cslone

Yes, as are your reasons for not liking Fuji, and just starting threads to whine about them. Your components sucked on your Fuji League and that's Fuji's fault?
I see the Pinarello Paris and Ridley Noah on the bottom of that list too. Where's the thread bashing those frames/manufacturers?

That's funny.

terrymorse 

I love my Fuji Team SL. Under 15 lbs, and it fits me like a glove:

ElJamoquio

That frame looks a lot like mine. Under a spot where the paint chipped, it's even the same color.

Stallionforce

Correct me if I'm wrong, but they didn't bother testing a Cervelo? I see some other obvious ommissions in that list as well. Nonetheless, it's an interesting list. I wonder if simply testing each aspect of a bike's performance is useful, however; after all, the bike must ride 'in one piece' as it were. I'd be much more likely to take the advice of a pro who has ridden 10 or 12 bikes in his career than follow the advice of a scientist.

humble_biker

Use all you want but that equipment is used to measure rider output and has nothing to do with power transmission in a frame. And rider output is not affected by the frame they sit on either.

ElJamoquio

Powertap measures power at the wheel hub... SRM measures at the crank. Using both, you can measure the power transmission in the frame.

I'm betting it's less than the margin of error of measurement for the SRM/Powertap, but I'd still love to try.

Does anyone have a SRM in SE Michigan?

tonphil1960

Killing me !!!!!!!!!! I have a Hyundai too, second one. 100,000 mile warranty!!!!! Great mileage !!!!!
Thousands cheaper than comparable Jap cars. Best cars I have ever owned and I have had many new cars..

Buy smart ..................... T

filtersweep

I wonder how many of those carbon fiber bikes were built in the same factory?

aballas

OMG WHAT A PIECE OF CRAP!!!!

vpiuva

This thread is not nearly as fun as a Ryanf thread. I can't believe I read through this.

ElJamoquio

It actually pertains to cycling, though. Every third thread is supposed to be about cycling.

Hell, every fifth thread is supposed to be about a Motobecane, so we're a little behind this month.

tonphil1960

I LOVE MOTOBECANES !!!!!!!!!!!! Didn't buy one but love em still...


T Bone

humble_biker

no you can't you measure rider output at two different points.

https://www.srm.de/Software/SRMManual.pdf

ElJamoquio

Are you joking?

Digital Gee

Thank God I'm not the only one.

tonphil1960

yeah I remember the good old days in the late 70's Motobecane, Puch, made Mopeds too. Gitane, Fuji, yes, Pugeot. yeah those were the days. Gotta Love Moto's.

T

tonphil1960

What is Tour mag. rating here. Bikes or the Hubble Telescope. If someone puts their ass on a bike and it rides well for them and they like it, it's a good bike. Killing me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Not everyone is interested in scientific tests of everything on Earth. Sometimes we just have to be Human, not Super Human all the GD time.... Compete, compete, compete that's what the entire American lifestyle is about and it's pretty sickening..... sorry for the rant but I am on a roll

Paleease,,,, T Bone..

humble_biker

maybe maybe not.

SRM powertap measures rider output as it relates to the bicycle. That has nothing to do with power transference in a frame.

Does frame material absorb rider efforts, and other dynamic forces? Yes.
Does frame material contribute to the forces of rider effort? Yes

Aside from that the "results" from the OP are pure opinion and crap.

ElJamoquio

...which is why you use the Powertap at the same time, and compare the results. The Powertap measures output at the wheel hub.

humble_biker

And by adding together and dividing by two you get an average of rider output from two different locations on the machine...Has nothing to do with the frame. Why do you suppose they measure rider forces at the two most active points?

ElJamoquio

By subtracting one from the other, or dividing one by the other, you get the power lost through the hysteresis of the frame.

humble_biker

At best it can only be an estimate. And it is in no way scientific.

There are too many variables involved for it to be of any significant use.
The purpose is to measure the rider.
If it measured power transferance in a frame what we would see are pro riders riding identical frames for any given event.

It might be possible to measure a materials ability to accept dynamic force but it will never be of any use as long as a human body is sitting on it.

ElJamoquio

'It is in no way scientific'

HUH? Testing a hypothesis with data taken by mucho-dinero-strain gauges mounted to axles, (almost certainly calibrated at the factory) and zero'd pretty much every ride... isn't scientific?

You may claim that the data is incomplete (or worthless). I disagree. Perhaps in the realm of ultra-sprinters (way above 1500 watts) we need to worry about the deflection of the crank in terms of output, but I'm never going to put out 1500 watts, so I don't really care.

And even in the 2000 watts case, I think the data would be very useful.

My hypothesis: it doesn't matter; frame 'x' has 99.X% of the power transfer of frame 'y'., regardless of material or design. Since it doesn't make a difference in all but extreme cases, pro riders ride whatever bike paid the most money to have them ride it (again, except for extreme cases... which is why some bikes are re-branded).

humble_biker

Of course it has to be at 0 how else could you measure rider output with any accuracy.
Forgive my ignorance but if you could go to the manual and show me the varying ratios for frame and crank material as well as the various lengths and sizes I would like to see it.
Here's a hypothetical: Let's assume it is possible, we have everything all set up on frame1 for rider A. Frame1 has a chainstay length of X. We move rider A to another frame. Frame2 which has a different chainstay length and is also made of a different material than Frame1. But rider A is exactly the same on either frame. So SRM Powermeter will give a different reading because it measures the deflection in chainstay AND the variation in frame material? In addition to the rider data?

The zero is an absolute for the equation to gauge off of. It is the same zero regardless of frame material or crank material or the variations in size of both.

As far as the statement about pro's goes if the frame material could be quantified in this way. Then you would see the ones that wanted to win on the best possible choice for the given scenario the others would ride the sponsors choice and they would lose barring the infinite number of variables involved there...

ElJamoquio

I'm not trying to insult you - but the Powertap measures the torque at the wheel hub, not the crank.

So comparing the two shows how much difference (and I'm betting it's below the margin of error for the system) between crank arm input/output and what actually gets to the hub.

The amount that is absorbed by the frame is argued about around here incessantly. This proposed test would answer that question.

So to answer your hypothetical: no, the SRM would presumably measure the same in either frame/material. But the Powertap, which is used on the same bike at the same time, WOULD vary - however slightly - between two frames of differing dimensions/materials. The amount of change is what I want to measure.