Quick Step Gets Ultralight Bikes For Mountain Stages
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,875
Bikes: Cervelo RS, Specialized Stumpy, Schwinn 974
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The whole UCI thing is dummkopf. Why not allow the lightest bikes to compete? On time-trial flats, why not allow recumbents?
"We cannot allow this kind of thinking, because we'll we just can't. We aren't interested in seeing the best times possible, we're only interested in CONTROLLING PERFORMANCE TO WHAT IS BELOW WHAT IS POSSIBLE."
"We cannot allow this kind of thinking, because we'll we just can't. We aren't interested in seeing the best times possible, we're only interested in CONTROLLING PERFORMANCE TO WHAT IS BELOW WHAT IS POSSIBLE."
#27
Raising the Abyss
UCI:
"EPO, Good"
"sub 15lb bike, Bad"
"EPO, Good"
"sub 15lb bike, Bad"
__________________
"...in Las Vegas where -the electric bills are staggering -the decor hog wild -and the entertainment saccharine -what a golden age -what a time of right and reason -the consumer's king -and unhappiness is treason..."
"...in Las Vegas where -the electric bills are staggering -the decor hog wild -and the entertainment saccharine -what a golden age -what a time of right and reason -the consumer's king -and unhappiness is treason..."
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Boone, North Carolina
Posts: 5,094
Bikes: 2009 Cannondale CAAD9-6 2014 Trek Domaine 5.9
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
the EVO is an awesome bike..... really quite an inovation. It has received quite a bit of praise from lots of folks.
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The point is to standardize the bike so that the RIDERS are being judged, not the sponsors' pocketbooks or the latest MIT whizkid in their employ. Whether that leads to doping is up for debate.
#30
Peloton Shelter Dog
You are my BF Ray of Sunshine.
__________________
https://www.cotsiscad.com
https://www.cotsiscad.com
#31
Raising the Abyss
And you are my BF Wizard of Oz. Despite all your bellowing, we all know you're a softy.
__________________
"...in Las Vegas where -the electric bills are staggering -the decor hog wild -and the entertainment saccharine -what a golden age -what a time of right and reason -the consumer's king -and unhappiness is treason..."
"...in Las Vegas where -the electric bills are staggering -the decor hog wild -and the entertainment saccharine -what a golden age -what a time of right and reason -the consumer's king -and unhappiness is treason..."
#32
Senior Member
I'm hoping to see a racer win on a KHS or an open-mold frame. Otherwise, it'd just be Specialized or Cervelo or whoever has the most Dental Funding to blow on 1 pound plastic e-gruppo crap.
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vlaamse Ardennen, Belgium
Posts: 3,898
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Why not allow knives in soccer?
Why not allow small electric motors in cycling?
Why not allow bionic replacement cyborg muscles?
Why not allow rocket boosters?
Why not allow dragcars in front of riders?
Why not allow springs that tension themselves while going down and then release energy going up?
etc...
A sport is a sport and all sports have restrictions to keep them the sports they are.
I like my bikes to remain bikes and applaud the UCI for outlawing anything that changes them too much.
Why not allow small electric motors in cycling?
Why not allow bionic replacement cyborg muscles?
Why not allow rocket boosters?
Why not allow dragcars in front of riders?
Why not allow springs that tension themselves while going down and then release energy going up?
etc...
A sport is a sport and all sports have restrictions to keep them the sports they are.
I like my bikes to remain bikes and applaud the UCI for outlawing anything that changes them too much.
#36
Senior Member
For a mountain stage bike, there may be some advantage in using lighter wheels and transferring the weight to ballast on the frame.
I am surprised that metal weights are added to the crankset: a rotating part, rather than, say the waterbottle holders.
I appreciate the idea of lighter bikes for lighter riders. In pro racing this may not be do-able but for everyone else, it should be quite normal. I dont see why, as a 140lbs (64kg) lightweight, why should I have to buy bikes rated for 300lbs riders.
I am surprised that metal weights are added to the crankset: a rotating part, rather than, say the waterbottle holders.
I appreciate the idea of lighter bikes for lighter riders. In pro racing this may not be do-able but for everyone else, it should be quite normal. I dont see why, as a 140lbs (64kg) lightweight, why should I have to buy bikes rated for 300lbs riders.
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Does any form of racing that involves a vehicle not have a minimum weight for the vehicle. I'm not sure but I know most forms of motorcycle and auto racing have minimums etc... I know bicycle racing would be diffrent from the power plant point of view but it is still a race vehicle.
#38
Peloton Shelter Dog
Firearms. The answer to eliminating soccer for good is allowing firearms in the sport.
__________________
https://www.cotsiscad.com
https://www.cotsiscad.com
#39
At a certain level, and pros are definately there, you can not lose weight without sacrificing power.
Pro athletes are basicly bones and muscles and you can't just "choose" your body type.
Lighter riders have less power and so they carry relatively heavier bikes because all bikes weigh exactly the limit these days.
It's unfair to guys like Pantani or Contador.
Pro athletes are basicly bones and muscles and you can't just "choose" your body type.
Lighter riders have less power and so they carry relatively heavier bikes because all bikes weigh exactly the limit these days.
It's unfair to guys like Pantani or Contador.
For a mountain stage bike, there may be some advantage in using lighter wheels and transferring the weight to ballast on the frame.
I am surprised that metal weights are added to the crankset: a rotating part, rather than, say the waterbottle holders.
I appreciate the idea of lighter bikes for lighter riders. In pro racing this may not be do-able but for everyone else, it should be quite normal. I dont see why, as a 140lbs (64kg) lightweight, why should I have to buy bikes rated for 300lbs riders.
