Cycling shoe setup

Andy Heninger said:

Quoted message said:

So you find claims of 30% speed increases in ordinary riding
due to using clipless pedals to be credible?

I keep an older road bike at my office with pedals that are clipless on
one side and plain - not sure of the right term, but just a serrated
frame for street shoes - on the other.

I regularly ride it both ways.

Overall speed differences are, for me, negligible. I can easily run my
self out of wind with or without being clipped in. Subjectively, effort
for a given speed doesn't noticeably vary. No big difference that I can
see either in occasional short (around a mile) impromptu chases with a
coworker coming back from lunch.

Accelerating from a stop in a relatively high gear is easier while
attached - you can pull up. I'm sure any kind of a sprint is faster
while attached. But this doesn't have much of any effect on any sort of
normal riding, or any effort that lasts for more than about 15 seconds.

I do like the clipless pedals (this is confusing, both sides are
"clipless"😉 as opposed to being unattached, better, though. With no
chance of bouncing a foot off the pedal, it seems like my legs and feet
stay more relaxed. You can pull up if you want - I don't normally, but
it's handy when starting out from a stop. I like being able to stand up
without first checking that my feet are still halfway reasonably
centered on the pedals. I like being able to pull the pedal up while
stopped by just lifting my foot.

-- Andy Heninger
[email hidden]

Dear Andy,

I agree that the terms are prone to misunderstanding--I'm
using bare for no-connection, presumably serrated pedals,
clips for toe-clip-and-strap, and clipless for what most
people use, the twist-in-and-out cleats.

Some of the fuss elsewhere in this thread may be due to
emphasis, which you address. While you see little difference
in general results, other riders are now explaining in more
detail that they feel that the advantages of clipless in
pull-up acceleration and handling contribute to much greater
messenger-bike style riding in heavy traffic. Jobst is
saying that he's sure that he goes 50% faster clipless--but
he specifies this somewhat special messenger-bike
heavy-traffic situation, not ordinary touring.

You find clipless more comfortable, and I see no reason to
question that. What's particularly interesting is that you
use both methods fairly often on the same bike--your
experience makes the best argument for comfort that I've
seen.

I do like two minor points that you make. Maybe they've been
made before, but I don't remember when.

First, your point about pull-up helping when trying to
accelerate in a high gear. Seems reasonable.

Second, your point about being able to pull the pedal up a
little more easily when stopped. I doubt that plain pedal
riders have little trouble doing the same thing, but I can
see what you're thinking--the pedal must follow the foot
backward without any fuss whatsoever.

Thanks,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

With Sandy claiming easily measured 30% speed increases in
mild riding due to clipless pedals, it's a puzzle why such
an advantage can't be measured by numerous other posters.

OK, in those rough terms it's not hard to work out vague measurements,
but I thought you were after something more scientific.

So, how's this for you: I knocked something like five minutes off my
average time for my six mile commute to work when I fitted clipless
pedals - down from around 30 minutes to around 25 minutes. What's that
as an improvement in percentage terms - around 17%? Will that do for
you?

That's on an urban journey, not pushing hard, stopping at traffic
lights, a few upward gradients but no real hills to speak of. Maybe
there are other factors in the improvement that I haven't accounted
for, but if you are telling me that I don't get to work faster since I
fitted clipless pedals, you are just plain wrong.

d.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

1- what kind of pedals?
2- how long did you use them?
3- what bike?
4- are you an agressive rider, or do you just kind of putter along at
10-12mph?

And to add to the above questions, what kind of tests, research, and
evaluation have you done to decide that there are no benefits to
clipless pedals? Where is the link to your data?

I look forward to your answers.

Life is Good!
Jeff

Dear Jeff,

What I ride and have ridden is immaterial to the original
question "What are the benefits of clipless pedals?"

I've never claimed any benefits for them. Usually, it's up
to the people who claim that things are perfectly obvious to
back their claims up.

So far, I'm still waiting.

At this point, the only specific claims made in support of
the advantages of clipless pedals are from Booker and Sandy,
who state that they go 30%-50% faster at their ordinary
speeds due to clipless pedals (12 mph with plain pedals,
16-18 mph with clipless).

Is this what you consider credible support?

I'm doing the "research" by asking if anyone has any
evidence other than the seat of their pants and prior
convictions.

Some people feel that clipless pedals are more comfortable
than plain. Fine with me--de gustibus non est disputandum.

