Time Pedals -- Impact vs. Equipe

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Judibob, Mar 29, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Judibob

    Judibob Guest

    Well, OK, I'm a believer. I posted here a couple of weeks ago about the demise of the Time pedal
    design, and the fact that I have always used Time because of it's low spindle height & nice large
    platform. Well, now, all of my opinion that follows is based on a 1-hour roller ride just now (nice
    28 degrees & snow here today). But, these new Impact pedals are nice. I didn't get any real feedback
    from others out there, so I bought a pair of Northwave Genetix shoes (because their advertised thin
    sole caught my eye) and a pair of Impacts. I after 20 minutes or so making a new set of custom
    orthodics for the new shoes by taping cut-up pieces of an old inner tube on the bottom of the
    insoles (does anybody else do that?) I clipped into the pedals just fine. They feel just like the
    old Times. Still not used to how tiny they look though. They feel the same while pedalling - I just
    left the factory settings for Q & unclipping angle, etc. They worked just fine. I had to check out
    the foot-to-spindle centerline distance. I know my old Carnacs figure, since I drilled a hole in
    them way back when & measured the thickness through the sole to the platform surface. They are
    24.4mm with the second generation Times, and 25.4mm with the first gen Times. I also have some old
    data from a Zinn study and he shows the original Time pedals with Time shoes as being 22.5mm.
    Now, with the advertised 6.8mm sole thickness of the Genetix, along with the scaled thickness of
    the Impact cleat (4.6mm) and the advertised 7.7mm bioposition of the Impact pedals, I come up
    with a foot-to-spindle distance of 19.1mm! Neat! And, I would have to say it felt that way on the
    rollers, as I was not bunched at all, and actually felt a bit more stretched out if anything. So,
    just wanted to share that. I'm a believer, and think Time has done a great job on this design.
    I'll still keep my old Times until they wear out (they never will) but I may buy another set or
    two of the new Impacts as well. Bob
     
    Tags:


  2. Danny Callen

    Danny Callen Guest

    "judibob" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Well, OK, I'm a believer. I posted here a couple of weeks ago about the demise of the Time pedal
    > design, and the fact that I have always used Time because of it's low spindle height & nice large
    > platform. Well, now, all of my opinion that follows is based on a 1-hour roller ride just now
    > (nice 28 degrees & snow here today). But, these new Impact pedals are nice. I didn't get any real
    > feedback
    from
    > others out there, so I bought a pair of Northwave Genetix shoes (because their advertised thin
    > sole caught my eye) and a pair of Impacts. I after
    20
    > minutes or so making a new set of custom orthodics for the new shoes by taping cut-up pieces of an
    > old inner tube on the bottom of the insoles
    (does
    > anybody else do that?) I clipped into the pedals just fine. They feel
    just
    > like the old Times. Still not used to how tiny they look though. They feel the same while
    > pedalling - I just left the factory settings for
    Q
    > & unclipping angle, etc. They worked just fine. I had to check out the foot-to-spindle centerline
    > distance. I know my old Carnacs figure, since I drilled a hole in them way back when
    &
    > measured the thickness through the sole to the platform surface. They are
    > 24.4mm with the second generation Times, and 25.4mm with the first gen Times. I also have some old
    > data from a Zinn study and he shows the original Time pedals with Time shoes as being 22.5mm.
    > Now, with the advertised 6.8mm sole thickness of the Genetix, along with
    the
    > scaled thickness of the Impact cleat (4.6mm) and the advertised 7.7mm bioposition of the Impact
    > pedals, I come up with a foot-to-spindle
    distance
    > of 19.1mm! Neat! And, I would have to say it felt that way on the rollers, as I was not bunched at
    > all, and actually felt a bit more stretched out if anything. So, just wanted to share that. I'm a
    > believer, and think Time has done a great job on this design. I'll still keep my old Times until
    > they wear out (they never will) but I
    may
    > buy another set or two of the new Impacts as well. Bob
    >
    >

    I've had Time Pedals since the late 80's and still race with them. The biggest problem I've had is
    pulling out in sprints. I nearly took down the announcers stand after pulling out in a prime a few
    years ago. I wonder if the "new" design is less succeptible to cleat wear. I've had trouble finding
    the "medal" front cleat as I just can't stay connected using that stupid plastic design. Is the
    cleat design the same? Is it plastic? Is it better than the old design?

    Danny Callen
     
  3. Fe

    Fe Guest

    Hello,

    First to respond to your question: no, the front plate is plastic on the new impacts. I too like the
    steel on the old ones, and have lkept-over steel cleats from years ago when they were the norm.

    Now, as for the impacts themselves! I cannot get the left pedal to work without pulling out my foot
    upon applying a bit of up-pedal pressure. My foot pulls out with the normal pedal action, and this
    is with me in the saddle on a trainer! I don't have a weird pedal action, and I have never pulled
    out of the old time pedasl.

    The right pedal is OK. Does anybody have any idea, before I throw these pedals back to the shop and
    ask for a refund?

