Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Stiffness Does Not Matter

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Stiffness Does Not Matter

Old 08-24-21, 01:47 PM
  #101  
unterhausen
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,664 Times in 2,497 Posts
An hour record really isn't a great example of something that calls for stiffness. Aero is all. Of course, aero was somewhat of a fringe concept when Merckx did his ride.

As long as the chain stays on at first, it really doesn't matter how stiff/not stiff those bikes are. I always thought it was funny that Merckx' bike was lightened to an incredible degree for the time. Just not that important once it gets up on plane. Which is after the first 15 seconds.
unterhausen is offline  
Likes For unterhausen:
Old 08-24-21, 01:47 PM
  #102  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,879

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3906 Post(s)
Liked 7,182 Times in 2,905 Posts
Originally Posted by HTupolev
This said, I do think that there's some reality behind Heine's observations. While his study was somewhat crude ...
Yeah, he might have some good ideas, but his "tests" and "studies" are so badly done that they are essentially useless.
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 08-24-21, 02:22 PM
  #103  
63rickert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 329 Times in 245 Posts
Originally Posted by GhostRider62
Who needs logic with obvious errors of fact.

1. The record has been broken
2. The bike used Columbus tubing
3. The power was not close to 750-800 watts. He might have needed 400 watts at that altitude.
400 watts? Record would have been reset many many times. By most anyone.

Widely reported at the time to be Reynolds. The lightweight set that had been around for already a long time then. Reported as everything since then. Pino Morroni told me what the frame was and I will believe him.

No one here seems to have the faintest idea what is involved in riding a bike on a track.

Boardman record was controversial to say to say the least. I honestly did not know about the other ride. And thanked the man who told me.
63rickert is offline  
Old 08-24-21, 02:36 PM
  #104  
Eric F 
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,801

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4839 Post(s)
Liked 7,830 Times in 3,710 Posts
Originally Posted by 63rickert
No one here seems to have the faintest idea what is involved in riding a bike on a track.
Pedal hard. Turn left.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Old 08-24-21, 02:54 PM
  #105  
HTupolev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,261
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1971 Post(s)
Liked 1,297 Times in 629 Posts
Originally Posted by 63rickert
When you can put out 750-800 watts continuously for an hour get back to me.
Eddy Merckx wasn't anywhere in that remote ballpark. Even a really big guy on a fairly upright fit running beefy touring tires could smash Merckx's record if he could put out 800W for an hour.

It's hard to know Merckx's aerodynamic and tire drag with confidence, but my back-of-the-napkin guess for his power is similar to GhostRider62's.
HTupolev is offline  
Likes For HTupolev:
Old 08-24-21, 02:54 PM
  #106  
GhostRider62
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2332 Post(s)
Liked 2,094 Times in 1,311 Posts
Originally Posted by 63rickert
400 watts? Record would have been reset many many times. By most anyone.

Widely reported at the time to be Reynolds. The lightweight set that had been around for already a long time then. Reported as everything since then. Pino Morroni told me what the frame was and I will believe him.

No one here seems to have the faintest idea what is involved in riding a bike on a track.

Boardman record was controversial to say to say the least. I honestly did not know about the other ride. And thanked the man who told me.
It was at altitude. Some have estimated the power to have been 365 watts. In any case, your 750-800 watts is crazy wrong. It was not Reynolds tubing and the record has been broken a number of times. Name me a single rider who has ever had an FTP over 750 watts. 500 watts is extraordinarily rare, it takes a big man with huge VO2 max and high lactate threshold. More importantly......

Your example is completely not relevant anyway. During a steady state effort at high cadence as you can see from the video of attempt in Mexico, the actual force on the pedals is quite low. There is even some slow motion video of him.
GhostRider62 is offline  
Likes For GhostRider62:
Old 08-24-21, 02:56 PM
  #107  
GhostRider62
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2332 Post(s)
Liked 2,094 Times in 1,311 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
Pedal hard. Turn left.
Like Nascar.
GhostRider62 is offline  
Old 08-24-21, 03:22 PM
  #108  
Eric F 
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,801

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4839 Post(s)
Liked 7,830 Times in 3,710 Posts
Originally Posted by GhostRider62
Like Nascar.
Zactly.

