Old 03-21-12, 11:39 AM
  #85  
waynesulak
Senior Member
 
waynesulak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 1,971

Bikes: Custom 650B tandem by Bob Brown, 650B tandem converted from Santana Arriva, Santana Noventa, Boulder Bicycle 700C, Gunnar Sport

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by rdtompki
Chains are not 100% efficient and small gears, I believe, tend to have greater losses than large gears. The daVinci has an additional chain drive, two additional bearings and some small intermediate cogs. HOWEVER, the word "certainly" was used in an engineering sense as in I believe you could measure a difference. Do I think it's significant, absolutely not, but I don't know whether the difference between convention and ICS is .1% or .01%; doesn't matter one bit to me. If I were racing I'd be looking at .1% as important plus a possible weight penalty. We love our daVinci and for us the ICS is perfect; I wouldn't ride anything else.
Chain drives have been around a long time and there is a lot of research out there if you want to research the energy losses.

I have spoken with Todd at daVinci about this and if I recall correctly he feels that some loss in drive efficiency is offset by the benefit to team comfort resulting in more power on the second half a a long ride. The people I know with daVinci bikes appear to love them. For us being tied together on the bike is part of the appeal as well as a the challenge. Some people like fixed gears. Choice is good.

Last edited by waynesulak; 03-21-12 at 11:43 AM.
waynesulak is offline