Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Folding Bikes Discuss the unique features and issues of folding bikes. Also a great place to learn what folding bike will work best for your needs.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-04-08, 05:59 PM   #1
OldiesONfoldies
Small wheels ARE better!
Thread Starter
 
OldiesONfoldies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Foldies vs Roadies

I always know that roadies are faster than foldies and recently orgz a comparision ride. The fastest foldie I have, the Dahon Speed Pro vs 3 roadies. 9 of my Dahon Club riders (all SP and one MU P8) joined in as well. This was for a 4.5km sprint on a relatively flat road with some very slight descents & climbs.

2 of our strongest riders manage to keep up with the roadies at 35-40kmh. I max 51kmh on the slight down slope on Schwalbe Marathon tires (not as good as Stelvios for sprints expectedly). At the finishing point, #1 roadie (Ridley Carbon ridden by a young 23 yo guy) was 20 secs ahead of #1 SP. #2 position was another roadie with #2SP just at its heels. #3 roadie was in the middle of the pack.

So in this rough shootout test, roadies are indeed faster as expected. In another race over 160km (with the same rider), the difference is even greater - abt 10%. Would this be your experience as well?

http://lovethefold.blogspot.com/2008...shoot-out.html

Last edited by OldiesONfoldies; 08-04-08 at 08:40 PM.
OldiesONfoldies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-08, 06:48 PM   #2
BruceMetras
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Rafael, California
Bikes:
Posts: 1,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldiesONfoldies View Post
I always know that roadies are faster than foldies and recently orgz a comparision ride. The fastest foldie I have, the Dahon Speed Pro vs 3 roadies. 9 of my Dahon Club riders (all SP and one MU P8) joined in as well. This was for a 4.5km sprint on a relatively flat road with some very slight descents & climbs.

2 of our strongest riders manage to keep up with the roadies at 35-40kmh. I max 51kmh on the slight down slope on Schwalbe Marathon tires (not as good as Stelvios for sprints expectedly). At the finishing point, #1 roadie (Ridley Carbon ridden by a young 23 yo guy) was 20 secs ahead of #1 SP. #2 position was another roadie with #2SP just at its heels. #3 roadie was in the middle of the pack.

So in this rough shootout test, roadies are indeed faster as expected. In another race over 160km, the difference is even greater - abt 10%. Would this be your experience as well?

http://lovethefold.blogspot.com/2008...shoot-out.html
OldOne, maybe next time convince the riders to switch steeds... for the sprint.. then you could average the results and draw additional conclusions..
BruceMetras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-08, 06:56 PM   #3
jur
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 6,806
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
+1

By having different riders riding different bikes, you are changing more than 1 thing so the conclusion is muddled.

Plus it is important that all drive trains are optimally cleaned, lubed and adjusted, so that they don't schew the results. It will be difficult to have a strong conclusion.

I wouldn't call it 10% though. I would call it 1 or 2%, as by my experience my Swift is about 5-10% faster than my R20, but indistinguishable from a roadie I had. This assumes that in both cases, ie roadie & folder, you can aero tuck down equally to eliminate wind resistance from the equation as much as possible.
jur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-08, 08:42 PM   #4
OldiesONfoldies
Small wheels ARE better!
Thread Starter
 
OldiesONfoldies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Good points esp abt switching steeds. The aero riding position does make a lot of difference esp after 30kmh in my opinion.
OldiesONfoldies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-08, 07:48 AM   #5
stevegor
Senior Member
 
stevegor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oz
Bikes: lots... even a Raleigh twenty !!!
Posts: 2,117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If the test was able to have all the riders with the same ability then a correctly geared Moulton, Bike Friday or Swift should be very close to a full sized roadie.
stevegor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-08, 09:06 AM   #6
SesameCrunch
Eschew Obfuscation
 
SesameCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Bikes: 2005 Fuji Professional, 2002 Lemond Zurich, Folders - Strida, Merc, Dahon, Downtube, Recumbent folder
Posts: 3,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegor View Post
If the test was able to have all the riders with the same ability then a correctly geared Moulton, Bike Friday or Swift should be very close to a full sized roadie.
Ah, but there's still a significant weight difference between the Moulton and a good roadie. Even the New Series Moulton is about 22 lbs, a good roadie nowadays is 16, 17 lbs. That may not be significant on the flats, but in the hills (which is hard to avoid around my area) it is a big disadvantage.
__________________
SesameCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-08, 11:44 AM   #7
jeffy1021
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Bikes: Dahon '08 Mu P8, Litespeed Arenberg
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SesameCrunch View Post
Ah, but there's still a significant weight difference between the Moulton and a good roadie. Even the New Series Moulton is about 22 lbs, a good roadie nowadays is 16, 17 lbs. That may not be significant on the flats, but in the hills (which is hard to avoid around my area) it is a big disadvantage.
I thought smaller wheels fare better on hills, am I misinformed?
jeffy1021 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-08, 08:36 PM   #8
SesameCrunch
Eschew Obfuscation
 
SesameCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Bikes: 2005 Fuji Professional, 2002 Lemond Zurich, Folders - Strida, Merc, Dahon, Downtube, Recumbent folder
Posts: 3,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffy1021 View Post
I thought smaller wheels fare better on hills, am I misinformed?
If everything else is equal, I agree that smaller wheels are better for hills, as they spin up faster. I actually have a 17 lb 20" folder, and it's very good for climbing.

However, my earlier statement in this thread is that a heavier bike is a disadvantage on the hills.
__________________
SesameCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-08, 08:57 PM   #9
jur
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 6,806
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffy1021 View Post
I thought smaller wheels fare better on hills, am I misinformed?
There is some misinformation out there about smaller wheels climbing better. Some howlers out there:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bike Friday
Small wheels climb better due to a smaller diameter that needs to be rotated.
-I have NO idea what this is supposed to mean in physics terms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1984 Olympic Men's Road Race Gold Medal winner, Alexi Grewal
Tests have shown that up to 16 mp/h, the small wheel is more efficient that a big wheel. Between 16 and 33 mp/h there is little difference. Over 33 mp/h the gyroscopic effect of the big wheel makes it more effective. Most folks do not go over 33 mp/h.
-"Tests?" What "tests?" Show me the money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Moore, professional bike mechanic at Abbotsford Cycles
Reducing the weight of rotating parts, especially wheels, is doubly useful, as you effectively have to lift them up twice!
*awoooooo hoooooowl*
jur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-08, 09:04 PM   #10
noteon 
Drops small screws
 
noteon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: NYC
Bikes: Heavily modified Xootr Swift, Trek 1000SL that's been turned into a brevet bike, two 20" Torker Interurbans
Posts: 2,600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffy1021 View Post
I thought smaller wheels fare better on hills, am I misinformed?
For whatever this is worth, my 20" wheels skip off the pavement on steep hills unless I stand to pedal. My 700c wheels don't.
__________________
RIDE: Short fiction about bicycles • RUSA #5538
Learning to wrench better this year—current project: Fixie from build kit
noteon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-08, 02:29 AM   #11
mulleady
The Metropolis, UK
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceMetras View Post
OldOne, maybe next time convince the riders to switch steeds... for the sprint.. then you could average the results and draw additional conclusions..
+1 brilliant point! Then some truths would be revealed. Need similar conditions on the day too.
mulleady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-08, 06:07 AM   #12
stevegor
Senior Member
 
stevegor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oz
Bikes: lots... even a Raleigh twenty !!!
Posts: 2,117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SesameCrunch View Post
Ah, but there's still a significant weight difference between the Moulton and a good roadie. Even the New Series Moulton is about 22 lbs, a good roadie nowadays is 16, 17 lbs. That may not be significant on the flats, but in the hills (which is hard to avoid around my area) it is a big disadvantage.

