Originally Posted by
acidfast7
In response to another thread where it was a side discussion, let's discuss the topic here.
I'm in the anti-clipless camp because I don't want extra crap to lug around. I usually commute in street/office clothes and don't want to have to worry about another set of shoes after I arrive at work. (I can't really fit them in my 20 L backpack, which is the largest size that is really usable for a multimodal commute with a subway, train or hovercraft).
I also commute in heavy traffic as shown on other posts and don't like my feet chained should the bike get hit/slip/fall on rained-soaked roads.
However, what is the big advantage to them? People say they're faster, is there any empirical data out there?
Well...the advantages of using my riding shoes for riding are that:
-
when my feet get soaked on the commute in, I can change to work shoes that are dry
- my riding shoes are already compatible with the pedals on my bike(s)
- my rain booties and neoprene thermal booties are already configured to fit my riding shoes
- I'm more confident in the wet and ice clipped in because I'm certain that I won't slip off of the pedal when under burst effort
Now, to make this work, I pre-position my work shoes, coordinated dress belts, and suits in my office. I only carry underclothes, socks, shirt and tie. This minimizes the lugging of stuff, and allows me to ride bike(s) with panniers/full mudguards when I choose, or ride more nimble bike(s) using my backpack on other occasions.
As for more or less efficiency, I can only say that I'm able to engage various muscle groups by how I move my feet. When clipped in, you don't have to resort to the piston up-and-down that is so typical of lazy riders. You can "scrape the mud" or "circle" or "ankle" or whatever style of riding you prefer in the moment. But it's not scientifically based, it's just my experience after 45 years of riding.