    Someone mentioned the release angle, but this is not mentioned on my instrustions. I have the tit.
    mag model. Can someone exaplain if this is adjustable with this model and could this be my
    explanation? If so, how do I adjust the release angle?

    /Francis.

    "Danny Callen" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "judibob" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > > Well, OK, I'm a believer. I posted here a couple of weeks ago about the demise of the Time pedal
    > > design, and the fact that I have always used Time because of it's low spindle height & nice
    > > large platform. Well, now, all of my opinion that follows is based on a 1-hour roller
    ride
    > > just now (nice 28 degrees & snow here today). But, these new Impact pedals are nice. I didn't
    > > get any real feedback
    > from
    > > others out there, so I bought a pair of Northwave Genetix shoes (because their advertised thin
    > > sole caught my eye) and a pair of Impacts. I
    after
    > 20
    > > minutes or so making a new set of custom orthodics for the new shoes by taping cut-up pieces of
    > > an old inner tube on the bottom of the insoles
    > (does
    > > anybody else do that?) I clipped into the pedals just fine. They feel
    > just
    > > like the old Times. Still not used to how tiny they look though. They feel the same while
    > > pedalling - I just left the factory settings
    for
    > Q
    > > & unclipping angle, etc. They worked just fine. I had to check out the foot-to-spindle
    > > centerline distance. I know my old Carnacs figure, since I drilled a hole in them way back
    when
    > &
    > > measured the thickness through the sole to the platform surface. They
    are
    > > 24.4mm with the second generation Times, and 25.4mm with the first gen Times. I also have some
    > > old data from a Zinn study and he shows the original
    Time
    > > pedals with Time shoes as being 22.5mm. Now, with the advertised 6.8mm sole thickness of the
    > > Genetix, along with
    > the
    > > scaled thickness of the Impact cleat (4.6mm) and the advertised 7.7mm bioposition of the Impact
    > > pedals, I come up with a foot-to-spindle
    > distance
    > > of 19.1mm! Neat! And, I would have to say it felt that way on the rollers, as I was not bunched
    > > at all, and actually felt a bit more stretched out if anything. So, just wanted to share that.
    > > I'm a believer, and think Time has done a great job on this design. I'll still keep my old Times
    > > until they wear out (they never will) but I
    > may
    > > buy another set or two of the new Impacts as well. Bob
    > >
    > >
    >
    > I've had Time Pedals since the late 80's and still race with them. The biggest problem I've had is
    > pulling out in sprints. I nearly took down the announcers stand after pulling out in a prime a few
    > years ago. I wonder if the "new" design is less succeptible to cleat wear. I've had trouble
    finding
    > the "medal" front cleat as I just can't stay connected using that stupid plastic design. Is the
    > cleat design the same? Is it plastic? Is it better than the old design?
    >
    > Danny Callen
     
  4. Judibob

    Judibob Guest

    Actually, the Time pedals, whether new or old, are held to the cleat by the rear brass piece. The
    front piece, whether the original Aluminum (not steel as in the previous post) or the later plastic,
    is only a guide for clipping
    in. I have stocked up on the aluminum front pieces as well, simply because they don't wear out as
    fast. If you have a problem pulling out, check your rear (brass) cleat piece. On badly worn
    cleats, you will notice the place where the steel spring rides against it, and over time
    (sorry) will wear into the brass. On the back of the cleat (the original now, not Impact) you
    will get a nice cylinder worn in - right where it contacts the spring. As this gets deeper, the
    spring load goes down since the spring is not preloaded as far, and your hold-in force will be
    less. Check your brass cleat, in the back, for this wear point. You may need to replace that
    one. Also check the front tooth. The second generation cleats have a smaller tooth, but release
    both ways. The original cleat had a release only to the outside, but also had a larger
    interface with the pedal through a larger lip, which seems to result in better hold-in. As I
    have just gotten a set of Impacts, I don't have any experience with the wear characteristics of
    this design yet. The new Imapct cleat uses the same concept as the Equipe. The rear brass piece
    is still brass, but the locking and camming sides are reversed from the original design; and is
    quite smaller. They also use a square wire spring instead of the original round wire, and
    results in higher spring force density -- equal spring force can be packaged in a smaller
    volume. The release angles can be set to 13 or 17 degrees, and is adjustable by switching the
    cleats left to right. Notice the 13 & 17 notations on the bottom. The number you put to the
    outside of the shoe is the one that corresponds to the release angle. Also, you have the hex
    drive in the side that adjusts the preload on the helical torsion spring on the rear cleat
    piece. Adjusting this up or down corresponds to an adjustment in the clamping force of the
    spring. As a suggestion to the people coming out of the pedals by mistake, maybe try playing
    with either of these two variables. It may help. Also, the Q setting can be changed by playing
    with the small steel piece inside the pedal where the brass cleat goes in. That may change the
    way the pedals perform for you as well. Good luck! Bob
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...