Ok then, I wonder if you had a folder and a roadie at exactly the same weight, with 2 riders of exactly the same weight and ability if there would be any difference on the flats, climbing, descending and sprinting?
stevegor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-08, 08:12 AM   #13
SesameCrunch
Eschew Obfuscation
 
SesameCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Bikes: 2005 Fuji Professional, 2002 Lemond Zurich, Folders - Strida, Merc, Dahon, Downtube, Recumbent folder
Posts: 3,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegor View Post
Ok then, I wonder if you had a folder and a roadie at exactly the same weight, with 2 riders of exactly the same weight and ability if there would be any difference on the flats, climbing, descending and sprinting?
I actually have this situation. My black Fuji Team Issue is a carbon fiber 17lb bike with full Dura Ace drivetrain. My Dahon XX Anniversary Helios is also right around 17 lbs.

They're both excellent bikes and fun to ride. I have not done "scientific" tests on them for performance difference, but here are my anecdotal and honest thought about their differences:

- Flats - Probably very little difference. Although, I feel that 700C wheels roll more efficiently at higher speeds due to the higher angular momentum. Also, the Dahon's top gearing was around 95 gear inches with its stock setup, so it was a little disadvantaged when the paceline is going faster than 25mph or so. But, that is easily remedied.

- Climbing - As I said earlier, I actually do believe that smaller wheels are better for climbing,due to the fact that it spins up faster. My Rolf wheelset on the Dahon weighs 995 grams (!), the Easton wheelset on the Fuji weighs 1550g. Factor in the angular momentum impact and one can certainly see how it is harder to spin up the big wheels.

- Descending - I definitely feel more stable on the 700C wheels than the 406's. Maybe it's just my poor riding skills, though ..

- Sprinting - The Fuji wins again, I'm afraid. The hinges at the handlebar and mid-frame take a significant toll on rigidity when stomping on the pedals and pulling on the 'bars. There's no way around it. On a one-piece full size frame, it's a very confident feeling when I stand and pull on the bars. On the Dahon, particularly the Helios design, I just cannot pull as hard.

I have been on a two year search for a "portable roadie" - a folder than can keep me in the hunt on my weekend rides with the group. However, I have abandoned that idea because I simply have not been able to find one. That's why I put the Dahon up for sale and it is on its way to a new home. Maybe the Moulton TSR will come close, but it will weigh 24lbs.

Don't mean to start any wars here, just noting my honest observations about the bikes.
__________________
SesameCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-08, 08:31 AM   #14
makeinu
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 2,294
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffy1021 View Post
I thought smaller wheels fare better on hills, am I misinformed?
That's a half-truth that comes from the assumption that smaller wheels will always be lighter, but due to lack of engineering or just plain economics smaller wheels rarely achieve this potential. For example, in theory smaller wheels should be able to use fewer spokes, but in practice they never seem to be built that way because standard spoke placement, thicknesses, angles, alloys, etc have all evolved to be optimal for larger wheels and, thus, need to be relatively overbuilt when shoehorned onto small wheel designs (killing any advantage). That's not to say that there aren't small wheeled bikes being built with low spoke counts, it's just that for a given strength it seems that smaller wheels need to use more spokes than they would if optimally designed components were available.

Since the economics of the situation dictates that no manufacturer will custom engineer anything sufficiently close to what is available off the shelf, you have to look to radically different designs to see the effect. For example, an inline speed skater can usually beat the pants off a roadie in sprints or going up hills and, although the mechanics of skating are not as well understood as cycling, due to their re-engineering, inline skate wheels probably exhibit all the purported advantages of smaller wheels.

That's one of the things I find so interesting about being an engineer (albeit not a mechanical one): To engineer a superior product one must engineer a trojan horse that can not only trump existing products, but also weave its way past the status quo. In my opinion, small wheel racing designs have thus far failed to achieve this goal (though I would contend that the 8" wheeled Carryme from Pacific Cycles will blow any other commuter bike out of the water in terms of getting up to speed or going up hills with the minimal amount of effort).

Quote:
Originally Posted by jur View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bike Friday
Small wheels climb better due to a smaller diameter that needs to be rotated.
-I have NO idea what this is supposed to mean in physics terms.
I'm pretty sure they're trying to refer to the rotational inertia, but you can file this under the "don't you have to pedal more?" myth about small wheels because once you account for the higher gearing (and subsequent wheel spinning) the inertia is the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jur View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1984 Olympic Men's Road Race Gold Medal winner, Alexi Grewal
Tests have shown that up to 16 mp/h, the small wheel is more efficient that a big wheel. Between 16 and 33 mp/h there is little difference. Over 33 mp/h the gyroscopic effect of the big wheel makes it more effective. Most folks do not go over 33 mp/h.
-"Tests?" What "tests?" Show me the money.
I agree, unless he's referring to the (very difficult to measure) energy expended steering the bike it's hard to see how the gyroscopic effect could come into play (which, by the way, Jobst Brandt has argued is negligible compared to the qualitatively similar affect of fork trail).

Quote:
Originally Posted by jur View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Moore, professional bike mechanic at Abbotsford Cycles
Reducing the weight of rotating parts, especially wheels, is doubly useful, as you effectively have to lift them up twice!
*awoooooo hoooooowl*
Well, don't you agree that, neglecting surface friction, it requires twice as much energy to roll a wheel than slide it? Granted, "lift" is a bit misleading as gravity doesn't pull any harder on a rotating mass than a stationary one, but going over a hill is a longer distance than tunneling through it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegor View Post
Ok then, I wonder if you had a folder and a roadie at exactly the same weight, with 2 riders of exactly the same weight and ability if there would be any difference on the flats, climbing, descending and sprinting?
Even two different road bikes of different design, but equal weight, are not guaranteed to perform exactly the same. There are too many other variables. The biomechanics of cycling is more complicated than most like to admit.

Last edited by makeinu; 08-06-08 at 08:41 AM.
makeinu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-08, 09:09 AM   #15
makeinu
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 2,294
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SesameCrunch View Post
I actually have this situation. My black Fuji Team Issue is a carbon fiber 17lb bike with full Dura Ace drivetrain. My Dahon XX Anniversary Helios is also right around 17 lbs.

They're both excellent bikes and fun to ride. I have not done "scientific" tests on them for performance difference, but here are my anecdotal and honest thought about their differences:

- Flats - Probably very little difference. Although, I feel that 700C wheels roll more efficiently at higher speeds due to the higher angular momentum. Also, the Dahon's top gearing was around 95 gear inches with its stock setup, so it was a little disadvantaged when the paceline is going faster than 25mph or so. But, that is easily remedied.

- Climbing - As I said earlier, I actually do believe that smaller wheels are better for climbing,due to the fact that it spins up faster. My Rolf wheelset on the Dahon weighs 995 grams (!), the Easton wheelset on the Fuji weighs 1550g. Factor in the angular momentum impact and one can certainly see how it is harder to spin up the big wheels.

- Descending - I definitely feel more stable on the 700C wheels than the 406's. Maybe it's just my poor riding skills, though ..

- Sprinting - The Fuji wins again, I'm afraid. The hinges at the handlebar and mid-frame take a significant toll on rigidity when stomping on the pedals and pulling on the 'bars. There's no way around it. On a one-piece full size frame, it's a very confident feeling when I stand and pull on the bars. On the Dahon, particularly the Helios design, I just cannot pull as hard.

I have been on a two year search for a "portable roadie" - a folder than can keep me in the hunt on my weekend rides with the group. However, I have abandoned that idea because I simply have not been able to find one. That's why I put the Dahon up for sale and it is on its way to a new home. Maybe the Moulton TSR will come close, but it will weigh 24lbs.

Don't mean to start any wars here, just noting my honest observations about the bikes.
Your observations are consistent with my beliefs about the physics of cycling and the state of small wheel technology.

That said, I personally would like to know more about the relationship between fork trail and contact patch shape when it comes to self-correcting steering at high speeds ("stability descending"). Since contact patch shape depends on wheel diameter and trail can be adjusted independently of wheel diameter and both influence "stability" what I'm curious about in particular is to what extent trail can be used to cancel the rounder contact patch of smaller diameter wheels. Is it like inertia where the higher gearing can exactly cancel the size difference in all circumstances or is it like the frequency of oscillation when hitting a bump which Jur showed can be mostly (though not exactly) canceled out with wider tires?