This is why I prefer F1. F1 turns both ways, and has to use their brakes.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Likes For Eric F:
Old 08-24-21, 03:26 PM
  #109  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,879

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3906 Post(s)
Liked 7,182 Times in 2,905 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
Zactly.

This is why I prefer F1. F1 turns both ways, and has to use their brakes.
F1 uses rim brakes, right?
tomato coupe is offline  
Likes For tomato coupe:
Old 08-24-21, 03:48 PM
  #110  
indyfabz
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,059
Mentioned: 210 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 15,299 Times in 7,231 Posts
Originally Posted by GhostRider62
Like Nascar.
Actually, there was a NASCAR race on the other day with right turns. Totally threw me off at first.

indyfabz is offline  
Likes For indyfabz:
Old 08-24-21, 04:10 PM
  #111  
KKBHH
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski
I agree with this. IME of race car engineering a lot of drivers have a tendency to set up their cars way too stiff based on subjective “feel”. Often going softer on springs, anti-roll-bars and damping improves both traction and lateral grip. Drivers are often surprised by the stopwatch vs perception. Especially in low-downforce formula like Touring Cars where aero performance is much less critical.
A stiffer suspension is faster weight transfer, actually called load transfer since, like a go-kart, it's not very much due to body roll. And then faster load transfer is more traction on the turn-in. The problem is, how fast of a responding vehicle can the driver or rider handle ?

Also, faster load transfer works the tires harder and therefor the setup for a low-traction surface is a softer suspension.

The other subject was "Turn left". Well, turn-left is okay but steering is really a leveraging of the tire against the track. Then the contact-patch deflects out-of-line from the tire. As long as the contact-patch can further deflect then there is traction. The path of the vehicle is the result of the leveraging of the tires against the track but since both the front tires and the rear tires have contact-patch deflection then there is tire drift at both the front and rear such that there is not much apparent steering angle at the front wheels. The contact-patch deflection is called "slip angle" but really should be called drift-angle. Oh, on a four-wheel vehicle it's the outside tires with load on them that have significant slip-angle and drift in a curve. Note that the driver or rider doesn't steer through a curve under g-forces but just experiences the natural path of the vehicle due to the leveraging of tire force !

Now, for instance, the sport of "drifting" is really a sport of power-sliding because the rear tires are overloaded and can no longer further deflect the contact-patch. That's a slide.

Last edited by KKBHH; 08-24-21 at 04:38 PM.
KKBHH is offline  
Old 08-24-21, 04:36 PM
  #112  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,175
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4274 Post(s)
Liked 4,713 Times in 2,911 Posts
Originally Posted by KKBHH
A stiffer suspension is faster weight transfer, actually called load transfer since, like a go-kart, it's not very much due to body roll. And then faster load transfer is more traction on the turn-in. The problem is, how fast of a responding vehicle can the driver or rider handle ?

Also, faster load transfer works the tires harder and therefor the setup for a low-traction surface is a softer suspension.
Yes this is true, but not really the full story. A stiffer suspension will tend to increase dynamic tyre load variation when cornering, braking and accelerating, which in turn loses grip/traction (as tyre load vs grip is non-linear). It's complicated and optimum setup is pretty circuit dependent too. But the basic aim is to run as soft as you can get away with, rather than as stiff as you can, if that makes sense. This is coming from several decades experience of race engineering at the highest pro level (BTCC in the 90s and F1 from 2000-2010).
PeteHski is offline  
Likes For PeteHski:
Old 08-24-21, 04:53 PM
  #113  
KKBHH
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Well, as long as the tire can increase slip-angle under increasing load then that is a gain in traction even though it is also increasing drift. See, if the tire takes a larger load without sliding then that is more traction demonstrated. This fundamental relates to either increasing speed and g-force in a curve or to a re-balancing of front-to-rear load transfer.

