terrymorse 

There's also the fun of walking on those Speedplay cleats. Less walking, actually, more mincing. Or carrying cleat clovers, having them fall off while walking about, and retracing your steps to find the lost cleat cover.

Fun stuff.

Troul 

as long as the plugs are used, I've never lost a cover.... but evidently, losing a cover after taking off quickly from stop seems to be a thing I've only been unfortunate to experience...

WhyFi

Have you used them recently? They've all come with walkable cleats for the last 4 or 5 years; you're not skating on steel plates anymore. I find them to be more walkable than Delta-type cleats and the older Speedplay Cafe Covers that were always getting lost.

VegasJen

You guys defend clipping in all you want. But the data is out there. Clipping in gives modest gains in power, at best. So you can promote the additional expense and complication if you want. But I am immune to hype. The **** to worth ratio analysis shows no advantage. I could spend more time using them and I could have a $10,000 bike maintained by a shop but it still doesn't equal any advantage.

At least not in my case, not the way I ride. You want to ride clipped in, knock yourself out. Unlike some of you judgy types, I believe you can do whatever the hell makes you happy.

VegasJen

If people actually bothered to read my post, this is pretty much exactly what I said. I don't like them and I don't see a benefit. But I clearly state that if it's your thing, then you do you.

VegasJen

Did you actually read the post?

WhyFi

This is the most insightful thing you've said. If I rode like you ride, I wouldn't use clipless, either. If you rode like I ride, you wouldn't do so without clipless pedals, either.

Yet you insinuate that the majority of us are only buying in to hype, fashion and/or the emulation or pros. Seems awfully judgy to me.

Maelochs

I don't care how any of you ride. But if you make specious arguments i will note that.

Trying to "prove" that your way is better is pointless and in fact, impossible. There is no objective evidence to justify Any preference.

But seriously, if i am deaf and talk a lot about which bands don't impress me, are you going to listen closely to my opinions? If you give me two cars to test and I say one is better, are you going to listen to my judgment after you find out that i crashed the second one before the test?

You know you don't like cleats. You knew it before you started. You had a bunch of accidents because apparently you never bothered to learn to use them. You have Zero objective evidence showing they are as good, better, or less good than ... what you prefer. You never did a valid test.

You preference alone is all the validation you should need. You want it, that's it.

A lot of people start threads here here trying to "prove" that what they like is quantifiably better. It is pitiful and pathetic. Which color is better? What is the best song?

Why people cannot distinguish between subjective and objective .... maybe there is something to the "dumbing down" of the U.S. educational system.

Koyote

BS. You're telling clipless riders that they've bought into the "hype." Here are some snippets from your earlier posts:

And the data is actually quite mixed -- with plenty of it demonstrating physio and mechanical advantages to riding clipless -- like this study. And such studies don't even begin to discuss (much less measure) the advantages in bike handling, the reduction in crashes and skinned knees, and the reduced physical and mental effort provided by NOT having to keep thinking about and adjusting the position of feet on pedals.

You're a novice rider who tried clipless for a few rides and then comes onto a cycling forum (in which the average member has vastly more experience and knowledge than you) to tell a whole bunch of us that we're fools. You've got quite a Dunning Kruger effect going on.

tomato coupe

There seems to be a lot of that going around.

VegasJen

I made the attempt to use "clipless" pedals. The fact is the data doesn't support the efficiency argument. Not my opinion, but studies by people that live and breathe cycling. So that leaves really only two viable arguments. 1) you feel more in control and stable being clipped in. That's a valid observation, and I respect that. 2) you're buying all the kit to look like the "big boys". If that's your thing, that's fine too. I don't know why you choose to and I don't care. But you're inferring that I'm judging everybody against the gotta-have-the-gear standard. I'm not. That may be a factor, but it's not a deciding factor.

And the fact that so many of you have your panties in a wad over my opinion does speak to the issue all by itself.

VegasJen

I said in my original post that they don't work for me. I don't like them. I think I gave them a fair shot. In case some of you FAILED to read my original post, I have more 200 miles over 8 or 9 rides between the SPDs and the Looks. I think the SPDs were better in that they were easier to get out of, but they could be pretty finicky to get into also. It still doesn't change the fact that for the riding I do (paved roads in generally dry, clear conditions) they're little more than expensive kit with little return on investment.