I personally think that at lower speeds the rounder contact patch of small diameter wheels is more "stable" because it gives you more leverage to hold the wheel steady when a bump or pothole tries to turn it (which is far more likely to cause a crash than endoing without the wheel turning). However, I suppose at higher speeds one wants the opposite effect where the longer contact patch gives the force of friction of the tire against the road more leverage against you so that the wheel holds itself steady despite the input of the rider. The question is, to what extent can one get the best of both worlds? The first low speed affect should be independent of trail, while the other is closely related to trail. Can adjustment of trail produce exactly the same affect as adjustment of contact patch shape? If not can trail be used to approximate a longer contact patch at all speeds? If not, can trail be used to approximate a longer contact patch at one or more target speeds?
makeinu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-08, 10:12 AM   #16
noteon 
Drops small screws
 
noteon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: NYC
Bikes: Heavily modified Xootr Swift, Trek 1000SL that's been turned into a brevet bike, two 20" Torker Interurbans
Posts: 2,600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't have much of an opinion on flats, hills, sprints, etc--but I haven't seen anyone mention road conditions. My experience is that larger-diameter wheels deal noticeably better with grooves and potholes, so I'll tend to take uneven asphalt a little faster and more confidently when I'm not riding my Swift.
__________________
RIDE: Short fiction about bicycles • RUSA #5538
Learning to wrench better this year—current project: Fixie from build kit
noteon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-08, 09:02 PM   #17
stevegor
Senior Member
 
stevegor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oz
Bikes: lots... even a Raleigh twenty !!!
Posts: 2,117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SesameCrunch View Post
I have been on a two year search for a "portable roadie" - a folder than can keep me in the hunt on my weekend rides with the group. However, I have abandoned that idea because I simply have not been able to find one. That's why I put the Dahon up for sale and it is on its way to a new home. Maybe the Moulton TSR will come close, but it will weigh 24lbs.

Don't mean to start any wars here, just noting my honest observations about the bikes.


SesameCrunch,

Have you considered a Bike Friday Pocket Rocket Pro? According to BF, with a Durace groupset and light pedals you can get it down to approx 18.75 lbs, (8.6kg), maybe lighter if you use a carbon Campag Record groupset, that's about 6 lbs lighter than the Moulton.
stevegor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-08, 10:30 PM   #18
SesameCrunch
Eschew Obfuscation
 
SesameCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Bikes: 2005 Fuji Professional, 2002 Lemond Zurich, Folders - Strida, Merc, Dahon, Downtube, Recumbent folder
Posts: 3,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegor View Post
SesameCrunch,

Have you considered a Bike Friday Pocket Rocket Pro? According to BF, with a Durace groupset and light pedals you can get it down to approx 18.75 lbs, (8.6kg), maybe lighter if you use a carbon Campag Record groupset, that's about 6 lbs lighter than the Moulton.
Yeah, that would be pretty good. However, $4,500 for that configuration is an issue. Also, I've kinda given up on that search for the portable roadie. I keep having to ask myself "why not just ride the big bike?". Haven't come up with a good answer yet. Finally, I just committed to the Moulton, and will have to remain faithful for an acceptable amount of time .
__________________
SesameCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-08, 11:08 PM   #19
EdYago
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What makes for a roadie? What makes for a good candidate for a good roadie?

Sorry if these are stupid questions, I don't know.
EdYago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-08, 05:35 AM   #20
Tovar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's a matter of POWER,

20" inches wheel is OK, depending how:

You will need more POWER to be able to SPIN enough to make the same distance as a big wheels bicycle.


Regards
Tovar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-08, 06:02 AM   #21
stevegor
Senior Member
 
stevegor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oz
Bikes: lots... even a Raleigh twenty !!!
Posts: 2,117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdYago View Post
What makes for a roadie?

A bike that fits your measurements properly, that is reasonably light, has drop bars and good quality tyres.


What makes for a good candidate for a good roadie?

