How does ageing affects your purchasing prospects?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Venod

Eh up
Location
Yorkshire
This is CycleChat for goodness sake: why are you bringing motor vehicles into it?

I thought this was a simple way of explaining things, scientific it isn't.

A rider averaging 150w over 100km on the flat (and everything else kept the same) on a 9kg bike would complete 14 seconds faster than a rider on a 10kg bike (210:57 v 211:11). On that analysis is (bike) weight "[one of the two] most important factors"? I suggest not.
If one sets the amount of climb to 1% (rather flat for Devon), then the difference is greater: the rider on a 9kg bike takes nearly a minute shorter (shock, horror - the bike is sooo much 'easier' to ride - not).

This is a more scientific aproach and proves my point that a lighter bike is easier to ride than an heavier one, although I agree its not a signifcant difference. and not the only factor to consider.
 
Last edited:

Twilkes

Guru
Depends how you quantify 'significant' I guess. It might be enough to make you feel you are working 'slightly' harder to achieve the same road speed, which is something you alluded to earlier.

Mudguards often decrease the effect of air resistance: https://road.cc/content/tech-news/2...udy-shows-optimum-drag-reduction-achieved?amp

https://www.renehersecycles.com/myth-3-fenders-slow-you-down/
 
Last edited:

Sharky

Guru
Location
Kent
I thought this was a simple way of explaining things, scientific it isn't.



This is a more sientific aproach and proves my point that a lighter bike is easier to ride than an heavier one, although I agree its not a signifcant difference. and not the only factor to consider.
I've also heard a theory that a lighter bike is easier to fall off, as the centre of gravity of the bike/rider is higher.
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
Mudguards usually make excellent parachutes - it probably explains why you have to work harder on that bike to stay with the group.
While we're getting all scientific I'd like to note that the parachute effect of mudguards is the cube root of f-all.

(But they are lethal, we already know that)
 

derrick

The Glue that binds us together.
I am waiting for the right colour scheme on a Cipollini.^_^
Not had a new bike for a couple of years.
 

Nebulous

Guru
Location
Aberdeen
I’ve been fairly parsimonious for much of my life. Always looking for a deal and consequently I think we’ve done a lot with the money I’ve made. On taking up cycling almost 10 years ago at 48 I bought an Allez elite and considered that a self-indulgent purchase. An accident, which lead to some compensation meant I moved onto a Tarmac comp in 2015. To be honest, while it’s probably more bike than I need, it’s never quite excited me in the way the Allez did. It spends much of its time on a turbo.

Taking an interest in audax led to a Genesis Equilibrium. It is a tool for the job, an endurance bike, and has needed a lot of fiddling. A new rear mech for a bigger cassette, guards, a new saddle, new wheels with a hub dynamo and better tyres. It’s getting there and practically probably not much slower than the Tarmac. Any losses in speed are made up for in improved comfort.

With children self-sufficient and planning a wind-down to a pension we have more cash than before but that doesn’t mean I want to spend it. I don’t see a new bike anytime soon. I have found myself really impressed when I have relaxed the purse strings however. Decent bibs made a big difference, as did a £200 gore jacket. Everyone will have different ideas, funding levels, other commitments and need to make their own choices. I have found far more improvement than I expected moving from Lidl / Aldi gear to expensive stuff, but I’ve taken a long time to reach that conclusion.
 

Twilkes

Guru
When you say 'often' - you mean a single study (unless there are others?), which doesn't even name the mudguards they tested?

I mean often as in amongst the population of people who use mudguards - the other link shows the type of mudguards tested in a wind tunnel and explains why a mudguard that angles down over the top of the wheel can reduce drag, even if the rest of the mudguard can balance that out, and why motorbike racers have them when they're totally unnecessary for guarding against mud.

What is obvious according to common sense is often debunked by science, this is one of those cases.
 

Stompier

Senior Member
What is obvious according to common sense is often debunked by science, this is one of those cases.

I'm a big fan of science. But in all seriousness, what you have posted there in its current form does not 'debunk' anything in particular.
 

Twilkes

Guru
I'm a big fan of science. But in all seriousness, what you have posted there in its current form does not 'debunk' anything in particular.

It debunks your parachute comment, and implies that the majority of mudguards will be net zero or reduced drag.

But I'm not going to argue the toss over things like this in 2020, I spent too much time doing that on forums in 2019 and I shudder to think how much better my garden would have looked if I hadn't. :smile:
 

Stompier

Senior Member
It debunks your parachute comment, and implies that the majority of mudguards will be net zero or reduced drag.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but it doesn't 'debunk' anything. And the study's conclusions imply nothing of the sort. Unless I've missed some of the analysis - in which case, can you highlight the appropriate section that I've missed. The study's findings are clear enough, but let's not extrapolate something that isn't in there.
 
Top Bottom