Baby Puke

Tires are the same, Soyo's, I'm sure that tire hasn't changed since the 60's (it's a very very nice tire). I have seen some pretty wild frames executed within the rules with aero tubing and crazy geometry. It must be steel. Keep in mind they don't have to worry about UCI rules so really steep seat angles are sometimes seen for those who want an extreme forward position, and you will see some oddball forward stuff, like almost kissing the front tire. There are definitely a variety of schools of thought on how to sit on a bike. Wheels have got to be Araya box rims and 36 spokes, but they can be bladed. But that's about it. I think a bike pulled out of a time machine from 1975 would be just as good as what you could get now. Padding is maybe different and better, the helmet is the same but it's basically a motorcycle helmet.

By the way, I don't want anyone getting the idea I was riding pro over there, I wasn't. I just rode with a club that (at that time) pretty much demanded that you ride to the rules. Or at the very least clips and straps and the mushroom hat. Other non-NJS stuff was merely "frowned upon".

GhostSS

Still pretty cool, I read a bit of your blog that's great stuff! I haven't been back to Japan since 2006, I really miss it. I'd like to take my bike(s) next time I go and try track or tour around the country side.

Baby Puke

GhostSS, where did you live and for how long? I miss it too. We plan to go back. If gonna tour by bike bring your climbing legs! Hella mountainous.

GhostSS

I was born near Aomori-Ken but I was young when my family left for America (around age 6). I went to Kita-Kyushu Oita-Ken for about a year to study in college. Didn't do much cycling, the college was on a forested volcano (an onsen town, Beppu-shi), getting to and from would have been a trial. EDIT: Instead I joined the college rugby team. We lost every game.

Baby Puke

Whoa, my wife's family is from Aomori-shi! I've heard Beppu is really nice.

Quinn8it

While not practical and I'm not really even suggesting it is how it Should Be...

there is something interesting about an NJS type Standard- it brings it back to Man Versus Man.. Things would be simpler that way.. And I wouldn't have to figure out my aero position..

Baby Puke

Very true, Quinn. Simplifies things a lot.

Fiveflat

What are the thoughts on a Felt TK3? Particularly for a newcomer to track? I really don't want to put ANY money into this cheap chinese bike I have and my LBS has a TK3. While I usually couldn't care less on public opinion of ME, I'd still rather not look like a poser LOL! The TK3 is priced pretty reasonably compared to what I see some people paying for a "fixie"
(He did have me get on a 56 and said I looked like a bear on a tricycle - so I'm not concerned about size. We both know what I need now).

slindell

In theory the UCI bike rules are supposed to even out the technology, just a few decades later than NJS and sticker instead of stamped into the part (not mentioning the confused random changes). The down side is that with tight rules in place to ensure no gross advantage getting the marginal edge can be more costly. And to truly even it out you need to regulate the clothing and positions (and ban short/small riders who do not provide adequate draft :-)).
Getting the tech out of the equation and just having a standard bike and kit would be a better race and make the focus just on training/racing, but then how would us masters racers have a hope of keeping up with the kids.

MrGibs

Anyone use the Giro AirAttack (with or without the Shield) on the track? Looks like it could be a fun helmet to try out.

spazegun2213

they are great starter bikes. The only "downside" to them is the skinny Chainring, chain and rear gear (both are 3/32"). Most track stuff is 1/8" for all of that. That being said, unless you are making a TON of power, that stuff will last you seasons of use. Upgrading all of that is not very expensive at all either. So that is the only "downside." We have a few people riding them here in San Diego and they all love them.

Baby Puke

When you literally have one rim, one saddle, one brand of handlebar, one spoke maker, etc., the costs are manageable. There is no room for experimentation or exotica, which some people will understandably object to. But it does keep things cheap, at least in this specific example. My Panasonic is a much less expensive bike than my Dolan.

carleton

Yeah, NJS is essentially the IROC of bike racing.