Somebody who can ride a good bike properly.....I have raced on my cheaper bike against rich guys who have the best bikes, latest gear and huge egos and have soundly trounced them. I think if you are reasonably fit and used to hard exercise, have good stamina and lastly, enjoy pushing the limits, you're a good candidate.

Sorry if these are stupid questions, I don't know.
Not stupid, hope this helps
stevegor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-08, 12:31 PM   #22
alhedges
Senior Member
 
alhedges's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Naptown
Bikes: NWT 24sp DD; Brompton M6R
Posts: 1,133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tovar View Post
It's a matter of POWER,

20" inches wheel is OK, depending how:

You will need more POWER to be able to SPIN enough to make the same distance as a big wheels bicycle.


Regards
Why?
alhedges is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-08, 03:47 PM   #23
pm124
Car free since 1995
 
pm124's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NYC
Bikes: Birdy Yellow, Birdy Monocoque
Posts: 1,018
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SesameCrunch View Post
I actually have this situation. My black Fuji Team Issue is a carbon fiber 17lb bike with full Dura Ace drivetrain. My Dahon XX Anniversary Helios is also right around 17 lbs.

They're both excellent bikes and fun to ride. I have not done "scientific" tests on them for performance difference, but here are my anecdotal and honest thought about their differences:

- Flats - Probably very little difference. Although, I feel that 700C wheels roll more efficiently at higher speeds due to the higher angular momentum. Also, the Dahon's top gearing was around 95 gear inches with its stock setup, so it was a little disadvantaged when the paceline is going faster than 25mph or so. But, that is easily remedied.

- Climbing - As I said earlier, I actually do believe that smaller wheels are better for climbing,due to the fact that it spins up faster. My Rolf wheelset on the Dahon weighs 995 grams (!), the Easton wheelset on the Fuji weighs 1550g. Factor in the angular momentum impact and one can certainly see how it is harder to spin up the big wheels.

- Descending - I definitely feel more stable on the 700C wheels than the 406's. Maybe it's just my poor riding skills, though ..

- Sprinting - The Fuji wins again, I'm afraid. The hinges at the handlebar and mid-frame take a significant toll on rigidity when stomping on the pedals and pulling on the 'bars. There's no way around it. On a one-piece full size frame, it's a very confident feeling when I stand and pull on the bars. On the Dahon, particularly the Helios design, I just cannot pull as hard.

I have been on a two year search for a "portable roadie" - a folder than can keep me in the hunt on my weekend rides with the group. However, I have abandoned that idea because I simply have not been able to find one. That's why I put the Dahon up for sale and it is on its way to a new home. Maybe the Moulton TSR will come close, but it will weigh 24lbs.

Don't mean to start any wars here, just noting my honest observations about the bikes.
In my limited experience, I would say that these are a spot on observations. I feel less confident on descents on my Birdy. On climbs, if I'm with a group of riders that are better than me (usually the case), I get dropped, even with my light wheels equipped with Stelvios. My bike weighs in at about 22 pounds. (Could still shed 400gm from the wheels, and another 400gms elsewhere, but it would still be heavier than a road bike.)

Of course, if you have a stiff frame and a light bike (e.g. the 2009 Pacific Reach), you are good to go. Next bike, SC?

Last edited by pm124; 08-07-08 at 03:51 PM.
pm124 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-08, 04:44 PM   #24
SesameCrunch
Eschew Obfuscation
 
SesameCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Bikes: 2005 Fuji Professional, 2002 Lemond Zurich, Folders - Strida, Merc, Dahon, Downtube, Recumbent folder
Posts: 3,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pm124 View Post
Of course, if you have a stiff frame and a light bike (e.g. the 2009 Pacific Reach), you are good to go. Next bike, SC?


It would have been. Then EvilV's Moulton showed up...
__________________
SesameCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-08, 08:22 PM   #25
Tovar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alhedges View Post
Why?
It takes more than one revolution of a small wheel to travel the same distance as one revolution on a big wheel.

You can keep the pace of a big wheeler but you will need to pedal like hell!!.


Regards
Tovar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:03 PM.