Watts of the Titans
#1
OM boy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,355
Bikes: a bunch
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 507 Post(s)
Liked 634 Times
in
432 Posts
Watts of the Titans
feeling guilty that I inadventantly hijacked the "Is wattage output directly linked to calories burned?" thread, so moving it here for anyone else interested in these impressive performances...
here's posts todate:
Back to 'Watts of the Titans' of the hour record...
Found this way cool page on Hour Record Holders, has great tech numbers for all the hour record holders.
the numbers just blow me away! and then I scroll down to Eddy's Numbers - gawd...
I remember reading about all of them, since Ole Ritter's record in 68, its been great to follow these when they were announced. Shame they regressed the record back, tech innovation is part of the sport. it certainly doesn't negate Ole or Eddy's efforts. Cycling is about man and machine and as each improves, so should the distances...
Anyway, my next fun project is to accummulate a full series of pics with each of the Hour Holders on the equipment they used - would be a fun comparo...
-----------
posted by Fuzzthebee:
Indurain averaged 510 watts for his 1 hr record, and he weighed 81 kilos.
-----------
then posted by moi:
This would be HUGE numbers if so. Where did these come from?
A fairly large disparity between whats listed on the page, for both Mig's avg wattage and his lsited weight at the attempt.
I can only assume the Bikecult page directly quotes UCI listed stats; since there are no references listed and the Biblio page is not done - who really knows where these numbers come from. Although the actual hour record numbers are as i;ve read from other sources.
BTW, near the bottom of the page, Jeannie Longo's numbers are no less impressive, especially in prespective of her size. I couldn't imagine any guy close to her size coming up with the numbers she produced.
here's posts todate:
Back to 'Watts of the Titans' of the hour record...
Found this way cool page on Hour Record Holders, has great tech numbers for all the hour record holders.
the numbers just blow me away! and then I scroll down to Eddy's Numbers - gawd...
I remember reading about all of them, since Ole Ritter's record in 68, its been great to follow these when they were announced. Shame they regressed the record back, tech innovation is part of the sport. it certainly doesn't negate Ole or Eddy's efforts. Cycling is about man and machine and as each improves, so should the distances...
Anyway, my next fun project is to accummulate a full series of pics with each of the Hour Holders on the equipment they used - would be a fun comparo...
-----------
posted by Fuzzthebee:
Indurain averaged 510 watts for his 1 hr record, and he weighed 81 kilos.
-----------
then posted by moi:
This would be HUGE numbers if so. Where did these come from?
A fairly large disparity between whats listed on the page, for both Mig's avg wattage and his lsited weight at the attempt.
I can only assume the Bikecult page directly quotes UCI listed stats; since there are no references listed and the Biblio page is not done - who really knows where these numbers come from. Although the actual hour record numbers are as i;ve read from other sources.
BTW, near the bottom of the page, Jeannie Longo's numbers are no less impressive, especially in prespective of her size. I couldn't imagine any guy close to her size coming up with the numbers she produced.
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Check out the weight of Eddy's bike: 5.75 kilos? That's gotta' be a typo. That's only 12.65 lbs. They must mean 7.55 kilos.
#3
bzzzz
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I believe the power outputs were estimated in those days. Anyways here is a link to a paper on Indurain's record:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...591&query_hl=4
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...591&query_hl=4
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Mountain Brook. AL
Posts: 4,002
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 303 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 136 Times
in
104 Posts
The weight is likely correct. These are track bikes after all, single speed gearing, no shifters, no brakes, no cables. Even then light weight road bikes were made in the 17# range, so 12.7# after taking off all auxiliary parts is quite believable.
Steve
Steve
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sch
The weight is likely correct. These are track bikes after all, single speed gearing, no shifters, no brakes, no cables. Even then light weight road bikes were made in the 17# range, so 12.7# after taking off all auxiliary parts is quite believable.
Steve
Steve
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Mountain Brook. AL
Posts: 4,002
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 303 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 136 Times
in
104 Posts
After looking at the charts you were getting your info from one other thing occurred. There was a LOT of experimentation in the 80's and 90's with aero equipment: addons on the bike, full disc wheels, fancy frames and bars etc all of which add weight to the bike. One bike was listed at 11kg! Eddy, otoh used a standard DF track bike with spoked wheels that was optimized for light weight without loss of strength. As many have commented weight of the the bike is most significant in acceleration and hour riders accelerate only once. A bike with an extra 5# weight but 3-5% lower drag will go a lot further at speeds above 30mph over an hour. The UCI became alarmed at the technology involved and for that reason disallowed one of Chris Boardman's records and promulgated rules as to bike appearance and weights defining limits on "official UCI bikes". Pix of some of the bikes shows how extreme they became before these rules were put into effect. Eddy Merckx and Ole Ritter rode 'standard bikes'. Most of the others were optimized for aero purposes in some way. This is why the bike weights are so different.
Steve
Steve
Last edited by sch; 11-23-05 at 11:02 AM.
#7
OM boy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,355
Bikes: a bunch
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 507 Post(s)
Liked 634 Times
in
432 Posts
Originally Posted by sch
After looking at the charts you were getting your info from one other thing occurred. There was a LOT of experimentation in the 80's and 90's with aero equipment: addons on the bike, full disc wheels, fancy frames and bars etc all of which add weight to the bike....
... Eddy Merckx and Ole Ritter rode 'standard bikes'. Most of the others were optimized for aero purposes in some way. This is why the bike weights are so different...
Steve
... Eddy Merckx and Ole Ritter rode 'standard bikes'. Most of the others were optimized for aero purposes in some way. This is why the bike weights are so different...
Steve
Ran across the Bicycling article - July 74 - covering Merckx's Hour Record Ride and his bike...
and since I post at least one of these articles on a weekly basis in 'Vintage Forum' - here's a link to the article - Eddy's Record Ride & Bike
a search for 'vintage word' will prolly scare up some of the other stuff I've posted there...
#8
Gios
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: France
Posts: 165
Bikes: Pinarello Rokh, Look 586, Merckx Corsa 01
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by spunky
Check out the weight of Eddy's bike: 5.75 kilos? That's gotta' be a typo. That's only 12.65 lbs. They must mean 7.55 kilos.
FWIW, Merckx was asking for mods and changes to the bikes constantly. Colnago says that in one year he built him 22 different bikes, each built for a specific race.