I hope its not.

The last 6 years I've ridden at least 2k miles on Ultegra, Centaur, and Force (mechanical). I should prepend that I am on Force after they fixed the FD issues. They're all good groups, and every one has its advantages. Campy is smoother, Shimano shifts with more pop, and SRAM is somewhere in the middle, but you can downshift in the drops. The funny thing is they all represent their countries well; Italian grace and style, Japanese precision, and American utility.

Forced to give a rating of 1-100, it would be Campy 96, Shimano 94, SRAM 88. I'm sure the pro's go with Shimano because di2 and better deals, but I sure do not hope it hurts the other 2. Electronic is a huge advantage and everything I've researched indicates EPS is solid as well.

Part of me thinks introducing electronic to the ProTour is premature, especially since it is a major advantage. If I were a pro and I had to run SRAM I may be okay with it on my road bike, but time trials being able to shift when off the bars can shave a few seconds.

He was definitely on Di2. Loves the sprint shifters.

I'd like all electronics gone. Shifting, radios, computers - no stored energy or transmitting devices including batteries allowed. That would introduce more variables and make it more interesting than adding rough roads to the course.

I installed electronic shifting on my wife's TT bike after UCI changed the rules for measuring the 75 cm limit on the aerobar extensions. I have D/A and SRAM Red on the rest of the bikes. I have replaced the SRAM front and rear derailleurs on my road bike and my wife's road bike due to mechanical failure. The new front SRAM "yaw" derailleur seems to work much better. Time will tell if it lasts longer than one year.

I would change to Di2 and 11 speed if my frame was set up for Di2. I would have to run the wires externally or drill the frame.

With respect to the UCI pro tour and electronics, UCI is leaning toward more electronics versus less to make the sport more engaging for the fans. The latest being in peloton cameras. Pro cycling is not competitive with other sports in fan engagement (among many other things).

And I agree with that [MENTION=71001]Hermes[/MENTION]. I have no problem with passive electronics such as power meters and cameras. Active ones that replace physical effort (albeit a modicum) is the issue for me.

Disagree.

I'm all for progress with electronics, aero stuff, etc. Ultimately if the riders are in some kind of similar position on the bike, if they have a chain, then I'm probably for it. I didn't like the crazy TT stuff in the mid 90s nor the fragile light stuff just before the 6.8 kg bike rule came out. The limits defining measurements/etc dictate what'll be possible and at this point it's realistically not optimized but it's working.

I wondered about the SRAM thing because in mtb the typical reason for someone buying something is because a better peer rides the stuff in the same conditions. On the road apparently riders will look at the top level pros to see what they're riding. I guess, in a way, it's because road riding is a bit more consistent, meaning a road is a road. If I see a Cav using a particular wheel set and sprinting style then that's pertinent to me. Or TT set up or whatever. He could just as well be sprinting at a local crit, based on the way road bikes interact with their environment.

Off road stuff, with terrain, bumps, etc, are more variable and an easy way to figure out what's happening is to see what the better riders use on the same terrain. For example if I see a mtb race that's in the desert that's not really pertinent to me but if I see that the rider that demolished the field at the mtb race last week used a particular tire or suspension set up or whatever then it's more pertinent to me.

I've also heard a while ago, in terms of the cost thing, that Shimano will give "points" to teams (not sure of actual term). So a Di2 drivetrain might be 100 points (I'm totally making up the values), Ultegra Di2 75 points, DA mechanical 75 points, and Ult mechanical 50 points. A team can pick and choose what they want to use based on the number of points they get in sponsorship. I believe that at the time wheel sponsorship was considered separately from component stuff but if you decided to do wheels you got more component points. I have no idea how it works now.

Other teams just go and buy the stuff because it's easier to accommodate other smaller sponsors, like cranks or wheels or whatever. I think Sky was buying their own somethings - wheels? Shimano bits so they could use Rotors etc?, High Road was buying their own wheels, etc.

Finally, just because a company actually sells wheels doesn't mean that that's what they offer the team. I saw a pretty crazy document (orig copy, signed) of a pro tour team sponsorship agreement between a "part of a bike" manufacturer (not drivetrain) and the team. The "part of a bike" company would not only supply a lot of their parts but they would also pay for ALL the vehicles of the team (on two continents - I can't remember if a team bus was in the agreement but there were specifics on the vehicles, number of vehicles, etc - a fleet of team cars and vans for sure, and they named particular size Sprinters for the vans), the service course in Europe (team headquarters), and a slew of stuff that I totally forget (stuff like paying for clothing, various accessories, tools, stuff like that). I should have taken pictures of the pages but I didn't. It was absolutely nutty and I couldn't believe that it took that much to provide the "part of a bike" that that manufacturer built. When I looked at the team kit of that team I didn't even know the manufacturer was on there.

Hi, the Mrs is venturing into triathlons after 20+ years of competitive running. She is a much better age-graded athlete than I, winning local races pretty regularly up to the 1/2 marathon distance. She got injured this past August training for our big, local October 1/2 marathon (after winning it last year). After rehab, which included her first sport -- swimming, she decided she wanted to do triathlons or at least try them out. So I'm building up a generic carbon frame from China using Chorus-10 stuff that I had on an old steel frame.

Big lead-in to the real question: how "perfect" do aluminum rims need to be to convert to tubeless? She doesn't have a lot of hand strength and she will definitely be training separate from me on occasion. I'm think tubeless will be her best bet for avoiding flats. I have two different sets of wheels; Ksyrium (circa 2003) and some custom wheels with Velocity Aerohead rims (circa 2010). Both set of wheels are in good condition but have small dings in the rim. Can't feel anything when riding on them but you can definitely see them. On the truing stand it looks like 0.01-0.02 inches out-of-round.

I've never done the tubeless thing I'd appreciate any advice on whether or not these wheels are suitable for conversion.

If Pro teams want to ride dangerous 5-lb bicycles, they should be allowed. Imagine the increase in coverage the sport would get!

I'm all for disagreement, but I would appreciate knowing what/all that you are disagreeing with. Seems I posted about 5 or 6 things to disagree with.

Like NFL players smashing head and getting brain injury. If the public want's to see it and they are adults - go for it.

disagree























I think he's pro radios and electronic shifting.

Well, I think it's more accurate to say that I am not opposed to them, in the absence of evidence that they make racing less interesting. Also, Doge listed a bunch more electronic devices that would not improve racing by their absence, so I disagree with him on those, too.

I like variables that the human needs to overcome. The best one is when to attack/bridge etc. and it is alive and well in local crits. But in Pro RR - stage races the instinct rider calculation is taken out be radios and team cars. As this technology moves to gear shifts I doubt it will be long until it is also incorporated into brakes. The skill of racing as well as the power as well as the uncertainty makes the sport more interesting. Will a HR monitor alone ruin it - no. But an athlete knowing their limits (as Clint said) vs. looking at a computer is just more interesting - to me.

For training - use ever gizmo you want. For the race - display all the skills you have and that includes knowing when to go - on your own without the director telling you (Same goes for NFL too - IMO of course).

Disagree.

Radios: No
Electronics on the bike: Yes

IMO

I don't think race radios should be allowed. FOr team cars yes but in the rider's ears, no.
It has taken away some of the excitement. I always go back to Ekimov soloing for 260 km or something like that way back in the day. Look at whats his face from Garmin getting caught almost at the line last year. I hate seeing breaks get caught in the final KM of a stage. This is the result of race radio. Everything else, have at it. Look at the science of Sky, it really is an amazing thing.

Ugh...trying to find the right combo of spacers to get a Force BB30 into a Venge. Seems less than ideal having to mix and match to make it work.

do they not use the 10mm spacer & the adjustable preload washer any longer?

If there was some way to have safety stuff but not tactics I think that would be best. In a TTT or TT I think radios are fine, for splits, terrain stuff, etc. But in a field it shouldn't be quite so "director-centric". Maybe a "I've fallen and I can't get up" button on the rider's radio and an all-rider race director channel. So, for example, if the race gets neutralized, the director can say so and everyone hears it. If there's a particularly iffy corner coming up, ditto. Splits to breaks/etc, crashes, etc, all over the race director's mic, to everyone. But no team-only bands, no managers, no riders talking to their directors, etc.

