And to make us believe they aren't all doped up to their eyeballs.

No insulated bubble for me, I tour between 2 and 4 months per year and have opted for a very lightweight setup no regrets. If you want to play silly bugger and ask me to show you weight comparisons for all the equipment used it can easily be done and available and I am sure your are well aware of the lighter replacements. You keep asking what’s new but the real question is what’s readily available and that’s obvious if you choose to look. Yes there is a diminishing contingent of the fully loaded touring individuals mostly encountered on the well established routes such as Eurovelo and a large number riding e-bikes. It’s all good and if you chose to pack chinos and garden furniture that’s fine.

As usual the BF sycophants devolve into meaningless over thinking and over-arguing. But I appreciate it because it always causes me to re-view one of my favorite skits so I can post it scoldingly here. :thumb:

See now you're shifting the goalposts. It's no longer modern innovation, but rather what's available. But even that's untrue. There's a more competition in the bikepacking market, but getting a framebag or a large capacity saddle bag etc. has been possible for 20 years now for those who had the motivation for it. A host of small bags strapped around a bike frame were't cheap then and they aren't cheap now. But each to their own. Bad sleep, crotch "cooked" meals and stinking like a horse isn't really my jam when I'm taking my vacay.

What you're probably seeing on eurovelos etc. is newbies. It's fashionable nowdays to ride gravel bikes with lotsa small bags. But they'll learn. Or quit. And I'll continue to help them when their streamlining leaves them stranded.

Problem with this - record speeds are not just a PR, and not just for the entire race. Every race, every section of the race, every mountain - record times are getting smashed. Every cobble section of PR, where the riders are away from their teams, solo even - records smashed. Even Arenberg forest, where they put in a chicane to slow entry speeds, the riders are going faster than ever.

The slow/heavy disc brake bikes with slow heavy fat tires (according to you) are involved in smashing every record ever set on every mountain they race.

Part of this is the bike- the new bikes are faster*. A big part of this is the power figures riders are putting out.

*New bikes are faster, but not by the amounts Silica boy often lists. He is absolutely selling products - he is absolutely self promoting. And why not, he is selling stuff and his expertise.


Silica boy lists the rolling resistance difference between garden hose puncture resistant tires and full on race spec tires. Yes, there are 10-12+w per tire savings in this case. But race tubulars vs race tubeless - minimal. He lists drivetrain savings clean/vs dirty as 8-10+w, where others tested a clean vs dirty setup and came up with 1-3w. He overstates the extremes...

LBL, run this weekend, is a better example than PR for speeds and advancements. LBL has seen peak speeds of 38-40kph for 50+ years. A spike happened with the dopers, and speeds have remained +/- the same ever since. A small bump happened post Covid layoff - but this bump happened across the boards - at every race. This is due to the riders 100% - tubulars vs tubeless at this race - not much difference at all. Everything else post/pre Covid layoff is +/- exactly the same.

We just saw 44kph at LBL - the winner smashed the records on the final climbs, previously set by himself - and the overall speed record was smashed.


The real question isn't bikes - the real question is how can the two leaders hit the final climbs at 3-5 min @ 8w/kg, putting their in race V02 max numbers at near 100 - with one of them being only 19 years old. Even if the power estimates are off by 5% (in either direction mind you) in race/fatigued V02 max in the mid to high 90's is insane.

Power VO2 estimates are just that - estimates. VAM is not.
-They hit VAM figures of 2500 on the final two climbs of LBL
-Many of them hit VAM numbers of 1850+ on long TDF mountains - never seen before.

Race speeds are up mostly because the riders, in the past 4-5 years, have become aliens.

Dave Mayer above has it right. Does anyone here even remember what races used to look like?

It goes back to what I said much earlier. The new rule is pros only race a max of 85 days a year. With injury list, scheduling, transportation, most are only racing 70 or 75 days. Less than half the schedule they used to ride. Do you think maybe this might change race tactics? Duh.

Current races tend to look like a criterium or even a miss and out for six hours. Of course a tightly packed field goes fast. It's also dangerous and limits the possibility of doing anything else.

With only 70 race days each rider has to impress the director sportif and the sponsor each and every time out. The pressure to perform is extreme. And of course the riders are all more rested than they used to be.

Riders used to race very day in season. Or at least five days out of seven. In late season lots of riders would race two crits a day. This just does not happen any longer. It was a job. get up in morning and race. The riders knew each other and it was a fraternity and a craft guild and they knew the men they raced with. They knew each other's families. Now they only know their own team. The long hours at piano pace with lots of socializing in the field just do not happen now. Of course they go faster. It has less than nothing to do with the equipment and the sales pitch for the equipment. It is a matter of how the sport is structured.

Predictive typing keeps changing director sportif to English spelling. It's like the forum is hostile to the sport.

It's the result of all the factors, cumulatively. Tech has advanced, but even back when Tech was adding NEW at a much slower pace, advances were happening at a very perceptive pace.
The science of training, prep and decision making have constantly sped up advancement. Obvious in all things, and certainly in all things athletic.
Sure, the new tech has a part in this, but not as great as the elements of applied science as comes to human overall abilities, fitness, knowledge and ability to react and adapt.

Let's not forget that even though there are a very few incredible standouts, the entire population of riders , female and male, are all exceptional examples of what humans are capable of on a bicycle.
And, of course, Tech is 'slowed', hindered, regulated by the governing body of world cycling. If tech was unbounded, we would see even greater 'advances'...
We enjoy the fruits of all these 'advancements' and it makes riding maybe more pleasurable, fulfilling and whatever else we get out of it. But the tech whether 10 or 30 or 90 years old, still brings great enjoyment and fulfillment (if we ourselves acknowledge and appreciate it). So I still get great pleasure and fulfillment from riding my grandfather's bike from 1939.

Of course 'speed' is not the real advancement (Intent, other than the '1st to the Line' thing). If bicycle performance was completed based on 'speed' (without consideration for tech) we have gone beyond Human powered speed some centuries, millennia ago.
SO the major consideration and foundation of effort is 'HUMAN' effort and ability.
Under that parameter, the advancement of human capablity is still apparent, obvious, undisputed.
And the remarkable, notable is the effort of individuals against other individuals and the whole (Riders and Peletons).
The true and remarkable part of Road & Mtb and many other forms is not the 'Finish Line', it's the story, endeavour of how it's reached.
If you've ever 'raced' a bike, the 'win' is of course a great result, but I believe that reaching the 'end' of a race was never a total disappointment for non-winners. There is always a strong element of 'accomplishment'. It would have to be true for those who have 'worked hard for many miles/kilometers and finished well behind the 'winner'.
Science has added to the Human endeavor greatly, and allowed us to realize more accomplishment. I'm particularly aware of that, being 77. I look back and around, and I see that, inspite of my disappointments in myself, I see my capabilities are more than what was considered 'reality' not too far back in time. some of that is 'tech', knowledge and adjusted expectations; some of that is just a more focused 'me' on what I might be capable of.

New tech is great, But it's the rider...

Ride On
Yuri

Here you go. What racing used to look like.

Yet all facets of the sport is getting quicker and more comfortable.

To completely ignore obvious advances and dogmatically repeat and believe dated narratives picked up in months old magazines in the 70’s or bike shop gossip acquired while picking up a fresh tube of Clement tubular glue.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...0f8351f34.jpeg
Explain how amateur masters racers average speed has increased so clearly.

I missed the part where they had a smoke and glass of wine mid-race and caught up with family news. My understanding was back in the day they just peddled along and chatted as it was just a job for them, much like a barista at a fancy coffee shop.

Actually I was partial to Clement red glue. Haven't seen a good replacement. Gutta percha is not commercial any longer sadly.

70s bike shop chatter included chattering with Jimmy Walthour, Torchy Peden, Charlie Yaccino, Othon Ochsner, Sr., John vandeVelde, Jim Rossi, Jim Ochowicz, Pino Morroni, Andy Hampsten, Wayne Stetina, others. You could do worse for chatter. And chattered with most of above while riding as well as at the bike shop.