You do you and I'll do me.

mstateglfr 

VegasJen - learn to shift. Also, I can ride atop(not clipped in) my spd pedals without issue. If one isn't clipped and the other is, just pedal with the clipped in leg while your unclipped foot attaches to the pedal. Pretty simple.

But most importantly - learn to shift. You won't then get stuck in a bad gear riding up a hill.

Chuck M 

I'm guessing now (and I should have known by the mention of flame suit in the thread title) that you just want to argue about clipless pedals. I think you could have learned more and perhaps got better results had you posted something more along the line of asking for tips how to use foot retention and using the resources of this board's membership rather than alienating some of the people you think have panties in a wad.

Some of the more notorious trolls have recently been banned otherwise they would perhaps join in with you.

WhyFi

I'm not inferring anything, I'm going by statements that you've made.

I can't speak for others, but my panties aren't in a wad - panties would be inappropriate under bibs, we've discussed this.

Bob Ross

Some data doesn't support the efficiency argument, that's true. However, you may be confusing efficiency with efficacy.

As I wrote elsewhere: One thing that often gets overlooked when folks cite studies on "Pedaling Efficiency" (that demonstrate the downstroke produces positive torque while the upstroke produces negative torque) and conclude that this must be a reason why clipless pedals or toeclips are unnecessary, is that they may be confusing Efficiency with Efficacy.

Efficiency is a fairly objective measurement; it's defined as the ratio of the useful work performed by a machine or in a process to the total energy expended (or heat taken in).

Yes, putting all of your force into the downstroke of a pedal (and little-to-none into the upstroke) will produce more useful work -- make the bike go faster or farther -- or it will expend less energy, than having a uniform pedal stroke with consistent power around the full 360°.

But often our cycling goals aren't concerned with absolute Efficiency; our goals while riding aren't necessarily to always Maximize The Ratio Of Useful Work To Energy Expended. Sometimes our cycling goals are a bit more abstract

...like, Win The Race.

Or Get To The End Of The Ride Without Bonking.

This is where Efficacy trumps Efficiency. Achieving these abstract goals often requires that you temporarily ride in an inefficient manner. Because pulling on the upstroke or applying power through all 360° of the pedal stroke can distribute the workload to less-sore/tired muscles, and/or it can allow for more instantaneous acceleration. And being able to selectively do those things can often allow the cyclist to be more effective at achieving their ultimate goal.

And clipless pedals or toe clips have been shown empirically to aid the Efficacy of those strategies.

growlerdinky

as a rider who has been "clipped in" since 1994....



cool. you do you.

fujidon

You're looking for an argument and you created one.
Take the advice that you find useful and ignore the rest. If you insist on things like "the data doesn't support". you're just being argumentative and contrary.
And then you get pissy because because not everyone agrees with you,
Feel free to ride the way you like, but don't come here and tell everyone else they're wrong.

Some people enjoy the sport of debate for its own sake. I'm not one of them. I think you might be.

genejockey 

Yeah, that.

genejockey 

Jesus, people! "Data" is the PLURAL!!! "The data ARE out there"..."the data DON'T support the argument."
If you're going to waste time arguing about personal preferences as if they're empirically derived, you could at least do it grammatically.
/rant

mstateglfr 

I believe you meant to post- data are the plural.
...kidding.

Polaris OBark

The word data is not a plural. There is one word. Geese is a single word for more than one goose. Mice is a single word for more than one mouse. Data is a single word for more than one datum.

The data themselves are plural.

genejockey 

BTW, for the OP - as someone above said, you'd benefit from learning how and when to shift. Also, you might benefit from spending time and effort on bike set up and maintenance. With the derailleurs and shifters set up properly, and shifted properly, you shouldn't find yourself stalling out and dropping the chain, pedal type notwithstanding.

genejockey 

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The singular is "datum" and even if it weren't "Data" takes the plural. "These are the data" "The data show thus-and-so".

genejockey 

Right, because as written, it was talking about the word, not the data.