View Single Post
Old 03-19-21, 11:21 AM
  #15  
Phatman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NC
Posts: 3,594
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked 96 Times in 50 Posts
Originally Posted by cmh
I would still race if there was some definition of a standard bike that I needed to buy, but I wouldn't ever be in favor of it. It would be way more trouble than it is worth. Everyone would need their bike examined every race to be sure it abides by the rules (go ahead Doge - chime in about the immense hardship that is junior gearing). I can imagine driving to a race and being DQ'd for any number of reasons - your rims are too tall, aero bars, is that electronic shifting!, are you trying to race with a seatpost that isn't round! cheater! latex tubes! those save watts and not everyone can afford them!

To gsteinb's point - trying to standardize on a 'merckx bike' that anyone would have meant he would have had to go out and buy wheels with box section rims or something, making it more trouble than it was worth.

Also, don't think that this is some new phenomenon and all bikes were equal at some other time in the bike racing. There have always been the innovations of the day that made some bikes faster than others although we didn't have power meters and wind tunnels to measure the savings.
The practical aspect is definitely a massive impediment to implementation, I'm sure that's why it hasn't been done yet. As far as that particular Merckx TT is concerned though, if that was the standard, there just wouldn't be anything else sold so it wouldn't be an issue. He would've already had the gear.

And while I don't think bike advantages are a new thing, I do think that there has been more advancement in speed from equipment in the last decade or two than previously, and I think a lot of that has to do with ballooning bike prices taking them from being "crafted" products to actual engineered products with wind tunnel testing and FEA analysis where intelligent people can actually quantify what matters.

Originally Posted by TMonk
For Mass Start racing it doesn't make a big difference anyways. Fast tires/tubes and a good position on the bike are worth a lot more than the other expensive stuff. Oh, tactics and legs help too.

TT would be an obvious exception but for mass start it's like w/e
I think that it makes LESS of a difference with mass start racing, but a breakaway is basically a time trial, so aero matters. I haven't been in a crit in a few years, but when you see that guy with the skinsuit, shoe covers and the 80/90mm Enve's, that miiiighhhtt be a guy to watch if he attacks.

Originally Posted by Russ Roth
Wouldn't interest me much. I don't have the latest and greatest, guess I'm one of those poor, but I have what I like and buy what I enjoy. In some ways the parts can be faster and in other ways slower but I still want to ride my bike. Could see at the pro level it mattering but even at the semi-pro it probably wouldn't be a big deal.
I think things are currently more equal at the pro level, mostly because cost isn't really a factor. I'd be surprised if every bike in the grand tour peloton weren't all sub 7kg. With that said, since things are most equal at the pro level, maybe that's the place to start. I doubt the pros would care if you added 5 pounds of bike weight and put a max depth/material spec on their rims because they know that everyone would have the same gear just like before.
Phatman is offline  
Likes For Phatman: