"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - Speedplay propaganda

It's bad enough the nonsense (in my personal opinion) Speedplay puts out about weight, contact area, etc. Sure, most companies overhype/mislead/lie with their marketing, but I find this offensive:

"Is the weight of a pedal system important?"

"Yes. All pedal system weight, like wheel weight, is rotating weight. It is twice as important to reduce the weight of rotating parts on a bicycle than it is to reduce the weight of non-rotating parts. An old bicycle saying says it all: "A pound off the wheels is worth two off the frame." The same can be said about pedals."

I get really irritated when companies treat us like children (much the way the current Bush administration does, but that's a whole other thread). I'm done venting, now.

Caveat: I understand that some people have Speedplay's and love them. I used to have a pair, but have switched to Ultegra's. I really liked the feel of the Speedplay's and I wish I could ride them -- they just didn't work out for me.

so you tried them, didn't care for them, and now everything about the company is pure, concentrated evil?

go away troll.

so you tried them, didn't care for them, and now everything about the company is pure, concentrated evil?

go away troll.


I agree. Go away. You tired them, and "they didn't work out" for you so now you think the physics of rotational mass vs. stationary mass that the company talks about is wrong. Go read a book and grow up.

I do think that rotational weight on the pedals is somehow different from rotational weight on the wheels. First, the accelerations/decelerations at the wheel are huge compared to changes in pedal cadence, and with each pedal stroke the weight of the pedal going down helps you the same amount as the weight of the opposite pedal coming up hurts you. I'd have to guess that if one of the engineers extraordinaire on the forum did the math it would be a pretty negligible benefit.

Say what you will about trolling, but taking "an old bicycle saying" about WHEELS and extrapolating it to PEDALS is pretty shaky at best.

Any takers in the engineering world to shed some light?

DrPete

I do think that rotational weight on the pedals is somehow different from rotational weight on the wheels. First, the accelerations/decelerations at the wheel are huge compared to changes in pedal cadence, and with each pedal stroke the weight of the pedal going down helps you the same amount as the weight of the opposite pedal coming up hurts you. I'd have to guess that if one of the engineers extraordinaire on the forum did the math it would be a pretty negligible benefit.

Say what you will about trolling, but taking "an old bicycle saying" about WHEELS and extrapolating it to PEDALS is pretty shaky at best.

Any takers in the engineering world to shed some light?

DrPete

Just as with wheels, the only time the different between weight and "rotational weight" (mass moment of inertia) is going to be during accelerations. Pedals will have a smaller radius of gyration and smaller mass than the wheels, thus making any change much smaller than a similar percent change in the wheelset, but I would think that, say, in a crit where you have to stop pedaling each time you go around a corner, a decrease is pedal weight would become noticable.

-Will Humber
Ph.D. Candidate in Aerospace Engineering
Pennsylvania State University

I agree. Go away. You tired them, and "they didn't work out" for you so now you think the physics of rotational mass vs. stationary mass that the company talks about is wrong. Go read a book and grow up.

Wow, are you two a couple of pieces of work. Where did I call them "pure evil"? And "Grow up"? Good one!

The fact of the matter is, even _if_ you accept that wheel weight counts twice as bike weight (which it doesn't, but I'd hate to bore you with the details), then pedals can't possibly count twice as well, as they are rotating (revolving, really -- I read that in a book once) at a much slower rate.

But the point isn't to debate the physics -- I figured it was obvious (although apparently I was wrong) -- but with the marketing rubbish. They know it's wrong, yet they throw it out there to fool the uneducated (not that I'm pointing finger, now). Same with the 'contact area' nonsense.

Just as with wheels, the only time the different between weight and "rotational weight" (mass moment of inertia) is going to be during accelerations. Pedals will have a smaller radius of gyration and smaller mass than the wheels, thus making any change much smaller than a similar percent change in the wheelset, but I would think that, say, in a crit where you have to stop pedaling each time you go around a corner, a decrease is pedal weight would become noticable.

-Will Humber
Ph.D. Candidate in Aerospace Engineering
Pennsylvania State University

Fraction of a watt, at best.

AE at Penn State, huh? You wouldn't be able to help me out with an implicit scheme for flux splitting of incompressible flows, would you? Man, it's making my brain hurt.

Wow, are you two a couple of pieces of work. Where did I call them "pure evil"? And "Grow up"? Good one!

The fact of the matter is, even _if_ you accept that wheel weight counts twice as bike weight (which it doesn't, but I'd hate to bore you with the details), then pedals can't possibly count twice as well, as they are rotating (revolving, really -- I read that in a book once) at a much slower rate.

But the point isn't to debate the physics -- I figured it was obvious (although apparently I was wrong) -- but with the marketing rubbish. They know it's wrong, yet they throw it out there to fool the uneducated (not that I'm pointing finger, now). Same with the 'contact area' nonsense.

Please bore us with the details. Your point seemed to be to refute Speedplay's marketing, so go for it.

They may be right about rotational weight on pedals, but the differences in pedal weight is usually only 10, 20 or 30 grams. I agree that it may be just a little difference, but it's all about shaving weight and effort where you can.

It's bad enough the nonsense (in my personal opinion) Speedplay puts out about weight, contact area, etc. Sure, most companies overhype/mislead/lie with their marketing, but I find this offensive:

"Is the weight of a pedal system important?"

"Yes. All pedal system weight, like wheel weight, is rotating weight. It is twice as important to reduce the weight of rotating parts on a bicycle than it is to reduce the weight of non-rotating parts. An old bicycle saying says it all: "A pound off the wheels is worth two off the frame." The same can be said about pedals."

I get really irritated when companies treat us like children (much the way the current Bush administration does, but that's a whole other thread). I'm done venting, now.

Caveat: I understand that some people have Speedplay's and love them. I used to have a pair, but have switched to Ultegra's. I really liked the feel of the Speedplay's and I wish I could ride them -- they just didn't work out for me.

Gee, that is important stuff!! Let's start a crusade. You must have an idyllic life if this disturbs you so much. Oh, did I mention that I love my three sets of Speedplay pedals. Having said that, they should not be allowed to get away with such an affront to our alleged intellegence! :D

my speedplay haiku

small and light for sure...
but how much do the cleats weigh?
a-ha! what a scam.

*note: i'm not on anyone's side in this, so don't take it that way.

my speedplay haiku

small and light for sure...
but how much do the cleats weigh?
a-ha! what a scam.

*note: i'm not on anyone's side in this, so don't take it that way.

Hehe... right on. The total system weight of my old X5's is actually MORE than a pair of Keo carbons... That's not why I went to the Looks, but it is a little "creative measurement" by the folks at Speedplay... and if you buy the jive quoted above from their website, their pedals look worse than a lot of the competition!

But whatever. Every company hypes their product in whatever way they can. Ultimately it's up to an educated consumer to know the difference, and choose the product that works for them.

DrPete

Please bore us with the details. Your point seemed to be to refute Speedplay's marketing, so go for it.

They may be right about rotational weight on pedals, but the differences in pedal weight is usually only 10, 20 or 30 grams. I agree that it may be just a little difference, but it's all about shaving weight and effort where you can.

Search my user name and look for posts about rotational mass.

Because, really, what I meant is I don't want to bore myself with the details.

Gee, that is important stuff!! Let's start a crusade. You must have an idyllic life if this disturbs you so much. Oh, did I mention that I love my three sets of Speedplay pedals. Having said that, they should not be allowed to get away with such an affront to our alleged intellegence! :D

I was thinking a letter writing campaign followed up with a boycott and protests at major cycling events. We could probably get organized by the Vuelta. Maybe you could bring your three sets (Wow! You stud!) and we could burn them or something.


Our slogan could be "FIGHT THE AXLE OF EVIL!"


Anyway, sorry to have wasted your time on the internet with something so...trivial. Next up: gcl8a takes on Microsoft!

Which reminds me:

I was reading an article about elliptical chainrings. Shimano (remember the colossal failure of Biopace?) poo-poo'ed the idea with the notion that the legs are naturally most efficient when they move at constant speed. For bonus points, can you tell me why this is a load of crap? Anyone?

OK, I'm off to go lie by the stream, eat fresh picked raspberries and read poetry to my wife. What a life!

Anyway, sorry to have wasted your time on the internet with something so...trivial. Next up: gcl8a takes on Microsoft!



OK, I'm off to go lie by the stream, eat fresh picked raspberries and read poetry to my wife. What a life!

Your apology is accepted, however leave Microsoft alone - my stock is struggling enough.

Okay, I'll send her home immediately!!

-Will Humber
Ph.D. Candidate in Aerospace Engineering
Pennsylvania State University

I wish you the best with your career after getting your Ph.D. My dad just retired from 20 years of work on the space shuttle's boosters. I'm glad he was able to see a successful shuttle mission right after his retirement.

I think you can get good performance out of Speedplay or all the Look style pedals, but as dog hair and DrPete mentioned, look at the weight of the pedals and the cleats. Personally, I just don't like having all that Speedplay hardware on my shoes vs. the relatively simple cleats of my Shimanos.

Your apology is accepted, however leave Microsoft alone - my stock is struggling enough.

I unloaded all my long-term positions in MSFT a few months ago (I should have done it a few years ago), but MSFT is still killing my index funds.

Personally, I just don't like having all that Speedplay hardware on my shoes vs. the relatively simple cleats of my Shimanos.

But you get serious poseur points. Titanium, carbon, full Disco kit. None of them come close to coffee shop covers.

Hehe... right on. The total system weight of my old X5's is actually MORE than a pair of Keo carbons... That's not why I went to the Looks, but it is a little "creative measurement" by the folks at Speedplay... and if you buy the jive quoted above from their website, their pedals look worse than a lot of the competition!

But whatever. Every company hypes their product in whatever way they can. Ultimately it's up to an educated consumer to know the difference, and choose the product that works for them.
DrPete

X5's are not in the same level as Keo Carbons. I'm not sure, but I bet X/1's would be a lot closer.

Plus, more pedal clearance!

I'm a crit racer, that one extra pedal stroke out of the corner is important to me. But really my knees suck and even with a good stroke any non-free float pedal bothers them.

X5's are not in the same level as Keo Carbons. I'm not sure, but I bet X/1's would be a lot closer.

Plus, more pedal clearance!

I'm a crit racer, that one extra pedal stroke out of the corner is important to me. But really my knees suck and even with a good stroke any non-free float pedal bothers them.

Hehe... I'm a big boy so the X1's wouldn't work for me... But you're right. Either way, I like the Looks, and for whatever reason I feel like I get a much better stroke sprinting out of the corner (and in the straights) with the Keos, and the difference in cornering clearance hasn't caused me any road rash yet. Like I said, whatever works.

I'm sure if Look were the (relatively) new kid on the block they'd have kooky propaganda too.

DrPete

Hehe... I'm a big boy so the X1's wouldn't work for me... But you're right. Either way, I like the Looks, and for whatever reason I feel like I get a much better stroke sprinting out of the corner (and in the straights) with the Keos, and the difference in cornering clearance hasn't caused me any road rash yet. Like I said, whatever works.

I'm sure if Look were the (relatively) new kid on the block they'd have kooky propaganda too.

DrPete

So far nobody is explaining why the Speedplays didn't work for them. They have worked for me for over ten years. And since Speedplay has been around for well over a decade (my guess is closer to two at this point) they're not exactly a 'new' company. My guess is their hype is just like all other company product hype - typical.

By the way, everybody I know who rides Speedplays sort of swears by them. I do. There's plenty of them in the local peloton.

with each pedal stroke the weight of the pedal going down helps you the same amount as the weight of the opposite pedal coming up hurts you.

Congrats, you've discovered perpetual motion.

Come on man, didn't you take ONE physics class your entire time in school?

So far nobody is explaining why the Speedplays didn't work for them. They have worked for me for over ten years. And since Speedplay has been around for well over a decade (my guess is closer to two at this point) they're not exactly a 'new' company. My guess is their hype is just like all other company product hype - typical.

By the way, everybody I know who rides Speedplays sort of swears by them. I do. There's plenty of them in the local peloton.

I'm guessing X1's wouldn't "work for him" cause he weighs too much. The Ti spindles probably have a weight limit. Not sure what it is, but at 165-170 at the most I'm sure I'm within it. I'm also on older X/1's that to my knowledge didn't have a weight limit.

Congrats, you've discovered perpetual motion.

Come on man, didn't you take ONE physics class your entire time in school?
Damn that friction, damn it to hell! :D

For rotating parts, it's all about Moment of Inertia.

I = mr2. (r = radius)

Therefore, it's negligible in pedals (super tiny radius and mass) below 1000 RPM.
Also pretty negligible in cranks (very small radius and mass)



Towlie
Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering
UT Austin - 1997

my speedplay haiku

small and light for sure...
but how much do the cleats weigh?
a-ha! what a scam.

*note: i'm not on anyone's side in this, so don't take it that way.
:roflmao:

dog hair creation
science and poetry one
point made in haiku

:roflmao:

dog hair creation
science and poetry one
point made in haiku

it started one day
when climbing very big hills
just something i do

For rotating parts, it's all about Moment of Inertia.

I = mr2. (r = radius)

Therefore, it's negligible in pedals (super tiny radius and mass) below 1000 RPM.
Also pretty negligible in cranks (very small radius and mass)

Towlie
Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering
UT Austin - 1997

The pedal (and cleat) is essentailly a fixed mass on the crank at the farthest point from the axle (creating the most inertia of any part of the crank/BB assembly). The pedal itself doesn't rotate at all, but stays in a (more or less) fixed position on the riders foot. Unless I'm missing something here.

I'd be interested in your calculation of the watts needed to power an additional 1/4 pound (113g) at 100 RPM over, say, a 4 hour period (24,000 rotations) on a 175mm crank arm radius. My guess is the number won't be huge, but you might want those watts it back if it's an uphill race finish.

Remember, you're dealing with a tiny power supply (in typical mechanical engineering numbers), we'll say 0.25 hp, that decreases with load over time. Or do Floyd at 0.42 hp.

Vinokurtov
High School Grad from a lousy public school system.

Damn that friction, damn it to hell! :D

And gravity. Damn that gravity! If it wasn't for gravity I'd be enjoying pizza, beer, and hot wings during the TDF instead of salad and water. :mad:

So far nobody is explaining why the Speedplays didn't work for them. They have worked for me for over ten years. And since Speedplay has been around for well over a decade (my guess is closer to two at this point) they're not exactly a 'new' company. My guess is their hype is just like all other company product hype - typical.

By the way, everybody I know who rides Speedplays sort of swears by them. I do. There's plenty of them in the local peloton.

It seems Speedplays are "love 'em or hate 'em". Half the world use them to alleviate knee pain, the other half blames their knee pain on them (OK, it's probably _way_ more the former than the latter). I started getting knee pain when I used them, but I don't think it was because of the float (although it may have allowed me bad mechanics). I have wide feet, and I always felt like my foot was 'hanging' over the side, plus I couldn't get the cleat far enough back to get the balls of my feet positioned well with regards to the spindle. I really liked the feel of the pedals (including the float), but they just didn't fit me.

I honestly have no problem with Speedplay; I just think their marketing strategy shouldn't be to come up with bogus responsed to the competitor's claims but more like "These pedals are sweet. Here, try a pair." Or instead of bogus explanations of pedal/cleat area, just make the pedal diameter 1/4" bigger and I'll be able to ride them again.

Congrats, you've discovered perpetual motion.

Come on man, didn't you take ONE physics class your entire time in school?

I know there's more to it than that---that's why I asked for the engineering opinion! Physics got crowded out of my brain by other stuff :)

DrPete

Absolute truth in marketing is like trying to find an honest politician - sure, it's theoretically possible, but not real common....

To answer the question about WHY I switched from Speedplay... As I increased my mileage this year I noticed that I was getting hot spots, and it felt like they were forming right on top of the pedal. I tried some fore/aft adjustment and just couldn't get comfortable. Others had commented on the (at least subjectively) larger contact area of the Keos and their relative success with them. So I tried them and have been happy. The other thing I've noticed is that the Looks offer a lot more fore/aft adjustment at the cleat then Speedplay.

Does that answer it?
DrPete

My first experience w/ Speedplay pedals was with the zeros. I grew to love them, and feel that they have been helpful in correcting some pedaling errors I have fought with for years. Curiously enough, I was given a set of X2s recently, tried them for one ride and I really disliked them. Way too much float and clipping out just felt akward.

Sometimes I have a hard time clipping in... this can be especially frustrating on a track bike or at the start of a crit;).

Fraction of a watt, at best.

AE at Penn State, huh? You wouldn't be able to help me out with an implicit scheme for flux splitting of incompressible flows, would you? Man, it's making my brain hurt.

Assuming:
t_spinup = 0.25 s
cadence = 90 rpm
crank length = 172.5 mm
mass speedplay zero ti (4 hole mount) = 234 g
mass look pp296 = 475 g (heaviest pedal on speedplay comparison chart)

The difference of these two is applying an extra 1.274 W on average getting the pedals up to speed. I cannot imagine this being noticable especially since it only last for a quarter of a second. The point still remains though that the same 'rotating mass' effect of wheels is there for pedals, but due to differing circumstances is not as noticable.

As for the the CFD stuff, I might be able to help you but I'd need more information about what you're doing.

Wow, are you two a couple of pieces of work. Where did I call them "pure evil"? And "Grow up"? Good one!

The fact of the matter is, even _if_ you accept that wheel weight counts twice as bike weight (which it doesn't, but I'd hate to bore you with the details), then pedals can't possibly count twice as well, as they are rotating (revolving, really -- I read that in a book once) at a much slower rate.

But the point isn't to debate the physics -- I figured it was obvious (although apparently I was wrong) -- but with the marketing rubbish. They know it's wrong, yet they throw it out there to fool the uneducated (not that I'm pointing finger, now). Same with the 'contact area' nonsense.

No, he's right, grow up, and please do go away. Oh, and thanks for the completely unrelated, unnecessary, and uncouth political reference.

...

The difference of these two is applying an extra 1.274 W on average getting the pedals up to speed. I cannot imagine this being noticable especially since it only last for a quarter of a second. The point still remains though that the same 'rotating mass' effect of wheels is there for pedals, but due to differing circumstances is not as noticable.


Guess I should have said fraction of a joule...darn.