Could they or Couldn't they ?????? perform.

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Hi to you all out there. I have been watching late-night re-runs of both the 2014 Tour de France and 2014 Giro d'Italia and I really do wonder whether some of the Big Names riding the Mega Expensive and Super Light Pro machines could get the same results on some of the 'Old School' machines that were equipped with 6 & 7spd blocks and double down-tube levers or handlebar change levers.
Yes,we all know that the greats of old tackled Mont Ventoux and some of the knee wobbling climbs of the day.
Mont Zoncolon was first introduced in the Giro d'Italia in 2003. I wonder how the pros of today would cope with some of the bikes of the 60's,70's and early 80's on this bump in the landscape instead of the machines that were being ridden?
 

raindog

er.....
Location
France
your bike's out of focus
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
They would do a lot better on crap old bikes than we would on wonderful new ones, but they would do a lot better on the new bikes than they did on the old ones..

(They used to swap bikes for major climbs and descents but now they ride the same bikes all the time, and even have to add weight to them to make them race legal.)
 

steveindenmark

Legendary Member
I am sure a lot of the pros have Classic racing bikes.

There is a lot more to this than just the bikes though. Modern day riders are just as tough as the old timers plus there is more knowledge about tactics, training, nutrition etc.

But there will never be a definitive answer to your question.
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
Having better brakes and a wider range of gears with smaller steps between them is going to help, and increased frame stiffness might also help. (I certainly prefer to ride stiff bikes but couldn't swear that they are faster.)
 

oldroadman

Veteran
Location
Ubique
You have to take a more holistic approach. In days of old a 8-9kg bike was considered reasonably light, but even the there were a few that got below 8kg - even with steel frames. Knew a lot, those people at Reynolds and Columbus. There were builders who used techniques familiar today that were advanced, lugless frames fully welded, and alos aluminium frames (Alan being a good example). Generally almost everyone was on the same level playing field. Down tube levers and handlebar end controls weighed little more than integrated levers do today, in fact brake levers were probably lighter. Seven speed blocks (screw on, none of your new-fangled cassettes!) were even then being made lighter, but a freewheel body in steel was a hefty lump, and all bikes were tail heavy, or at least more so than today. Gearing was changed stage by stage, 42x25, 39x24 were common bottom end ratios, although for really steep climbs up to 28 sprockets could be fitted. it just spaced out the gearing, so you might end up with 53x13 to 39 (or a 38 if the mechanic had good contacts at a manufacturer)x28, It got over most things. There were still some 20%+ bits used even then.
So overall, the answer is that kit has got a bit lighter, ratios are closer spaced and go as low as 34x29 (or even 30) as this lets riders spin better, which reflects the technique of faster pedalling versus a bit of brute force. Some riders still use bigger gears today. The weight thing overall is more to do with body weight so the overall package is light, then we have to consider bottles (a couple of full 500ml. ones add a whole kg to weight). Riders have the same spectrum of ability now as always was, and a super light bike (minimum today 6.8kg, but I bet that limit will be reduced) still won't turn a donkey into a race horse.
A couple of bits of information I picked up from reading and nattering the other day to a mate who is now an official:
The heaviest bike at ToB this year was a TT special (for the last but one stage in London) with disk wheel which weighed in at a whole 9.3kg.
The bike used by Matt Clinton at hill climb champs (run by CTT who don't care about UCI rules) was pared down to 5.2kg. Which might make anyone think that UCI limit might be safe at 6.2kg or a bit less without having bikes break all over the place.

I wouldn't want to ride a 5.2kg bike over the pave or any poorly surfaced road though!:cursing::wacko:
 

Hont

Guru
Location
Bromsgrove
There was an article in one of the cycling mags a year or two ago, which had some ex-pros compare old (1980s) and modern bikes. IIRC the biggest difference was stability during the descents - the new ones feeling much more secure at speed.
 

oldroadman

Veteran
Location
Ubique
There was an article in one of the cycling mags a year or two ago, which had some ex-pros compare old (1980s) and modern bikes. IIRC the biggest difference was stability during the descents - the new ones feeling much more secure at speed.
Go back a little earlier, and braking power was a bit of an issue at times....never mind stability, getting 'em round the corners if you could slow up enough was, er, interesting.
 
Top Bottom