cm lower and 2cm longer. I will be able to use a more reasonable 130mm stem and bought the shallower LOOK bar to compensate for the lower stack.

http://i.imgur.com/xe1zJen.jpg

carleton 08-26-17 09:17 PM

You will have a hard time finding a frame that makes a good fit for aerobars and one that's makes a good fit in drop bars. There will have to be a compromise somewhere.

taras0000 08-26-17 10:20 PM


Originally Posted by carleton (Post 19820481)
You will have a hard time finding a frame that makes a good fit for aerobars and one that's makes a good fit in drop bars. There will have to be a compromise somewhere.

I believe with Scattos, this should be easier. It used to be that you had two track frames if you were serious. One low and short, for aerobars, the other full size for mass starts. The one bike compromise is what I think resulted in the "buy your track frame 2cm smaller than your road frame" advice. With a short and a long stem for aerobars and drop bars respectively, you could get away with one frame. Now, frames can be lower at the front with the advent of bars like Scattos, making aerobars easier to use with a short stem.

carleton 08-26-17 11:46 PM


Originally Posted by taras0000 (Post 19820565)
I believe with Scattos, this should be easier. It used to be that you had two track frames if you were serious. One low and short, for aerobars, the other full size for mass starts. The one bike compromise is what I think resulted in the "buy your track frame 2cm smaller than your road frame" advice. With a short and a long stem for aerobars and drop bars respectively, you could get away with one frame. Now, frames can be lower at the front with the advent of bars like Scattos, making aerobars easier to use with a short stem.

I think with people adopting longer frames than in seasons-past, putting aerobars on those new frames will be tough, even if the head tubes are short.

I'm probably wrong. I haven't ridden aerobars since 2011 :foo:

jsk 08-27-17 09:48 AM

It's possible to get a good fit with the right stem and bar choices. I actually sized up for my track frame (Dixie Flyer 58) compared to my road frame (56). But by using a -27 degree 85mm stem for the aerobars I can match my road TT fit (which is pretty agressive). For drop bars I use a +6 degree 110mm stem with shallow drop bars (Pro Vibe 7S). The drop bar setup is longer/lower than my road fit, but the more agressive position works well for on the track since I don't have to worry about being comfortable for 3-4 hour rides.

This approach wouldn't work with a lot of frames, I found all the cheaper frames the head tubes are way too tall for me to get a good fit for both. The BTB runs long/low though, so it worked out. The higher-end Felt frame also would have worked, but was more than I was willing to spend. Dolan DF4 also might have worked, but none of the sub-$1K frames I could fine had the right geometry.

carleton 08-27-17 10:18 AM


Originally Posted by jsk (Post 19821189)
It's possible to get a good fit with the right stem and bar choices. I actually sized up for my track frame (Dixie Flyer 58) compared to my road frame (56). But by using a -27 degree 85mm stem for the aerobars I can match my road TT fit (which is pretty agressive). For drop bars I use a +6 degree 110mm stem with shallow drop bars (Pro Vibe 7S). The drop bar setup is longer/lower than my road fit, but the more agressive position works well for on the track since I don't have to worry about being comfortable for 3-4 hour rides.

This approach wouldn't work with a lot of frames, I found all the cheaper frames the head tubes are way too tall for me to get a good fit for both. The BTB runs long/low though, so it worked out. The higher-end Felt frame also would have worked, but was more than I was willing to spend. Dolan DF4 also might have worked, but none of the sub-$1K frames I could fine had the right geometry.

The problem is not simply getting the reach shorter for aerobars or longer for drop bars. The problem is that when you change the reach (for whatever bars) you change the handling of the bike because you are not changing the top tube length. Therefore you are simply adjusting where your bars are in relation to the front axle.

It's kind of hard to explain.

Take a photo of a bike then photoshop erase everything except the rider and everything from the headset forward (bars, stem, fork, front wheel). There is a sweet spot for the handlebars/aerobars above the front axle. The contact points on the bars, front axle of the wheel, and headset make a triangle. If you shorten/lengthen the stem, you are affecting that triangle.

Here are some pics from the internet to express what I'm trying to say. Imagine if these frames had the same geometry and TT length. Note where the stem/bar combos put the hands.

http://www.thebikecollective.com/wp-...rack-bikes.jpg
https://flwrider.files.wordpress.com.../mg_9587-e.jpg


Remember, materials don't affect steering handling. Changing the geometry affects the steering handling. Changing the stem angle/length changes the geometry of the bike.

These bikes will handle differently.

This is why bikes handle awkwardly when people are first trying aerobars and use the same stem that they use with drop bars and they have a hard time handling the bike. Then they put on a much shorter stem and things improve tremendously...but a different frame with that shorter stem could be even better.

The Mass Start / Sprint riding position is very different than the Pursuit riding position.

taras0000 08-27-17 01:04 PM

It would be interesting to figure out where that "sweet spot" for neutral handling is with aerobars. We have the usual guidelines like "elbows under the ears"... but what about the weight distribution? Where should the pads be in relation to the axle/steering column? My guess would be somewhere in between, but does anyone know this for sure? I haven't had aerobars on my bike for almost 15 years now, so I can't recall exactly how it related, nor do I have them around to check.

carleton 08-27-17 02:21 PM

Yeah, I'm curious about the sweet spot for aerobars, too. 99% of the advice for aerobars comes from the road TT/Tri communities who have to ride them for 40 minutes. Taking their advice for aerobar fitting would be as appropriate as taking their advice for drop bar fitting. Similar, but different-enough to warrant further investigation. Especially in a sport where winners and losers are determined by less than a second at the world level and a few seconds at the local and national levels.

For example, Sarah Hammer, one of the best ever...if not the best ever pursuiter, rides with very wide elbows which is very contrary to what you'd see at the world level for Road TT or Triathlons:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-_20100324.jpg

Even wider than her teammates:
http://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/U...yQ4kkU1oix.jpg

I gave my aerobars to @theblackbullet. He's much faster than I ever was on them :D


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:36 PM.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.