Now very stiff tires can take very large loads and that's how it's done. But a stiffer suspension is not an increase in load-transfer but just faster load-transfer. And that's why an increase in load-transfer is more traction on the turn-in. The balance of the front-to-rear load-transfer can be changed and the speed of the load-transfer can be changed but not the total load-transfer. Well, I mean that the total peak load-transfer is not changed with suspension stiffness. It can be changed with vehicle height or with vehicle track-width.

To relate all this back to bicycles, it could be said that many bicycles, like go-karts, just use tires and frame or fork deflection for a suspension.

Last edited by KKBHH; 08-24-21 at 05:28 PM.
KKBHH is offline  
Old 08-24-21, 05:00 PM
  #114  
70sSanO
Senior Member
 
70sSanO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 5,772

Bikes: 1986 Cannondale SR400 (Flat bar commuter), 1988 Cannondale Criterium XTR, 1992 Serotta T-Max, 1995 Trek 970

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1935 Post(s)
Liked 2,150 Times in 1,313 Posts
I wonder what chain lube they used to break the record?

Probably wet for less friction.

John
70sSanO is offline  
Old 08-24-21, 05:12 PM
  #115  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Except, of course, that flexibility on a track and in steady-state riding (even at massive power output) is nothing at all like road riding---smooth track, smooth pedalling, minimal longitudinal acceleration ...... nothing like sprinting, or climbing at max power ..... so your data input is a meaningless as anyone else's.

So far this whole thread is basically, "Yes, because I said so .... No, because I said so" repeated continually.

By the way ... maybe if he had been riding a modern Merckx bike that hour record would be significantly faster.
Originally Posted by 63rickert
Merckx did first kilo in 1:12. Try doing that, then tell me about steady state riding. Would also note here that for the way he was trained and the way racers rode back then Merckx was massively overgeared to be accomplishing such a quick first kilo.
Okay ... the old "if you can't do it you can't understand it" fallacy. So a physicist and a physician who can measure every aspect of a barbell, and the weightlifter, can track with video and sensors the entire performance of the bar and the lifter, and can do all the math to fully understand how the lift was done, how fast the bar was moving at a given time, how much it flexed, how much the lifter's body changed shape under load ... not to mention heart rate, BP, respirat6ion, whatever else .... don't know crap because they cannot make the lift.

Right.

Secondly .... YES, as you chose to overlook most likely because you had no logical refutation and had already blown your illogical refutation above ... there is No Direct Correlation between frame stiffness and frame "performance" in those very different examples. You can choose not to see stuff, but it doesn't go away, sorry.

On top of all that ....

Originally Posted by 63rickert
The Eddy Merckx hour record, still unbeaten after 49 years, was done on a Colnago built with Reynolds 22/28 butted tubes. In old style skinny diameter. Converting British wire gauge to metric gives wall thickness of 0.711/0.376mm. Of course Reynolds never produced anything accurate to 0.001mm, that is just how the nominal converts. But the skinny belly of the tube was less than 0.4mm. Every Category 6 rider knows that such a frame is impossibly flexible and noodly. What was good enough for Eddy would be laughed out of current market. When you can put out 750-800 watts continuously for an hour get back to me.
Originally Posted by GhostRider62
Who needs logic with obvious errors of fact.

1. The record has been broken
2. The bike used Columbus tubing
3. The power was not close to 750-800 watts. He might have needed 400 watts at that altitude.
So basically you were completely wrong from the very start …. On just about every important point of your post.

Yeah, I think I won’t take your word as authoritative, eh?

Let’s move on.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 08-24-21, 05:16 PM
  #116  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski
Yes this is true, but not really the full story. A stiffer suspension will tend to increase dynamic tyre load variation when cornering, braking and accelerating, which in turn loses grip/traction (as tyre load vs grip is non-linear). It's complicated and optimum setup is pretty circuit dependent too. But the basic aim is to run as soft as you can get away with, rather than as stiff as you can, if that makes sense. This is coming from several decades experience of race engineering at the highest pro level (BTCC in the 90s and F1 from 2000-2010).
I have no idea if this guy was actually a crew member, an engineer or even a fan of any motorsport .... but have no reason to doubt him. And if he really does have the experience he claims, I certainly wouldn't debate him ... on suspension set-up, at least.