I am surprised that metal weights are added to the crankset: a rotating part, rather than, say the waterbottle holders.
I appreciate the idea of lighter bikes for lighter riders. In pro racing this may not be do-able but for everyone else, it should be quite normal. I dont see why, as a 140lbs (64kg) lightweight, why should I have to buy bikes rated for 300lbs riders.
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vlaamse Ardennen, Belgium
Posts: 3,898
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
If you would look at the history of cycling, my dear fellow, you would come to the conclusion that very light riders, contrary to popular belief, actually are not good climbers in general.
I'll give you the numbers:
Pantani weighed only 55kg and had an aerobic power of 357W ... this gives him 6,5W/kg ... his power to frontal area was 1073W/mē
Armstrong weighed 74kg and had an aerobic power of 481W ... this also gives him 6,5W/kg ... his power to frontal area was 1185W/mē
If we count all the variables except the bike ... both riders will go up something like "Le Mont Ventoux" at the same speed except that Pantani has a smaller frontal area and so he should win.
Now ... bear with me here.
If we count in the weight of the bike at 6,5 kilograms and we calculate the theoretical times on the Ventoux ... we will see that Pantani will lose by about a minute and a half!
Face it: the weight of the bike is unfair to lighter riders in climbs.
I'll give you the numbers:
Pantani weighed only 55kg and had an aerobic power of 357W ... this gives him 6,5W/kg ... his power to frontal area was 1073W/mē
Armstrong weighed 74kg and had an aerobic power of 481W ... this also gives him 6,5W/kg ... his power to frontal area was 1185W/mē
If we count all the variables except the bike ... both riders will go up something like "Le Mont Ventoux" at the same speed except that Pantani has a smaller frontal area and so he should win.
Now ... bear with me here.
If we count in the weight of the bike at 6,5 kilograms and we calculate the theoretical times on the Ventoux ... we will see that Pantani will lose by about a minute and a half!
Face it: the weight of the bike is unfair to lighter riders in climbs.
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vlaamse Ardennen, Belgium
Posts: 3,898
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Does any form of racing that involves a vehicle not have a minimum weight for the vehicle. I'm not sure but I know most forms of motorcycle and auto racing have minimums etc... I know bicycle racing would be diffrent from the power plant point of view but it is still a race vehicle.
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Not always. For those that don't they have a weight break system that regulates weight of car by displacement. I see your point but what other form of racing at all has no minimum weight on the vehicle? Most times it's to limit either how much technology can be introduced or to limit cost.
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 197
Bikes: 2010 Specialized Allez
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
If you would look at the history of cycling, my dear fellow, you would come to the conclusion that very light riders, contrary to popular belief, actually are not good climbers in general.
I'll give you the numbers:
Pantani weighed only 55kg and had an aerobic power of 357W ... this gives him 6,5W/kg ... his power to frontal area was 1073W/mē
Armstrong weighed 74kg and had an aerobic power of 481W ... this also gives him 6,5W/kg ... his power to frontal area was 1185W/mē
If we count all the variables except the bike ... both riders will go up something like "Le Mont Ventoux" at the same speed except that Pantani has a smaller frontal area and so he should win.
Now ... bear with me here.
If we count in the weight of the bike at 6,5 kilograms and we calculate the theoretical times on the Ventoux ... we will see that Pantani will lose by about a minute and a half!
Face it: the weight of the bike is unfair to lighter riders in climbs.
I'll give you the numbers:
Pantani weighed only 55kg and had an aerobic power of 357W ... this gives him 6,5W/kg ... his power to frontal area was 1073W/mē
Armstrong weighed 74kg and had an aerobic power of 481W ... this also gives him 6,5W/kg ... his power to frontal area was 1185W/mē
If we count all the variables except the bike ... both riders will go up something like "Le Mont Ventoux" at the same speed except that Pantani has a smaller frontal area and so he should win.
Now ... bear with me here.
If we count in the weight of the bike at 6,5 kilograms and we calculate the theoretical times on the Ventoux ... we will see that Pantani will lose by about a minute and a half!
Face it: the weight of the bike is unfair to lighter riders in climbs.
#45
Full Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ridley, pa
Posts: 290
Bikes: felt f85
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#46
Senior Member
You mean, the bike still weight 14.99lbs minimum?
Pretty funny how they could tell the 500gms, then they rig it for the guy with the same bikes, he was no dummy.
Can I just suggest some diuretics instead of this bike weight nonsense?
Pretty funny how they could tell the 500gms, then they rig it for the guy with the same bikes, he was no dummy.
Can I just suggest some diuretics instead of this bike weight nonsense?
Last edited by zigmeister; 07-13-11 at 10:01 AM.
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vlaamse Ardennen, Belgium
Posts: 3,898
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
In my post above I have come up with actual numbers proving my statement that the weight of the bike is unfair for lighter riders.
This is not just a random thing I say but it is backed up by logic and physics.
I might be wrong, but until proven wrong by logic I will assume I am right.
I have yet to see you come up with anything even remotely resembling logic or numbers or even a statement other than "you are a troll".
Maybe your childish behaviour is indeed "typical pretentious BF", I don't know.
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,745
Bikes: S-Works Roubaix SL2^H4, Secteur Sport, TriCross, Kaffenback, Lurcher 29er
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Under today's rules, all the bike riders have to ride a bike of the same minimum weight (among other restrictions) along the same course, regardless of their conditioning or body type. That sounds equal to me.
Coming up with a system that attempts to handicap particular riders relative to others is not equal competition, it's an attempt to stack the deck against the most gifted.