Cycling and bicycle racing discussion forums.   View New Forum Topics
Today's Forum Topics

Set as homepage


Go Back   Cycling Forums > Tech Corner > Cycling Equipment
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Welcome to CyclingForums.com

You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread.

By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds.


weight

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 13-07.-2008, 01:57 AM   #16
alfeng
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,009
Default Re: weight

Quote:
Originally Posted by alienator
Wow. As usual, even with your deft use of colors, italics, and bold font, you read things that weren't even there.

First, perhaps you ought to read John's stuff more carefully.

Second, there has been no study that has shown any connection between frame or wheel stiffness that significantly or perceptibly improves performance. That is, in science, called a significant negative. Look it up.

Third: UofA? Uhm, its UA, and who the hell said I am in Engineering? You should get some remedial reading help.

Fourth: You quickly discount the results of one study that indicated that riders weren't able to reliably able to discern wheel stiffness quality. That study implied that riders had a probability of about 50% of "choosing" correctly. This suggests that riders couldn't with any accuracy ascribe performance benefits to a wheel, further suggesting that there may be no correlation (Uhm, correlation in the statistical sense. Again, look it up.) between wheel stiffness and performance gain/benefit.

Fifth: One point on a curve? Well, FYI, you can't fit a curve to one point. You can fit an infinite number of curves, but not one. Your math skills appear to be exceedingly weak. I did not draw a determination from "one point." You clearly don't understand the whole scientific method thing.

Sixth: Increased wheel stiffness has it's greatest effect entering corners under braking and exiting corners under power. It helps to maintain steering precision and confidence. Conversely, mid-corner increased wheel stiffness is not a bonus as the out of plane force inputs to the wheel are bumps, cracks, gravel and the like. A stiff wheel bounces off those defects, while a less stiff wheel flexes more in response to said inputs and better maintains its line. So, Professor, please tell me then which one is better and please justify your answer.

Alas, your presentation, as do all of your presentations, relies only on font trickery. Otherwise you've proven nothing, nor have you even shown that understand what you're talking about.
You're still spewing piss.

AND, your 'sixth' point reenforces my contention despite your belief to the contrary. Let some air out of your tires if you want better handling in the middle of a turn.

No offense to Swanson, but I looked at his presentation the 'first day' and the data was scant & therefore meaningless -- an unfortunate waste of time as originally presented -- and, YOU were the one who presumes conclusions can be extrapolated from minimum data ...

Are you even reading what you write?

Why don't you show your postings to whichever department you are in?

Oh, wait. If you did THAT, you'd probably be kicked out of school because no professional or graduate school would want someone whose posts are so immature and generally belligerent to be degreed by them.
alfeng is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13-07.-2008, 02:01 AM   #17
alienator
Registered User
 
alienator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 2,705
Default Re: weight

Quote:
Originally Posted by alienator
Wow. As usual, even with your deft use of colors, italics, and bold font, you read things that weren't even there.

First, perhaps you ought to read John's stuff more carefully.

Second, there has been no study that has shown any connection between frame or wheel stiffness that significantly or perceptibly improves performance. That is, in science, called a significant negative. Look it up.

Third: UofA? Uhm, its UA, and who the hell said I am in Engineering? You should get some remedial reading help.

Fourth: You quickly discount the results of one study that indicated that riders weren't able to reliably able to discern wheel stiffness quality. That study implied that riders had a probability of about 50% of "choosing" correctly. This suggests that riders couldn't with any accuracy ascribe performance benefits to a wheel, further suggesting that there may be no correlation (Uhm, correlation in the statistical sense. Again, look it up.) between wheel stiffness and performance gain/benefit.

Fifth: One point on a curve? Well, FYI, you can't fit a curve to one point. You can fit an infinite number of curves, but not one. Your math skills appear to be exceedingly weak. I did not draw a determination from "one point." You clearly don't understand the whole scientific method thing.

Sixth: Increased wheel stiffness has it's greatest effect entering corners under braking and exiting corners under power. It helps to maintain steering precision and confidence. Conversely, mid-corner increased wheel stiffness is not a bonus as the out of plane force inputs to the wheel are bumps, cracks, gravel and the like. A stiff wheel bounces off those defects, while a less stiff wheel flexes more in response to said inputs and better maintains its line. So, Professor, please tell me then which one is better and please justify your answer.

Alas, your presentation, as do all of your presentations, relies only on font trickery. Otherwise you've proven nothing, nor have you even shown that understand what you're talking about.


Wow. So educated. You really know how to turn a phrase. Rant on, fella. Italicize. Capitalize. Underline. Put it in a bold font, in a rainbow of colors. That's impressive.
alienator is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13-07.-2008, 02:45 AM   #18
alfeng
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,009
Default Re: weight

Quote:
Originally Posted by alienator
Wow. So educated. You really know how to turn a phrase. Rant on, fella. Italicize. Capitalize. Underline. Put it in a bold font, in a rainbow of colors. That's impressive.
You're still spewing piss!
alfeng is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13-07.-2008, 05:15 AM   #19
AngryPenguin
Registered User
 
AngryPenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 61
Default Re: weight

Quote:
Originally Posted by alfeng
You're still spewing piss!

Yay i'm mature, I can slag other people off... get a room you two.

I'll second the weight thing, I think the difference is more psychological than weight related. If you feel quick then you do go a bit quicker.

In terms of stiffness go with what feels good for you, although we can't agree how much difference it makes I think feeling good about the wheels is more important than any energy lost.
__________________
Its not what you've got its what you do with it.
AngryPenguin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13-07.-2008, 06:57 AM   #20
alienator
Registered User
 
alienator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 2,705
Default Re: weight

Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryPenguin
In terms of stiffness go with what feels good for you, although we can't agree how much difference it makes I think feeling good about the wheels is more important than any energy lost.


Exactly. A person should always go with what feels best or buffs their kettlebells.
__________________
Be an organ donor. When you're dead, you won't need 'em.
alienator is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13-07.-2008, 06:17 PM   #21
531Aussie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 5,064
Default Re: weight

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackchoo
which is faster?

a guy who weighs 80kg on 9kg road bike OR that same guy, who lost 3kg (to 77kg) on a 12kg road bike (ok assuming its the same bike and i stick 3kg of dead weight to the top tube?)
theory goes that losing 3kg of blubber will make a rider aerobically more efficient, coz they won't have to supply blood to the extra 'biomass', or somethink along them lines. Adipose tissue around the gut and arse doesn't demand a lot of blood during intense exercise, but apparently it's enough to make a difference. Google it

Also, I've read that "a every few extra inches" around the stomach makes a rider less aero. There was an equation I once saw which said that a 'certain' about of extra inches around the guts contributed to a 'certain' amount of drag
531Aussie is offline  
Reply With Quote

Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT +10. The time now is 07:45 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 cyclingforums.com

Links to websites we like:
Pezcyclingnews | Cyclingnews.com | Wine Zone | iinet