Some people claim that clipless pedals are safer than plain,
but I've yet to see anything beyond "feel" and theory in
support of this claim.

Some people claim that clipless pedals might have a slight
increase in efficiency (I recall Peter Cole's sensible post
on the matter). But if it's too slight to measure, then it's
just a theory little better than Rotor Cranks or Power
Cranks.

If it takes special circumstances (wild sprinting or
extremely steep, short climbs), then something is odd when
people like Sandy and Booker, just cruising along at 16-18
mph, claim that they're going 30-50% faster due to their
pedals.

Please don't repeat your usual claims to have answered
everything--take a line or two and tell us if you think that
clipless versus plain pedals are responsible for 12 versus
16-18 mph as Sandy and Booker believe.

If you expect even more from clipless pedals, feel free to
give some details--do they double a rider's speed?

If you expect less than the fascinating 30-50% speed
increases, I sympathize, but no one is trying to hold you
responsible for the advantages that others claim.

What other kind of physical effect is so obvious,
unquestionable, and so amazingly hard to support?

Do any bicycle speed calculators on the internet even
mention pedal type?

I'm willing to be convinced that there are advantages, but
address the question. Ad hominem attacks, physics by
popularity and custom, and an unwillingness to address
specifically claimed speed increases aren't convincing.

Carl Fogel

Carl, you stated that you have tried clipless and found no benefits.
Many of us are of the belief that the benefits, go with out saying.
You are in the minority here, telling us they have no measurable
benefits[that you are aware of]. The original question, in this thread
was how to mount the pedal hardware. These threads evolve, I think you
should just answer my questions. Or, am I to assume that you don't
have any experience with clipless. You like facts, give me some facts
on your experiences.

I believe bicycle performance calculators don't bother with pedal
info, because the use of a pedal retension system is a given. Do you
know of anyone who raced in the TdF, who didn't use a clipless pedal?

When people point out benefits for climbing or short sprints, you poo
poo that as not being normal riding. Every ride I go on, involves some
balls out riding. To me it is normal.

It seems to me that you are basing your experiences as proof that they
have no benefits. As I said before, YOU are in the minority here, most
people who try clipless and learn to use them, like them. They find
the hassles of special shoes and adjustments, worth it. That says
something, right there.

Don't you trust your own findings? Just answer my questions and we can
move on.

To quote you "So far, I'm still waiting."

Life is Good!
Jeff

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Do you think that the efficiency of clipless pedals alone over
bare pedals will raise a rider's average speed for Sandy's
non-urgent mile 30% from 12 mph to 16 mph?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Questions... questions... questions...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why don't you try it. I can say for sure that I get a 50% increase
in speed from my house to the store in the downtown where I live.
It is a bike messenger scene with traffic lights at every corner
over a net diagonal course with left and right turns in congested
traffic. With street shoes I can't do many of the dodges and
weaves that I can with my SPD shoes nor can I accelerate worth a
damn.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The way you ask, it sounds as though you don't have a bicycle on
which to assess these things, or at least don't ride it with
aplomb. Do it! and report back... and don't wear out the "?" key
on you KBD.

Quoted message said:

So you feel that there's a 50% increase in speed when you use
clipless pedals in heavy stop-and-go traffic due to acceleration and
cornering?

Quoted message said:

You say that you "can say this for sure"--any actual times comparing
plain pedals on the same bike versus clipless?

Quoted message said:

No offence is intended, but when did you last "do it" with plain
pedals on the same bike and time yourself on a familiar route?

As I said, I jump on the bicycle with street shoes on occasion when
I'm not in a hurry and ride to the store a mile away. The times are
obvious and speeds as well. I don't use a stop but the difference is
striking in missed traffic lights and stalls.

Quoted message said:

You do make more sense that some recent posts from others in that
you're specifying a frequent acceleration from a stop or near stop,
where pulling up might help, and adding considerable dodging and
weaving (drat, sorry, couldn't help that).

Quoted message said:

But do you consider this heavy-traffic stop-and-go riding typical of
your last 200,000 miles? My impression was that most of your riding
is ordinary touring, not playing bicycle messenger to get to the
store.

So? What does that have to do with the subject at hand? You asked
whether I believe that another rider got a 30% increase in speed. I
do. Now what?

[email hidden]

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Do you think that the efficiency of clipless pedals alone over
bare pedals will raise a rider's average speed for Sandy's
non-urgent mile 30% from 12 mph to 16 mph?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Questions... questions... questions...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why don't you try it. I can say for sure that I get a 50% increase
in speed from my house to the store in the downtown where I live.
It is a bike messenger scene with traffic lights at every corner
over a net diagonal course with left and right turns in congested
traffic. With street shoes I can't do many of the dodges and
weaves that I can with my SPD shoes nor can I accelerate worth a
damn.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The way you ask, it sounds as though you don't have a bicycle on
which to assess these things, or at least don't ride it with
aplomb. Do it! and report back... and don't wear out the "?" key
on you KBD.

Quoted message said:

So you feel that there's a 50% increase in speed when you use
clipless pedals in heavy stop-and-go traffic due to acceleration and
cornering?

Quoted message said:

You say that you "can say this for sure"--any actual times comparing
plain pedals on the same bike versus clipless?

Quoted message said:

No offence is intended, but when did you last "do it" with plain
pedals on the same bike and time yourself on a familiar route?

As I said, I jump on the bicycle with street shoes on occasion when
I'm not in a hurry and ride to the store a mile away. The times are
obvious and speeds as well. I don't use a stopwatch but the
difference is striking in missed traffic lights and stalls.

Quoted message said:

You do make more sense that some recent posts from others in that
you're specifying a frequent acceleration from a stop or near stop,
where pulling up might help, and adding considerable dodging and
weaving (drat, sorry, couldn't help that).

Quoted message said:

But do you consider this heavy-traffic stop-and-go riding typical of
your last 200,000 miles? My impression was that most of your riding
is ordinary touring, not playing bicycle messenger to get to the
store.

So? What does that have to do with the subject at hand? You asked
whether I believe that another rider got a 30% increase in speed. I
do. Now what?

[email hidden]

I said:

Quoted message said:

Track events are generally quite short, so comfort is rarely an issue
in any aspect of track racing.

davek responded:

Quoted message said:

Sounds a plausible explanation. I have no experience of track cycling so
any comment I might make is pure supposition.

I did notice, however, at the recent World Championships in Manchester
that some riders were using clipless, so maybe fashion is catching up
there too.

There is quite a variety of different "track" events, so it's sometimes
dangerous to generalize...

The most _popular_ track events are sprints. These typically involve
explosive accelleration from a very low speed. Sprints put more stress
on bicycles than any other type of activity done on a smooth surface.

Sprinters typically _do_ pull up on the down pedal, at least in the
early part of the surge, and are at relatively high risk for yanking a
foot off of a pedal.

However, other track events, such as time trials and pursuits are about
sustained, steady-state power at high speed. These events have no more
risk of cleat disengagement than any road event, and they also are
longer than sprints. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see
clipless pedals used for this sort of event.

Sheldon "All Generalizations Are False" Brown
+---------------------------------------------------+
| The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
| Curiosity has its own reason for existing. |
| --Albert Einstein |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

[email hidden] wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Dave Kenning said:

> Ignoring the counterbalance of the other foot confuses this
> issue endlessly.

Quoted message said:

That's what I was trying to say, only much more elegantly put.

Quoted message said:

But I don't think we're ever going to satisfy Carl unless we get
our measuring equipment out and give him some hard data.
Trouble is, I wouldn't know what measuring equipment to use, nor
how to use it, so I'm stuck with what I "feel". But that's fine
- it suits me. Sorry, Carl!

Don't be misled, measurements and date would not change anything.

[email hidden]

Dear Jobst,

Got any believable measurements or data showing significant
increases in efficiency in normal riding for clipless pedals
versus bare pedals?

If you do, they'd change my mind.

Carl, who wants you to change your mind specially if doing so
involves this much (and more) effort. Just ride what you are happy
with.

Jeff Starr said:

Carl, you stated that you have tried clipless and found no benefits.
Many of us are of the belief that the benefits, go with out saying.
You are in the minority here, telling us they have no measurable
benefits[that you are aware of].

That seems reasonable to me -- I haven't seen any measurements either.
I also think these claims of 30%-50% speed increases are exaggerated at
best, although perhaps for some riding conditions they could be true
(e.g. with traffic lights, small changes in acceleration can make large
changes in average speed depending on light timing).

Personally, I don't care if clipless pedals are faster, because I'm not
going back to plain pedals either way, and because maximizing speed is not
my primary goal.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Evelyn the dog, having undergone further modification, pondered the
significance of short-person behavior in pedal-depressed panchromatic
resonance and other highly ambient domains... "Arf", she said.

Sandy said:

<[email hidden]>a écrit dans le message de :

Quoted message said:

Dear Sandy,

Can you see why I'm a bit skeptical?

No. Not about me. But the swell of opinion directs lots of doubt in
your direction. For a guy who asks these questions, do you really want
us to believe you have rolled down a 2 mile incline at 54 miles an hour ?
Or was that off a cliff ? Or only imaginary. Frankly, directly, I don't
believe you.

I don't see where he says this, but I don't find it hard to believe at
all. I've reached speeds over 57 MPH coasting down a hill just a little
longer than this of approximately 8% grade. (This may have involved a
tail wind).

--
Benjamin Lewis

Evelyn the dog, having undergone further modification, pondered the
significance of short-person behavior in pedal-depressed panchromatic
resonance and other highly ambient domains... "Arf", she said.

Benjamin Lewis said:

Sandy said:

<[email hidden]>a écrit dans le message de :

Quoted message said:

Dear Sandy,

Can you see why I'm a bit skeptical?

No. Not about me. But the swell of opinion directs lots of doubt in
your direction. For a guy who asks these questions, do you really want
us to believe you have rolled down a 2 mile incline at 54 miles an hour ?
Or was that off a cliff ? Or only imaginary. Frankly, directly, I don't
believe you.

I don't see where he says this, but I don't find it hard to believe at
all. I've reached speeds over 57 MPH coasting down a hill just a little
longer than this of approximately 8% grade. (This may have involved a
tail wind).

I find that very hard to believe..

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

So far, I'm still waiting.

At this point, the only specific claims made in support of
the advantages of clipless pedals are from Booker and Sandy,
who state that they go 30%-50% faster at their ordinary
speeds due to clipless pedals (12 mph with plain pedals,
16-18 mph with clipless).

_ You are putting words in my mouth and I find it quite
offensive. I knew it was a waste of time to try answering
your question, but at least you could have the courtesy to
not misrepresent my statements. What I said was that I
thought your question was pointless and gave an example
to demonstrate this. Since you appear incapable of reading
and have a hobby axe to grind on this issue this is the
last you'll hear from me on this subject except to warn
others from replying to you in the future.

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQl1ooWTWTAjn5N/lAQGIhgP/UDFZvnthdRlOxiwwL3Km7+G75dBquKti
Bb/4IImDsIB8cPcwFbmxyjC0QUvQk9UsEr8WyyoeRYV6FDGyNGI6PQG5R/c9Ihuf
G/Q4lUZtDSmcBkSI+aFv4S20ipIQotsNAEcKlK2gFtd3z1U+x8liZppgj7D1hICZ
UQVfq2m3iJg=
=TfMf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

> Do you think that the efficiency of clipless pedals alone over
> bare pedals will raise a rider's average speed for Sandy's
> non-urgent mile 30% from 12 mph to 16 mph?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Questions... questions... questions...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why don't you try it. I can say for sure that I get a 50% increase
in speed from my house to the store in the downtown where I live.
It is a bike messenger scene with traffic lights at every corner
over a net diagonal course with left and right turns in congested
traffic. With street shoes I can't do many of the dodges and
weaves that I can with my SPD shoes nor can I accelerate worth a
damn.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The way you ask, it sounds as though you don't have a bicycle on
which to assess these things, or at least don't ride it with
aplomb. Do it! and report back... and don't wear out the "?" key
on you KBD.

Quoted message said:

So you feel that there's a 50% increase in speed when you use
clipless pedals in heavy stop-and-go traffic due to acceleration and
cornering?

Quoted message said:

You say that you "can say this for sure"--any actual times comparing
plain pedals on the same bike versus clipless?

Quoted message said:

No offence is intended, but when did you last "do it" with plain
pedals on the same bike and time yourself on a familiar route?

As I said, I jump on the bicycle with street shoes on occasion when
I'm not in a hurry and ride to the store a mile away. The times are
obvious and speeds as well. I don't use a stop but the difference is
striking in missed traffic lights and stalls.

Quoted message said:

You do make more sense that some recent posts from others in that
you're specifying a frequent acceleration from a stop or near stop,
where pulling up might help, and adding considerable dodging and
weaving (drat, sorry, couldn't help that).

