Or you just had one good day. Since you had foot retention systems in both cases, there's no reason why clipless should have been so much better than straps.

I guess it's like driving stick in stop&go traffic eh.

Learn how to Track Stand foo! :)

Consider this:

Your right foot is on the downstroke and you left foot is on the pedal, the pedal pushing your left foot back up. If your left foot is in contact at all with the pedal, it's is giving added resistance to the crank that your right foot on th downstroke has to overcome. If you left foot is attached to the pedal however, you can actually remove that resistance by pulling up. Now all the effort in your right foot's downstroke is going toward moving the bicycle, and not pushing your left leg.

That alone makes your pedaling more efficient. You can choose to lift even more with your left leg to get an even more efficient stroke. Your still going to have a lot more power in the downstroke, but it's just wrong to say that lifting up the pedals does not help.

Have you actually used clipless pedals for any length of time?

I had months of holding up in the high 80's and now I hit 95? I could never hit 120 and now I did? One good day? I don't think so. The difference between straps and clipless in what you mentioned is also that the shoes are stiff and solid. It IS different. I have a Triathlon next thursday so no more hard rides till after, and I will post my stats till I'm blue in the face.

People think this, but it's not the case. It's true you need to use muscular effort to lift your left leg. However you can either use the muscles on your left leg to pull it up, or use the muscles on your right leg to push it up. As long as the left leg isn't actively pushing down, there's no reason to claim one way is more efficient than the other.

Not true. As long as your foot is even touching the pedal, there is some pressure on it. Of course pulling up is impossible with platforms, and that's why clipless is better in this regard.

It takes some practice to get good at timing the "pulling up" part, and I think I'm getting better at it, though it's probably nearly impossible to quantify while I'm riding. It was sort of an epiphany when I realized that pedaling in clipless pedals is really quite a different thing than pedaling on platforms.

That's true, but you missed my point. If the left leg is passively resting on the pedal, not actively pushing down. then the work of lifting it can be done by the right leg pushing the right pedal, and it's no more difficult than pulling up. It's the same as the way it takes the same effort to lift something whether you pick it up with your hands, or hoist it with a rope and pulley. And as alanbikehouston pointed out, pros don't pull up, at least on the trainer in the lab.

Clipless, toe-clips, platforms.
It's all a matter of taste.

Clipless tastes like chicken.

Not in my case either. Clipless as defacto rehab. Of course I don't climb in too high a gear for hours.

Badly adjusted cleats are bad for the knees. That is not the same as clipless being bad for the knees. I call BS on that generalization.

That doesn't make any sense to me - if I am already using all my muscle strength to push down to propel the bike forward with my right leg, where do I get the extra strength to lift the left leg. The weight of the left leg is then effectively pushing against my forward motion by requiring some of the work from my right leg to lift it up. On the other hand, if I lift my left leg with my hamstrings (that is why they are there after all) then all the work of my right leg can go into moving the bike forward.

One leg drills or riding with special cranks that allow each leg to operate independantly will show that you can and do pull up with the opposite leg. In general practive this is highly dependant on cadence. The quadraceps are stronger and react faster than the hamstrings, epecially in untrained riders. At high cadences, where most of those lab tests are done, the hamstrings are not able to balance the quads and so there isn't much "pull up" effect. At low cadences, like when climbing a hill, the hamstrings play a much larger role. I can pedal with no pushing at all, just pulling up although it isn't very efficient. In practice I have to rachet down my shoes and tighten the velco straps to keep from pulling out on climbs and when I ride my commuter that has platforms my feet do sometimes slip off the pedals on the upstroke so that pretty much convinces me.

Folks really don't need clipless if they are not going to regularly spin more than 90 rpms, attack hills with gusto or sprint all out. One recent ride with platforms convinced me that I needed to dumb down my riding too much for my liking to stay on the pedals. FWIW, I'm a slightly chubby accountant - def not a pro or wannabe. YMMV

Your left leg rises on every pedal stroke. Something has to make it rise. That something can be the left leg muscles or the right leg muscles. From an energy expenditure point of view it doesn't matter - it's the same amount of work. And in fact as you yourself explain below, at high cadence it has to be the right leg pushing down that lifts your left leg, since the left hamstrings aren't fast enough to keep up with the pedal revolutions.


That is probably true, and even clipless pedal bashers acknowledge they may help here, but there are also lots of people who ride up steep slopes with platforms - take bmx riders for instance, or half-pipe tricksters.

When I used to ride clipless and I would swap them for platforms in winter boot weather, I would notice that too, for the first day or two, and then it goes away. In fact, I noticed it happened as the pedal goes over the top, not halfway up as you would expect if you are pulling up. So I concluded it was more an effect of leg momentum, and clipless making you lazy - you're used to the pedal dragging your foot over the top so you forget to actually keep your foot in contact with the pedal.

For me the bottom line is that I started using clipless around 2004 and like everybody else, I bought into the hype and the claims and I thought - wow, this is great, I feel so much faster and more in control and this must be so much more efficient. And then when I took clipless pedals off my bikes after a couple of years, and I discovered that I didn't suddenly slow down, or have to work harder, or lose my ability to ride uphill, I realized that clipless hadn't actually done much for my riding after all. The benefits are hugely overstated. In racing and very steep uphills, they offer a worthwhile, but still quite small advantage.

This is absurd. Next time you go grocery shopping, if you have multiple bags, carry everything with one arm. Same weight, same energy expenditure, should be just as efficient, right?

Or instead of doing eight pull ups, do eight one armed pull ups, four for each arm. No problem! Same thing, right?

Of course these are more extreme examples, but the same sort of thing applies to the clipless conversation here. If the left leg helps out the right leg, the whole thing is more efficient.

They aren't just extreme examples, they are inappropriate examples. The pullups, or a really heavy grocery load are beyond the capacity of one arm - I have to use two. However as Kommisar89 pointed out, at high cadence the legs don't actually work together - they take turns working the downstroke. In fact, in the grocery example, you're correct that it is the same amount of work to carry stuff with one arm as with two. Again, it's only if the load is beyond the capacity of one arm that it makes it more efficient to use two arms. If I have one heavy suitcase to carry some distance, I can alternate arms to make it tolerable, just like I alternate legs (a lot more frequently) in my pedalling effort.

I have no problem with using clipless. I unclip easily, don't fall over, and usually clip back in almost instantly.

That said, I don't use them anymore for commuting. There's no point. I can go just as fast (i check my speedo regularly) with or without. And I can wear any shoes I want, have my feet in any position I feel comfortable with at the moment and change position if I feel like it. The only downside is that it's SLIGHTLY harder to get moving from a complete stop. Not enough to care but it wouldn't be fair to not mention it. Would help in climbing steep hills but I don't have any of those.

We're really picking on this point you're trying to make, aren't we... ;)

The thing is, you say that it's the same amount of work whether you lift that leg or push it up with the other leg.

The problem is, any energy you spend pushing up that leg is not being used for forward motion anymore. It's lost -- it's gone. It's not serving any purpose towards locomotion.

I figure, there are muscles that make both pulling and pushing motions with our legs, so why not take advantage of them?

I have clipless pedals, and like them quite a bit. Of course I'm also on a recumbent trike, so don't have to unclip to stop.

I used to have a two-wheeler with toe clips, though, and didn't like them. The primary reason I didn't like them was due to the fact that at every stop, I'd have to flip the pedal up before I could use the clips.

I haven't seen anyone mention that, figured I'd toss that in before running away and avoiding the discussion of effectiveness. (my personal view -- it feels like I'm more efficient with the clipless pedals, that's enough for me. Not too concerned with the exact level of change)

Ahh but there's the rub - I gather from many of the posts that a lot of folks here never reach that point on their bikes. They are simply cruising along at a moderate pace. In that case having your feet attached to the pedals does't add much. On the other hand, I and I'm sure quite a few others often ride near or at my maximum capacity, at least for short distances and for that it does help. My typical cadence is 90-105 and I frequently go up to 120. No way I could do that on platforms.

But aside from all that, I think it is being implied in this thread that attaching your feet to the pedals is somehow a new fangled thing that the cycling industry has recently come up with to sell you things you don't need and several comparisons have been made to commuter bikes or BMX bike which by the nature of the their intended purpose use platform pedals. In fact, however, for road bikes attaching your feet firmly to the pedals has been the standard practice for decades. Long before Look introduced clipless systems in the 80's there were clips and straps with cleats on those same special expensive shoes that attached your feet even more firmly to the pedals and made it even more difficult to get in and out of. Clipless pedals were not introduced to replace bare platforms for casual riders but rather to improve clips and straps that had been used since the 30's at least.

Can we argue about the color of the sky next? Purple!

Why it's celeste of course, everybody knows that ;)

That's true, but it's exactly the same when you pull up - part of your effort goes towards lifting your leg (which doesn't aid locomotion), and part goes towards lifting the pedal (which does).
I agree. However most of the time the pulling muscles don't contribute as much as people think - they do part of the work of lifting the leg and none of the work of lifting the pedal.

The sky is every color BUT blue.

It merely reflects blue.

(okay, I know that technically it doesn't "reflect" but instead "scatters" blue wavelength light)

My friends & I solved this in the cafeteria in college.




:lol:

I am probably going tohave to get some. I realize my feet keep flying off the pedals when I am trying to increase my cadence. I am getting better at increasing my cadence by bending my feet....but that can only go so far.

WOW this thread is amazing, It even beats steel v's alum!!!
How could anyone question the superiority of clipless shoes?
If you stick on clippless shoes and pedal the same way as you do on your platforms you will not notice a difference. Think for a minute, clipless shoes do not have a built in turbo or supercharged battery system; you have to- well, use the pedals!

Glad you now admit that they are superior?

There's disadvantages to clipless for many types of riding (women complain about high heels, well try walking in them backwards) but peddling the bike is not one of them.

does anyone think that the people who say they do nothing hav'nt even tried them?

I've always said they offer a slight advantage, but it's usually grossly overstated. Under moderate exertion they offer zero advantage.

well forgive me I didnt get the idea that the argument through this post was whether clipless were better for a ride around the pond. for myself unless im riding around the park or with gf, I love them, so much easier to exit over clips