Originally Posted by
dunningrb
I don't think I'm missing umd's point. I don't know what "coefficient to speed" means.
Inherently means "existing in someone or something as a permanent and inseparable element, quality, or attribute: an inherent distrust of strangers." To say a road bike is inherently faster than a mountain bike is to say that a road bike possesses the permanent, inseparable attribute of being faster than a mountain bike. Thus, no mountain bike will ever move faster than any road bike. That's obviously isn't true.
The speed you achieve on a bicycle depends in part on your effort level. We all agree on this. But effort level is not an attribute of a bicycle; it's an attribute of the person riding the bicycle. Thus, a road bike is not inherently faster than a mountain bike. The mere fact that we make reference to effort level to explain how fast each bike can move proves my point.
Honestly, I don't understand how we can argue about this. This isn't about simple math; it's about the definition of inherently.
The definition of inherently is true, however if you were to take a MTB and a Road bike and put them in a wind tunnel to completely remove the rider's motor and effort out of the equation you will find that the road bike will always be more aerodynamic and thusly "inherently" faster. I don't think that anyone is arguing that a MTB is incapable of going faster than a Road bike. We have all seen fast MTBs moving down the road with strong riders. At the end of the day on pavement given the same rider with the same wattage the road bike will go faster or at least the same speed with less work.