Having hung around motorsports for a few years, and having listened and maybe learned ..... what he says makes sense ---- sure, the physics can be interpreted a bunch of ways, but what really works on different tracks is what matters.

But .... bicycles.

This is another thread where someone became an expert after reading an article on the internet--and read it almost all the way through---, and was kind enough to enlighten us with the latest "knowledge."
Maelochs is offline  
Old 08-24-21, 05:37 PM
  #117  
GhostRider62
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2332 Post(s)
Liked 2,094 Times in 1,311 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
F1 uses rim brakes, right?
And, F1 drivers wax their chains.
GhostRider62 is offline  
Likes For GhostRider62:
Old 08-24-21, 06:13 PM
  #118  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,175
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4274 Post(s)
Liked 4,713 Times in 2,911 Posts
Originally Posted by KKBHH
Well, as long as the tire can increase slip-angle under increasing load then that is a gain in traction even though it is also increasing drift. See, if the tire takes a larger load without sliding then that is more traction demonstrated. This fundamental relates to either increasing speed and g-force in a curve or to a re-balancing of front-to-rear load transfer.

Now very stiff tires can take very large loads and that's how it's done. But a stiffer suspension is not an increase in load-transfer but just faster load-transfer. And that's why an increase in load-transfer is more traction on the turn-in. The balance of the front-to-rear load-transfer can be changed and the speed of the load-transfer can be changed but not the total load-transfer. Well, I mean that the total peak load-transfer is not changed with suspension stiffness. It can be changed with vehicle height or with vehicle track-width.

To relate all this back to bicycles, it could be said that many bicycles, like go-karts, just use tires and frame or fork deflection for a suspension.
All true in theory and good to see someone who at least understands the fundamental difference between dynamic load transfer and chassis roll. If track surfaces were all billiard smooth with no kerbs then you wouldn't need any suspension i.e. a go-kart sat a few mm off the ground would be the best solution. But unfortunately there are kerbs and many lumps and bumps on all race circuits I've ever been to. Some are much more bumpy than others obviously. So you have to compromise between the speed of response to a steering input and the tyre load variation when running over all the bumps and kerbs. A softer suspension reduces tyre load variation, which nearly always results in faster lap times and less tyre wear (providing it is very well damped). So why not go really soft then you ask? Well that causes potential issues with geometry (camber, toe etc) and then there's ride heights and of course aero performance to consider.

But to be honest this is all pretty irrelevant to bicycle frame flex. I only mentioned this to highlight the potential difference between someone's subjective perception of stiffness and objective performance. They don't always match up. Like in this race car example, a stiffer suspension might well feel like it has a sharper turn-in response, but you might not notice a loss of grip mid-corner or loss of traction on a bumpy exit (especially with TC). That's why we have data and engineers to analyse it to death!
PeteHski is offline  
Likes For PeteHski:
Old 08-24-21, 06:41 PM
  #119  
Trakhak
Senior Member
 
Trakhak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,339
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2429 Post(s)
Liked 2,889 Times in 1,646 Posts
Originally Posted by ChamoisDavisJr
But Merckx was jittered up on Amphetamines making it harder to ride in a straight line. Let’s see these young fellas do that!

Merckx is steel the best
Full disclosure: Sosenka was popped for PEDs at least twice, although not for his hour record ride. I suspect the UCI thought he was juiced for the hour record, too, but couldn't prove it. There's got to be a reason his record-setting ride is almost universally ignored in the bike racing community.
Trakhak is offline  
Likes For Trakhak:
Old 08-24-21, 11:54 PM
  #120  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,879

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3906 Post(s)
Liked 7,182 Times in 2,905 Posts
Originally Posted by Trakhak
Full disclosure: Sosenka was popped for PEDs at least twice, although not for his hour record ride. I suspect the UCI thought he was juiced for the hour record, too, but couldn't prove it. There's got to be a reason his record-setting ride is almost universally ignored in the bike racing community.
And Merckx was busted three times; once before he set the hour record and twice after.
tomato coupe is offline  
Likes For tomato coupe:
Old 08-25-21, 02:03 AM
  #121  
Jax Rhapsody
Rhapsodic Laviathan
 
Jax Rhapsody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 1,003

Bikes: Rideable; 83 Schwinn High Sierra. Two cruiser, bmx bike, one other mtb, three road frames, one citybike.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 222 Post(s)
Liked 123 Times in 91 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
Zactly.