Masters are going faster because there are more of them. In case you haven't notice 50+ is often the biggest field. Whereas in 70s over 50 was considered ancient. Field size was tiny. If anyone that age showed up at all. Is this difficult to understand?

There's a lot to be said for racing as a job. That's what professional means.

Oh, you linked to 60 Cycles. Those are my friends. Note the shorts "SENO". Rudy a best friend. Cared for his widow for 23 years after his death, until Delores passed on as well.

If this is your idea of an insult you just made a mistake.

Great breakdownes-pecially the idea that it’s an energy problem, not an equipment problem. The speed gains in Paris-Roubaix are wild, but it’s probably a mix of tech, stronger riders, and more aggressive racing rather than just bikes alone.

Hah, surf music and Booker T on a doc set in Quebec. Looked intense.

First off, 2005 and before - 147km. 2006 and after - 138km.
--The chart, all gains from 2000-2006 don't matter, course changed.--

Looking at the pro or elite category for that race - much different story.
2006 winning time - 4:23
2025 winning time - 4:25
-With all the years in between being in that same range +/-

So the pro riders saw little or no performance gains over a 20 year period.

Disc brakes, electronic shifting, 12 speed... they really do nothing for speed. Aero gains help a little on a course like this - but nothing stands out as obvious.

I imagine the increase in masters speed is due to having better masters in the race.

From personal experience, a lighter bike, more senior friendly gearing, race-fit clothing, better sports and general nutrition, learning the importance of rest, using the gym and I’m sure something I have forgotten, has allowed me to ride about 1 MPH slower now than I did as a 40 year old. Speed is not always the thing, but being able to go farther and climb with less effort has its benefits. All of this I have learned thanks to many forum members and the University of YouTube. AND I really don’t care if a company is selling me a product that allows me to go farther or faster or both as long as it works or has a good placebo effect. Double AND, I still stop and take plenty of pictures along the way because I just enjoy nature and being outdoors.
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...5e5f6b107.jpeg

I'm just WOW. This discussion makes me want to buy a modern bike. Do we have a personal account from a BFer who bought a modern bike and found that it cut their times substantially on his or her favorite hilly 50 mile course? Thus eliminating the unknowns w/r to fueling or doping? I'm still riding my 2000 vintage Trek 5200, which I have really enjoyed and put a zillion miles on. Of course, it's a triple with GI from 128-31 and I use all of them. Our tandem, also a triple, has GI from 130 to 18. When one needs that much range, close spacing is important.

Personally - tested and verified using months of data on the exact same course... pancake flat bike, using a power meter. I have well over 500 rides on this path as data points.

I gained about 1-1.2 MPH when switching from chunky armadillo tires to GP5000's (about .75mph), then the rest with 40mm deep CF wheel upgrade. On a more modern bike to begin with, but not a full on aero bike - but semi aero. Set PB's at the same power levels over and over.

But...
I then bought a 2001 Lemond -bone stock except GP5000's- and blew all of those numbers out of the water. Then saw some marginal gains when I put 50mm deep wheels on it.

Why? Body position. The front end is stretched out a wee bit more and about 1.5" lower.

If I swapped out to a full new aero frame and kept the same body position/50mm wheels - I would only expect marginal gains, very marginal. Especially at the speeds/watts I ride at.

These points may not relate much to the pros, but for mere mortals, yeah: nutrition, recovery, position, clothing -- these are all much less expensive ways of getting speed, even if they are less sexy than a new bike. I was riding in a race last weekend, and for a time was behind a guy who had unzipped his jacket and was letting it flap wildly in the wind. If he'd just zipped it up, or removed it and put it in his pocket, he could've ridden away from me pretty easily.

Regarding the comment about your speeds/wattage: bear in mind that aero gains are cumulative with time -- in other words, if you are riding more slowly, those aero gains may be even more significant if you are riding the same distance.

