we've been collecting website data for some education grants we're planning for
Not the only metric but helps to tell the big picture
Doesn't everyone like charts and graphs? ;)

Yeah OK! Certainly it you're working in Education and/or Outreach website clicks are an important metric. I know I've put out plenty of press releases on the work I'm doing. Interaction with the public is important.

But as I said, this is an old work, I doubt anyone cares about us looking at it any more!

Where issue is being drawn Chaad, is the article does not do justice to the subject in the least. The notion of vibration damping, ride quality and efficiency of energy transfer are being misrepresented in terms of their root cause. Differences being ascribed to materials aren't true. Geometry differences have colored this relationship. It is the relationship between material and geometry and the associated tradeoffs of each that limits combinations that should have been addressed. Why weaker and softer Aluminum ends up being stiffer for example. That is what should be addressed. Aluminum is not a stiffer material than carbon fiber...and yet the bike tested was because of geometry. It is much easier to make a carbon bike stiffer than Al for the same weight. . No meaningful extrapolation of ride quality can be drawn based upon the test description and yet conclusions were drawn which although true of 3 particular bikes, doesn't remotely represent the industry in terms of material characterists.

As far as I can tell, we have the slides for a 2004 conference presentation.

Here is the abstract for the article submitted,
Article Abstract

Ahhh... I found the article without images.
Re: Objective effects of bike on performance

One can assume some of the power point images are several of the images from the article.
http://web.mit.edu/2.tha/www/ppt/Bike-ISEA.pdf

So the published article is a conference proceeding as well, so likely not peer reviewed.

I have had bikes that beat me to death, other bikes with the same frame material that ride like silk. It's not the material but the design, imho.

For example not all aluminum is created equal. A CAAD10 due mostly to the alloy in the aluminum is what created the ride quality versus, say, any entry level aluminum frame. So it's a combination, but the alloy change made a big difference between the CAAD9 and 10 in vibration absorption.

Are you sure? Or was it the design differences that the different aluminum alloy made feasible. That is like saying Reynolds 753 is lighter than Reynolds 501. Or that a 501 frame is stiffer than a 753 fame. Yes, but not really because the metals have different density or stiffness. The 753 is stronger and less mass is needed for the same frame integrity, but the two alloys have just about the same density and stiffness. Isn't it similar in aluminum alloys. Strength changes but not so much density and stiffness. For example, 7075 alloy is almost twice as strong (tensile yield) as 6061 alloy, yet it is only 4% stiffer (Young's modulus).

Duh?

You think mit is coming out with their own bike line and trying to sway customers.. You dumb dumbs.

No I don't think that. You seem to have some basic issues with English comprehension. MIT grad? ;)

Ok mr. Nobody.

:lol: