View Single Post
Old 12-28-10 | 02:25 PM
  #97  
Spring Water
Banned
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by knowledgdropper
The point I was trying to make was that people don't "measure" spin-up with the wheel in the air and their hand spinning the crank. You say that the idea of spin-up is bogus and that you believe this to be true on the strength of your prescribed test.

I'm saying that your test is invalid to quantify spin-up because your test essentially only looks at rotational mass- when there are lots of other variables to consider. If spinning a wheel on a stand means "spin-up" to you, then OK, you're right, there's almost no perceptible difference between any bicycle wheel. However- "I do not think it means what you think it means."

I don't believe that easy spin-up should automatically be equated with sheer lightness- which is what a lot of people seem to do when trying out new wheels. I think of spin-up as a function of actual riding, with real loads and forces acting on the wheel. As such, I see the concept of spin-up as being more related to the stiffness of a wheel- and this appears to be where you and I differ.
I'm no physics expert but lets clarify a few things...that may be entirely inaccurate because i'm not a physics expert.

The discussion of "spin-up" is all about rotational mass.

Low rotational mass allows them to spin-up faster. The problem with this argument (spinning a wheel on a stand) is that all the forces that magnify the effects of higher rotational mass are...next to nothing. Thus, the benefits of a low rotational mass will be...next to nothing.
Spring Water is offline  
Reply