Pro peloton speeds
 

Regarding higher speeds in the Pro peloton = I tend to agree with @CycleZen's first sentence stating "cumulative" effects/affects.? And 'fewer race days' has been identified.

Also, I believe the entire peloton is at a higher level of fitness. More Mega-Teams with huge budgets (compared to a decade ago), better athletes with higher salaries/side jobs, 'training at elevation' more often, more specialists primarily targeting either 1 day, 1week, or Grand Tours. Lack of UCI/WADA to be more strict on 'nutrition' and 'medications'. (what gas have some been huffing lately?). Better training at youth levels leads to younger super-stars.

Maybe another slight consideration for stage races are changes in the name of 'rider safety'. Shortened stages due to inclement weather, less hazardous courses (l'Angrilu used to be a goat path, now has mtn pavement), etc.

The Classics and Monuments remain the same, largely.

(apologies if all the above has been mentioned, in addition to stiffer framesets, aero tubes, better tires, lighter wheels, skinsuit fabrics, etc.)

Equipment choice is a big one, as far as aero gains go...and often some low hanging fruit IMO. I think of the latest Giant Propel launch, where they claim(insert grain of salt here) that the new Propel 18ish watts faster than the old one IIRC. Sounds like a lot, until you read that most of those gains come from faster tires and a narrower cockpit. Even if it's an integrated cockpit, those are still more affordable changes than a brand new aero bike, and they're changes that will make a noticable difference.

The position argument makes me think of some of the recreational riders I see on long reach/short stack race bikes, yet they don't have the flexibility to maintain that position. Even if they do get into that position, their power production drops off at that tight of a hip angle. Many people likely just assume a lower cockpit is going to be more aerodynamic, but it's likely slower when they can only manage to ride around on the bar tops with locked-out elbows.

As far as cheap/easy marginal gains, add leg-shaving to the list. Even by the most conservative estimates, it's saving me 5 watts...I'll never turn down a free 5 watts.

Yeah, I'm an old man with a damaged back (neck, really -- C3,4,5 vertebrae), and even on my custom frame with a tallish head tube and a shallow-drop handlebar, I only go into the drops when trying to, say, bridge up to a group. I envy the riders who can stay in the drops all day long.

Re: shaving. I do it out of respect for the traditions of a beautiful sport, and also because it makes it easier to apply sunblock -- and less dust and dirt sticks to smooth legs. The wattage gains are just gravy. :)

No, anything but. Any reason I can find to post that video, I will. It's the coolest cycling video ever! For those that think fricton is only DT shifters, there's a few running barcons. It's the sights and sounds of racing and nothing more.....except for the surf music. Awesome! No commentary needed.

Thanks so much. Yes, same here. That's for sure the reason I could out-descend almost everyone I rode with. The one exception was the local Cat 2 champ. We descended side by side. Neither of us could find an advantage their opponent couldn't match. I guess I'll stick with my old bike. The reason for my screen name is that's what some of my buddies called me when I bought that bike. They were all buying custom steel - I was the first to go carbon and yes, it did make a difference. The first time I got on it I was amazed. I'd click for the next gear and I'd go faster. I kept clicking and kept going faster, no obvious end point. I'd been on many bikes but never one that performed like that. Yes, position probably had something to do with that performance, but the bike was made for that position. I still ride with bars 10 cm below saddle, perfectly comfortable. I'm 5'6" and short legged.

I admittedly only ride the drops for descending or when the terrain is super rough. That being said, I have a decent amount of saddle-to-bar drop, so the "aero hoods" position is still pretty low. Luckily I'm able to sustain a fairly tight hip angle during the ride. It's just that I've now had to institute a stretching and strength routine for the stabilizing muscles in my hips, as I've been dealing with sciatica pain off and on since last season.

I probably shouldn't even mention it, but dealing with road rash is a lot easier with shaven legs as well. It's one of those very low frequency events, but when it does happen, I'm sure glad not to have bandages stuck to leg hairs.