Quoted message said:

But do you consider this heavy-traffic stop-and-go riding typical of
your last 200,000 miles? My impression was that most of your riding
is ordinary touring, not playing bicycle messenger to get to the
store.

So? What does that have to do with the subject at hand? You asked
whether I believe that another rider got a 30% increase in speed. I
do. Now what?

[email hidden]

Dear Jobst,

So you "can say for sure" that your time to a store a mile
through heavy traffic away is 50% faster with clipless than
in street shoes, due to the cornering and accelerating
advantages of clipless pedals, not traffic variations.

What are the average speeds and overall times that lead you
to your 50% faster figure? That is, where are we in this
table for a 1-mile ride's time and average speed?

street 50% faster difference
shoes clipless in seconds
min / mph min / mph in heavy traffic

7:30 / 8 mph 5:00 / 12.0 mph 150
6:40 / 9 mph 4:27 / 13.5 mph 133
6:00 / 10 mph 4:00 / 15.0 mph 120
5:27 / 11 mph 3:28 / 16.5 mph 109
5:00 / 12 mph 3:20 / 18.0 mph 100
4:37 / 13 mph 3:05 / 19.5 mph 92
4:17 / 14 mph 2:51 / 21.0 mph 86
4:00 / 15 mph 2:40 / 22.5 mph 80
3:45 / 16 mph 2:30 / 24.0 mph 75
3:09 / 17 mph 2:21 / 24.5 mph 71
3:20 / 18 mph 2:13 / 27.0 mph 67
3:09 / 19 mph 2:06 / 28.5 mph 63
3:00 / 20 mph 2:00 / 30.0 mph 60

Incidentally, how do you deal with the obvious variations in
such short times caused by traffic and signals?

Carl Fogel

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 07:37:39 +0200, "Sandy" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]>a écrit dans le message de :
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dear Sandy,

Can you see why I'm a bit skeptical?

No. Not about me. But the swell of opinion directs lots of doubt in your
direction. For a guy who asks these questions, do you really want us to
believe you have rolled down a 2 mile incline at 54 miles an hour ? Or was
that off a cliff ? Or only imaginary. Frankly, directly, I don't believe
you.

[snip]

Dear Sandy,

My daily route has slightly over 2-mile downhill from about
5100 feet to about 4700. It's nothing spectacular, with a
long flat section in the middle, but I've measured the final
curving drop to the Arkansas River at about 7%.

As I said, the highest speed that I've ever recorded is 54
mph, with a nice (but sadly rare) tailwind--rolling over the
lip of the drop, the road curves east, and there's a
sheltering spur of the bluffs to the west.

That's the maximum speed, obviously, not the average.
Typcially, I pedal up to 34-37 mph on the upper reach of the
descent, tuck in, and coast down to where the road flattens
out. Then I start pedalling again at the beginning of the
third steel railing, where my speed usually drops to 24 mph.
I expect on reasonably calm days to hit 30 mph at the mile
marker sign at the top of the final drop, and to see 39 mph
as my maximum speed at the bottom (the drop is too short to
reach terminal velocity).

Given that I'm about 6'1" and 195 lbs on a 25-lb bicycles at
about 4800 feet on a 7% grade, this calculator predicts a
terminal hands-on-drops velocity without any wind of only
45.7 mph:

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

Since I'm using a tuck noticeably better than just hands on
drops, using the triathlon option might be more accurate.
That raises the prediction to 50.1 mph.

Add a 4 mph tailwind and the calculator predicts 54.1 mph.

Unfortunately, as I mentioned, the final steep drop isn't
nearly long enough to reach terminal velocity--day in, day
out, I see only 39 mph for a moment at the very bottom. So
it takes a good tailwind, much more than 4 mph, for me to
break 50 mph in this naturally sheltered spot.

As for belittling you, my point is that 20 km/h or 12 mph is
an unusually low speed for a bicycle on reasonable flat
ground.

For fun, I stood one pedal and just pushed my touring bike
around a few long blocks with one foot this morning, like a
giant skateboard--no pedalling, clipless or otherwise.

I covered 0.65 miles in 4:03 without much trouble, an
average of 9.8 mph. My dizzying maxium speed was 11.4 mph.

If you can only raise that to 12 mph using your pedals, then
you're either climbing, stopping repeatedly for traffic,
bucking a vicious headwind, cursed with a bicycle that needs
to be replaced, or an extraordinarily slow rider.

