Re: A couple of questions about cycling.

[PC]

On 3 Aug 2003 19:13:00 +0950, Cheese <[email protected]>
wrote:

>1. Why do pro cyclists shave their legs?

This question has been asked a million times, search groups.google.com
and you'll find a million different answers.. In my opinion, it's
somewhere between "the clean look is basically part of the uniform"
and "it helps keep crash damage (cuts, scrapes etc) from getting too
nasty"..

Oh, and I think you'll find that serious cyclists would wax, not
shave..

>2. Do you reccomend any good road bikes for under $1000AU

Can't help there, sorry.. I ride a hybrid mtb/commuter..

>3. My average speed is about 25km/h, how can I get it up to 40?

In what circumstances? Back street riding? Main road riding? Race
track riding? Rail Trails? Hilly? Flat?

I average 23km/h on mostly flat stop/start back street riding, and
it's gradually working up after 18 months of perseverence and
switching from 46/36/28 gears to 52/39 gears..

>4. What clothing/accessories do you reccomend using when cycling??

Whatever you find most comfortable.. Since moving a few weeks ago, my
home-work commute now is fairly short (5.5km), so I don't need to ride
in Lycra, but I do, because that's what I always used to wear, and I
still have to wear something.. Besides, almost anything else makes my
legs tired unnecessarily.. My bike also has a 12" wide touring saddle
for extra comfort, panniers for a change of clothes and wet weather
gear, a $5 portable FM radio taped to the handlebars, shimano cleats,
multiple LED flashers for extra night visibility and a fairly basic
cycle computer for speed/distance/avg's


PC, 3056

 

[PC]

On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 18:41:42 +1000, Andrew Swan
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> My bike also has a 12" wide touring saddle for extra comfort
>
>Seriously? That's not a saddle, that's an armchair!

Yep, it narrows to about 2" at the front.. Velo market it under the
Webspring brand, and there's at least one other brand on the market
that's similar.. I buy em at Brunswick Street Cycles in Fitzroy..

Unfortunately, Velo saddles don't seem to agree with me, or maybe
they're just shoddy, so I have to replace em every 9-12 months or so..
They're $49 each, but I pay it anyway.. It seems a small price to pay
for comfort..


PC

 

[Suzy Jackson]

"PC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> >> My bike also has a 12" wide touring saddle for extra comfort
> >
> >Seriously? That's not a saddle, that's an armchair!
>
> Yep, it narrows to about 2" at the front.. Velo market it under the
> Webspring brand, and there's at least one other brand on the market
> that's similar.. I buy em at Brunswick Street Cycles in Fitzroy..

This fascination casual cyclists have with wide saddles never ceases to
amaze me. Just because a saddle has heaps of padding doesn't mean it's
going to be comfortable. You have to remember that cycling (unless it's a
motorbike you're riding) involves rotating pedals at some point, which in
turn involves moving your thighs back and forth.

Now like most people, I only have a gap of an inch or so between my thighs,
so if I try to pedal on anything wider, they rub, and I get chaffing, which
hurts. That's the real reason why anyone who spends any decent time on the
bike ends up using nice narrow saddles. It's not some masochistic thing,
but just the opposite. The more padding you stuff in between your legs, the
worse you're going to make it, so better to go with a nice narrow saddle
that's got a little bit of spring in it, and even then be sure to wear
proper cycling shorts to protect your thighs from rubbing.

Regards,

Suzy

 

[PC]

On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 09:44:29 GMT, "Suzy Jackson" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>> Yep, it narrows to about 2" at the front.. Velo market it under the
>> Webspring brand, and there's at least one other brand on the market
>> that's similar.. I buy em at Brunswick Street Cycles in Fitzroy..
>
>This fascination casual cyclists have with wide saddles never ceases to
>amaze me. Just because a saddle has heaps of padding doesn't mean it's
>going to be comfortable.

It also never ceases to amaze me how many people think that everyone
has the same size butt, or is the same weight, or the same height..
This applies especially to bike equipment designers and retailers,
either not making/selling multiple size ranges or not putting them
through proper testing to make a quality product

Anyway, the bones in my posterior seem to be wider set than most, and
need a wider seat, and my legs are set apart, so the wide-ish front
doesn't bother me at all no matter how long I ride.. Even if that
wasn't the case, the sheer thought of my entire upper body weight
sitting on the six square inches of the average saddle frightens me..
Surface area should count for something..


PC

 

[Theo Bekkers]

"PC" wrote

> Even if that
> wasn't the case, the sheer thought of my entire upper body weight
> sitting on the six square inches of the average saddle frightens
me..
> Surface area should count for something..

You must be scared to death when you're walking and place all of your
weight on the ball of one foot then. Much smaller area than the
average saddle.

Theo

 

[PC]

On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 10:50:28 GMT, "Theo Bekkers" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>> Even if that
>> wasn't the case, the sheer thought of my entire upper body weight
>> sitting on the six square inches of the average saddle frightens
>> me..Surface area should count for something..

>You must be scared to death when you're walking and place all of your
>weight on the ball of one foot then. Much smaller area than the
>average saddle.

My feet are designed to take my weight.. As my posterior bones are
set too wide for the average saddle, the weight would fall directly
onto muscle and tissue in the area, and that is quite painful..


PC

 

[Gary K]

I'm not disagreeing with you PC, its horses for courses. I've seen those
foot wide saddles and depending on the type of riding you do and the
position you have on the bike, you probabely are very happy with it.

Others, on racing bikes (& racing mtb's), have a low position where only
approx. 1/3 of their weight is on the saddle (and 1/3 on each of
handlebars and pedals). To have some kind of pedalling effeciency, you
don't want to be sitting on your glutes (bum muscles), because you
need'em for pedalling.
Thats why regular (narrow) saddles are best.

Wide saddles are ok for the sit up and beg riding position, you very
nearly are 100% weighted on the saddle. But your glutes are doing double
workload, they are flexing against the entire weight of your torso and
helping pushing the pedals. Tiring!



PC <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 09:44:29 GMT, "Suzy Jackson" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >> Yep, it narrows to about 2" at the front.. Velo market it under the
> >> Webspring brand, and there's at least one other brand on the market
> >> that's similar.. I buy em at Brunswick Street Cycles in Fitzroy..
> >
> >This fascination casual cyclists have with wide saddles never ceases to
> >amaze me. Just because a saddle has heaps of padding doesn't mean it's
> >going to be comfortable.
>
> It also never ceases to amaze me how many people think that everyone
> has the same size butt, or is the same weight, or the same height..
> This applies especially to bike equipment designers and retailers,
> either not making/selling multiple size ranges or not putting them
> through proper testing to make a quality product
>
> Anyway, the bones in my posterior seem to be wider set than most, and
> need a wider seat, and my legs are set apart, so the wide-ish front
> doesn't bother me at all no matter how long I ride.. Even if that
> wasn't the case, the sheer thought of my entire upper body weight
> sitting on the six square inches of the average saddle frightens me..
> Surface area should count for something..
>
>
> PC