This is why I prefer F1. F1 turns both ways, and has to use their brakes.
Stock cars use brakes when they hafta. Unlike F1; they don't have abs, or power brakes.
Jax Rhapsody is offline  
Old 08-25-21, 03:33 AM
  #122  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,175
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4274 Post(s)
Liked 4,713 Times in 2,911 Posts
Originally Posted by Jax Rhapsody
Stock cars use brakes when they hafta. Unlike F1; they don't have abs, or power brakes.
ABS is not allowed in F1 regulations. That's why they often lock wheels under braking.
PeteHski is offline  
Likes For PeteHski:
Old 08-25-21, 04:17 AM
  #123  
Branko D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 338 Post(s)
Liked 408 Times in 252 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski
You can definitely argue in favour of more vertical frame compliance. In fact many manufacturers already have. That's why we have super thin seat-stays, D-shaped seat posts, IsoSpeed, Futureshock, etc. Wider tyres and lower pressures have arguably made frame compliance much less critical in very recent years, but still I'd rather not have a bone-shaking stiff frame for riding on our pot-holed roads. CF goodness can give you vertical compliance and high lateral stiffness at the same time.
That's true.

I really like the aesthetics of old bikes, but modern CF road bikes are just awesome all around and great to ride.
​​​​​
Branko D is offline  
Old 08-25-21, 08:43 AM
  #124  
Bah Humbug
serious cyclist
 
Bah Humbug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Austin
Posts: 21,147

Bikes: S1, R2, P2

Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9334 Post(s)
Liked 3,679 Times in 2,026 Posts
I know I'm going to regret this, but...

Regardless of how much or whether lateral energy is returned or wasted, how can the measured deflection possibly affect that?

Take rider A on bikes X and Y. Rider A always has an identical pedaling style, and puts 5w laterally into the BB. Bike X deflects 4mm at the BB under rider A's 5w lateral. Bike Y is stiffer and deflects 2mm at the BB under rider A's 5w lateral. Bike Y deflects less, but still absorbs 5w laterally. In other words, the less deflection of the stiffer bike doesn't mean there's less wasted effort deflecting the bike, just more resistance to the same wasted effort. It would be like saying that a stiffer car suspension makes the road smoother.

Now rider A may prefer the feel of bike Y, of course. Bike Y may be sharper-handling. I don't see how bike Y can be more efficient though.

This of course also means that "planing" (which is the damned stupidest word for the suppose concept) is bunk, because deflecting MORE also doesn't mean anything better either, inherently.
Bah Humbug is offline  
Old 08-25-21, 09:00 AM
  #125  
livedarklions
Tragically Ignorant
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,094 Times in 5,053 Posts
Originally Posted by Bah Humbug
I know I'm going to regret this, but...

Regardless of how much or whether lateral energy is returned or wasted, how can the measured deflection possibly affect that?

Take rider A on bikes X and Y. Rider A always has an identical pedaling style, and puts 5w laterally into the BB. Bike X deflects 4mm at the BB under rider A's 5w lateral. Bike Y is stiffer and deflects 2mm at the BB under rider A's 5w lateral. Bike Y deflects less, but still absorbs 5w laterally. In other words, the less deflection of the stiffer bike doesn't mean there's less wasted effort deflecting the bike, just more resistance to the same wasted effort. It would be like saying that a stiffer car suspension makes the road smoother.

Now rider A may prefer the feel of bike Y, of course. Bike Y may be sharper-handling. I don't see how bike Y can be more efficient though.

This of course also means that "planing" (which is the damned stupidest word for the suppose concept) is bunk, because deflecting MORE also doesn't mean anything better either, inherently.
I'm not sure your last paragraph about planing follows--as you note, the stiffer frame is more resistant to the 5w. Doesn't this translate to less energy stored and returned?
livedarklions is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

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