My impression was that you're not extraordinarily slow and
don't have a rusty bicycle, but you weren't climbing
anything or facing any winds that you thought worth
mentioning and there wasn't any stopping for traffic--so I'm
baffled by your 12 mph test speed for 4 runs along a 1.5 km
route that seems to be flat, windless, and unobstructed.

If I've misunderstood your test route, please let me know.

Carl Fogel

davek said:

Quoted message said:

With Sandy claiming easily measured 30% speed increases in
mild riding due to clipless pedals, it's a puzzle why such
an advantage can't be measured by numerous other posters.

OK, in those rough terms it's not hard to work out vague measurements,
but I thought you were after something more scientific.

So, how's this for you: I knocked something like five minutes off my
average time for my six mile commute to work when I fitted clipless
pedals - down from around 30 minutes to around 25 minutes. What's that
as an improvement in percentage terms - around 17%? Will that do for
you?

That's on an urban journey, not pushing hard, stopping at traffic
lights, a few upward gradients but no real hills to speak of. Maybe
there are other factors in the improvement that I haven't accounted
for, but if you are telling me that I don't get to work faster since I
fitted clipless pedals, you are just plain wrong.

d.

Dear Dave,

That sounds quite interesting. But I'm still wondering what
the reason would be for your improvement.

If you were riding 6 miles in 30 minutes, that's a 12 mph
average speed.

If you were riding 6 miles in 25 minutes, that a 14.4 mph
speed.

I think that the variation in traffic, lights, wind, and
"not pushing hard" might have more to do with it than any
physical advantage of clipless pedals.

No offence is intended, but do you think that there might
have been some improvement due to expectation and increased
interest when you switched to clipless? Did you change just
your pedals, or start riding a new bicycle?

If not, where I'm puzzled is where all the extra power is
coming from when you're not pushing hard, not sprinting, and
not climbing any real hills. When I look at this calculator

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

for flat ground, defaults, on the drops (maybe not how
you're riding), it predicts that 12 mph requires only 67
watts, while 14.4 mph requires 102 watts.

Again, no offence intended, but these are rather reduced
speeds and power. Even bolt upright on a mountain bike, the
calculator predicts only 119 watts for 14.4 mph.

When I see bicycle speeds on pavement down around the high
school track team's speed for ordinary commutes, I have to
wonder if the riders are spending lots of time at traffic
lights, slowing for cars and pedestrians, or similar things.

At such low speeds, not pushing hard, where are all the
extra watts coming from or being wasted? The pedals? I don't
doubt your sincerity and I don't doubt that your 30 minute
commute can drop to 25 minutes. But traffic interference and
psychology seem more likely to explain things than your
shoes.

I wish that I weren't saying the same thing to so many
people who are trying to give me good evidence.

But when the riding is described as "not pushing hard" or
seems to be governed more by signals and traffic or involves
30-50% speed increases in a mile due to cornering and
acceleration, I have to keep wondering how much is due
pedals and how much is due to the obvious other factors.

I do appreciate your taking the trouble to explain your
experience. If this is still your daily commute, can you jot
some notes for a week and see how much your actual time
varies, including lights and traffic and any other delays?

Carl Fogel

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de :
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

No. Not about me. But the swell of opinion directs lots of doubt in your
direction. For a guy who asks these questions, do you really want us to
believe you have rolled down a 2 mile incline at 54 miles an hour ? Or
was
that off a cliff ? Or only imaginary. Frankly, directly, I don't believe
you.

Quoted message said:

Dear Sandy,

Quoted message said:

Given that I'm about 6'1" and 195 lbs on a 25-lb bicycles at
about 4800 feet on a 7% grade, this calculator predicts a
terminal hands-on-drops velocity without any wind of only
45.7 mph:

Your academic calculations are fine, probably. I won't bother looking. I
simply do not believe you about you.

Quoted message said:

As for belittling you, my point is that 20 km/h or 12 mph is
an unusually low speed for a bicycle on reasonable flat
ground.

No it's not ; it's a measure of the sponginess of sneakers, the leg weight
not unloaded on the upstroke, and the mobility of sneakers. These in
comparison to using riding shoes.

Quoted message said:

For fun, I stood one pedal and just pushed my touring bike
around a few long blocks with one foot this morning, like a
giant skateboard--no pedalling, clipless or otherwise.

Quoted message said:

I covered 0.65 miles in 4:03 without much trouble, an
average of 9.8 mph. My dizzying maxium speed was 11.4 mph.

If you can only raise that to 12 mph using your pedals, then
you're either climbing, stopping repeatedly for traffic,
bucking a vicious headwind, cursed with a bicycle that needs
to be replaced, or an extraordinarily slow rider.

You divert, not handily. I was not in a hurry. I just didn't feel like
walking, as riding is quicker. Not a race. But, the comfort and efficiency
of good shoes with a locked cleat just makes it easier and faster. You got
my data. I am truly tired of your disingenuous pursuit of what is too basic
not to know.

Quoted message said:

My impression was that you're not extraordinarily slow and
don't have a rusty bicycle, but you weren't climbing
anything or facing any winds that you thought worth
mentioning and there wasn't any stopping for traffic--so I'm
baffled by your 12 mph test speed for 4 runs along a 1.5 km
route that seems to be flat, windless, and unobstructed.

If I've misunderstood your test route, please let me know.

You have plainly misunderstood most of everything, and yet you persist.
Well, I think I'll leave you on your own, and you can write to yourself,
back and forth, as long as you like.

I just thought of a question you could so cleverly post in a grade school
forum : "Do you children think it's really brighter outside when the sun is
shining ? Give me some real measurements !!!"

--
Bonne route,

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 18:44:50 +0000 (UTC), Booker C. Bense
<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

So far, I'm still waiting.

At this point, the only specific claims made in support of
the advantages of clipless pedals are from Booker and Sandy,
who state that they go 30%-50% faster at their ordinary
speeds due to clipless pedals (12 mph with plain pedals,
16-18 mph with clipless).

_ You are putting words in my mouth and I find it quite
offensive. I knew it was a waste of time to try answering
your question, but at least you could have the courtesy to
not misrepresent my statements. What I said was that I
thought your question was pointless and gave an example
to demonstrate this. Since you appear incapable of reading
and have a hobby axe to grind on this issue this is the
last you'll hear from me on this subject except to warn
others from replying to you in the future.

_ Booker C. Bense

Dear Booker,

Your post seemed to say that on your cruiser with plain
pedals your speed dropped to 12 mph, while you expect 18 mph
from your clipless bikes.

Feel free to clarify whatever it is that you meant about the
speeds.

Carl Fogel

Benjamin Lewis said:

Jeff Starr said:

Carl, you stated that you have tried clipless and found no benefits.
Many of us are of the belief that the benefits, go with out saying.
You are in the minority here, telling us they have no measurable
benefits[that you are aware of].

That seems reasonable to me -- I haven't seen any measurements either.
I also think these claims of 30%-50% speed increases are exaggerated at
best, although perhaps for some riding conditions they could be true
(e.g. with traffic lights, small changes in acceleration can make large
changes in average speed depending on light timing).

Personally, I don't care if clipless pedals are faster, because I'm not
going back to plain pedals either way, and because maximizing speed is not
my primary goal.

Dear Benjamin,

I've been wondering about the effect of repeated stop-and-go
acceleration differences involving traffic.

Jobst is sure that he goes 50% faster with clipless pedals
on a 1-mile trip to the store with heavy traffic and lights,
partly due to acceleration (pulling up sprinter-style on the
backstroke) and partly due to improved cornering and
handling.

I'm cautiously skeptical of the idea that any reasonable
improvements in acceleration alone over a mile sprinkled
with stop signs (have to stop, no matter what) are going to
add up to a 50% increase in average speed on a bicycle.

I think, however, that you're saying something quite
different that hasn't been raised earlier in this thread.

If I'm following you, your point is that even a slight
change in acceleration might let a rider zoom through yellow
light instead of having to stop and wait motionless for 60
seconds--right?

Carl Fogel

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 23:54:52 +0200, "Sandy" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de :
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

No. Not about me. But the swell of opinion directs lots of doubt in your
direction. For a guy who asks these questions, do you really want us to
believe you have rolled down a 2 mile incline at 54 miles an hour ? Or
was
that off a cliff ? Or only imaginary. Frankly, directly, I don't believe
you.

Quoted message said:

Dear Sandy,

Quoted message said:

Given that I'm about 6'1" and 195 lbs on a 25-lb bicycles at
about 4800 feet on a 7% grade, this calculator predicts a
terminal hands-on-drops velocity without any wind of only
45.7 mph:

Your academic calculations are fine, probably. I won't bother looking. I
simply do not believe you about you.