Of course I'm not a pro. I'm sure it's a bit safer at some level if someone drops back for a bottle and radios his intent before he is at the back.

At the same time even Wiggins was sort of disgusted with the whole director-radio thing when he crashed out of the Tour that one year. "Well the problem is that every director is yelling at their riders to move up now and you run out of road." or something like that.

Radios have definitely taken away some of the "race reading" importance of the guys on the road. Apparently Horner is really good at reading races, for all his other faults. I keep seeing that observation in various articles/interviews over the years.

For us amateurs it's fun to try and read races. Obviously a rider has to be strong enough to go with the moves. Two examples.

Once I was in the Mengoni race in Central Park. It's prestigious to win and I was hoping just to "participate" as I couldn't sprint against the pros and 1s. I was talking with a Cat 1 at the back and I had this sudden feeling like there'd be a huge attack. I told the Cat 1 I wanted to get to the front. To my surprise he said that we should go, there'd be some big attacks as soon as we hit the hill that lap. We both moved up a bit aggressively, hitting the front just as a (pro) Mengoni rider launched hard up the hill. We were already at speed so we basically got on with no real effort (because, in a sense, we were "attacking" just to get to the front). I made it only a little bit after the hill, maybe a mile or so, but the Cat 1 made it a bit further. We both read the situation well but we were also both surprised that we'd called it so accurately. The terrain, the pace, it all screamed at us that someone would go. I think that Mengoni rider one (it was that one sprinter that won everything for a number of years, name escapes me).

Wilson Vasquez, that's his name.

In another race we had two Chevy LA Sheriff pros, Jeff Rutter and someone else (Jim Copeland? did he race for them?). It was a big deal, one was a former Pro US Crit champion (I think Copeland was, not sure of Rutter). There was a Breakaway Courier rider in the field (Charlie Issendorf, currently of Zwift, but back in the day he raced alongside Hincapie for Mengoni and later for Breakaway Couriers). He had on TriSpokes/HED3s, Scott Rakes (mass start legal aero bars), and I knew he couldn't sprint with the others. He was at the back for a good 10 laps - I knew because that's where I was and he was riding next to me. I figured, okay, he's a really strong rider, and he can't sprint with the really super guys. He's also optimized his bike for a break, not for a sprint. Therefore he's going to put everything into a late attack. He started moving up at about 5 to go and I thought, "Okay, there goes the winning move." I had nothing in my legs so I just watched him navigate through the field for a couple hundred meters, until I couldn't see him. Then a lap later the announcer was going berserk. Issendorf had attacked, the field hesitated, and he quickly gained a 15 or 20 second margin. The field went into warp drive with maybe 3 to go but he was still clear and there was no one willing to pull him back. Issendorf won by a good margin, I don't remember how much.

If I had the legs to go with Issendorf maybe he wouldn't have gone 100% but based on his behavior, based on his equipment, it was painfully obvious what he would do. It was a matter of committing when he did, and having the legs to follow. Even in my cross-eyed state it was pretty obvious what he was going to do. I think the others just underestimated what he had left in the tank. I knew he was soft pedaling when he was at the back so he had a lot.

yeah, I got it set up with a 10mm on the drive side and the pre-load on the non-drive side. however, that still leaves like 2-5mm or so gap on the non drive side. there is no play, so I assume that is ok? also, any need for "dust caps" to your recollection?

i believe with the sram bb30 systems you will want a stepped washer on each side. that could be the missing gap you describe if you are not using them. these seem like dust covers for the bearings. without them, your bearings will get contaminated more quickly.

OTOH, i am confused when you say there is a gap but there is also no play. preload is correct when it just barely eliminates play; anything beyond creates a load on the bearings that they are not designed to handle and results in premature wear.

photo?

The gap is between the crank arm and the preload. The lack of play was without any real load on the crank. I'll try to snap a pic tomorrow, I took it all apart since I was just getting a sense of how it all went together before building it up.