Quoted message said:

As for belittling you, my point is that 20 km/h or 12 mph is
an unusually low speed for a bicycle on reasonable flat
ground.

No it's not ; it's a measure of the sponginess of sneakers, the leg weight
not unloaded on the upstroke, and the mobility of sneakers. These in
comparison to using riding shoes.

Quoted message said:

For fun, I stood one pedal and just pushed my touring bike
around a few long blocks with one foot this morning, like a
giant skateboard--no pedalling, clipless or otherwise.

Quoted message said:

I covered 0.65 miles in 4:03 without much trouble, an
average of 9.8 mph. My dizzying maxium speed was 11.4 mph.

If you can only raise that to 12 mph using your pedals, then
you're either climbing, stopping repeatedly for traffic,
bucking a vicious headwind, cursed with a bicycle that needs
to be replaced, or an extraordinarily slow rider.

You divert, not handily. I was not in a hurry. I just didn't feel like
walking, as riding is quicker. Not a race. But, the comfort and efficiency
of good shoes with a locked cleat just makes it easier and faster. You got
my data. I am truly tired of your disingenuous pursuit of what is too basic
not to know.

Quoted message said:

My impression was that you're not extraordinarily slow and
don't have a rusty bicycle, but you weren't climbing
anything or facing any winds that you thought worth
mentioning and there wasn't any stopping for traffic--so I'm
baffled by your 12 mph test speed for 4 runs along a 1.5 km
route that seems to be flat, windless, and unobstructed.

If I've misunderstood your test route, please let me know.

You have plainly misunderstood most of everything, and yet you persist.
Well, I think I'll leave you on your own, and you can write to yourself,
back and forth, as long as you like.

I just thought of a question you could so cleverly post in a grade school
forum : "Do you children think it's really brighter outside when the sun is
shining ? Give me some real measurements !!!"

Dear Sandy,

I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical of your well-meant test of
clipless versus plain pedals.

I expect that you ran them in good faith, but it seems
unlikely that the test runs were comparable in effort if you
averaged only 12 mph on reasonably level pavement for a mile
without headwinds, but 16 mph (30% faster) with clipless
when riding without any urgency, as you put it.

It seems more likely that your strong feelings on the matter
would unconsciously affect your efforts and speed. There are
many levels of riding without urgency, and at such low
speeds even a slight variation would render your results
meaningless.

Thanks for your efforts. If you go for a ride, I hope that
you'll feel better.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Lou Holtman said:

Benjamin Lewis said:

Sandy said:

<[email hidden]>a écrit dans le message de :

> Dear Sandy,
>
> Can you see why I'm a bit skeptical?

No. Not about me. But the swell of opinion directs lots of doubt in
your direction. For a guy who asks these questions, do you really want
us to believe you have rolled down a 2 mile incline at 54 miles an hour
? Or was that off a cliff ? Or only imaginary. Frankly, directly, I
don't believe you.

I don't see where he says this, but I don't find it hard to believe at
all. I've reached speeds over 57 MPH coasting down a hill just a little
longer than this of approximately 8% grade. (This may have involved a
tail wind).

I find that very hard to believe..

I assure you that it's true. I was probably even more surprised than you
are when I checked my speedometer at the bottom. If it makes it any easier
to believe, I was going at a decent speed before I started the descent --
but if the hill had been longer this would not have been necessary.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Evelyn the dog, having undergone further modification, pondered the
significance of short-person behavior in pedal-depressed panchromatic
resonance and other highly ambient domains... "Arf", she said.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That seems reasonable to me -- I haven't seen any measurements either.
I also think these claims of 30%-50% speed increases are exaggerated at
best, although perhaps for some riding conditions they could be true
(e.g. with traffic lights, small changes in acceleration can make large
changes in average speed depending on light timing).

different that hasn't been raised earlier in this thread.

If I'm following you, your point is that even a slight change in
acceleration might let a rider zoom through yellow light instead of
having to stop and wait motionless for 60 seconds--right?

Yes. It seems plausible to me, anyway, if the lights are timed in the
right way.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Evelyn the dog, having undergone further modification, pondered the
significance of short-person behavior in pedal-depressed panchromatic
resonance and other highly ambient domains... "Arf", she said.