International Race of Champions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

slindell

I was thinking of IROC when commenting where ideally you just show up and pick a bike off the rack. But I seem to remember that some cars were consistently faster than others so the results were partially determined by the draw.
On bikes you get into the insignificant digits by things like rims getting heavier as the dies wear so different batches vary in weight. Frames vary in alignment, weight and fine measurements. So even if not mattering much in overall results there are minor variations. Ski manufacturers pull skis off the line that match flex/weight/vibration parameters that they want for the race pool so even though you can buy the same model off the same line as the top racers their equipment is faster. Some of the racers claim favoritism by the ski mfgs for some racers getting the best off the line.

Overall I think having a standard bike would be good for most racers by capping the cost it is probably not sellable at the top end and the standard bikes would cost more than the low end now raising the barrier a bit to get started. If you need the equipment boost (or other help) to get an upgrade to the next cat life probably will not be pleasant there anyway so applying limits to cats 5-3(2?) might help people enjoy things more.

carleton

Those that (rightfully) complain the most about standardization are the equipment manufacturers.

Where is the incentive to innovate if you cannot profit from it?

Why would Specialized spend hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of dollars creating the Shiv if the league governing bodies will not allow it which means that their target audience (a serious triathlete) cannot use it in comp so they can't sell it? So, why innovate at all?

For example, the day that the UCI (and by extension, USA Cycling) says that track bikes must use a double triangle design made of round aluminum tubing...blah, blah, blah... will be the day that Felt stops producing the TK1 (as an example). And you can see how others will follow suit.

...OR that will be the day that a new governing body will get a breath of life.


Athletes want to go faster than before. Athletes don't want to see if they were fast as athletes of years past by riding the same bikes those guys rode.

Who wants to race on this:



When you can race on this:



...assuming that you had 20,000USD just laying around

Soil_Sampler

Me!
Where do I sign up?

UCI Hour Record
Best Human Effort

bigfred 

But Carleton, development has been stiffled for years now. That Look still complies with the double diamond frame priciple purely because the UCI says it must. That design in no way maximizes the utility of fiber reinforced plastic as an engineering material. And, it costs 19,000 USD more than the Merckx example would for very marginal gains. Eliminate the wheels from that equation and the gains become even less.

Given your title as 27.2 Seatpost Champion and proponent and that you have previously supported that "fit" far exceeds "material" with regard to importance to race performance, I'm somewhat surprised you would be so quick to the above view.

I can't agree with anyone that thinks cost is somehow limiting track participation. There are plenty of very capable track bikes available for reasonable amounts and many tracks have rental/loaner bikes for those who have an interest.

What is missing is accessability and cool factor. Make it fashionable and people will flock for a short while. Somehow find a way to make track cycling part of a locales culture and they'll continue to return and participate.

flip.flop

If I'm happy with my performance during endurance races, but struggle on the sprints at the end, should I (as well as focussing on it in training) consider a different gear in order to help me get going. I currently use 86 GI and feel comfortable on it.

carleton

Right! The Double-Diamond is just part of the problem.

Remember the days of bikes like this:



UCI put an end to that.

We could totally have new bikes that are faster.

If it were up to the UCI, skinsuits would not be allowed either. Technically, a woman's sports bra is illegal under current rules that prevent any "added support or body modification" (or however it is worded).

As far as 27.2 is concerned: If aero seatposts didn't slip, I would ride them. But, they slip.

bigfred 

Yep.

What we have right now is more similliar to NASCAR. Where manufactuteres spend inordinate sums of money for very small incremental gains compared to what could be attained if that same budget were allocated to actual innovation.

UCI's entire skin suit, body shaping, tangent is completely rediculous! "You, there, you're clothes are too tight." "You,.... you're national team didn't invest enough in good tailoring, your suit is too loose in some places and too tight in others." "I am sorry, your body morphology does not comply with what the UCI would like to see a cyclist shaped like, you are disqualified for being too ....(insert: tall, short, skinny, round, V shaped, ^ shaped, muscular, annorexic)." Or, at least, disadvantaged. "Oh, and your suit should be looser around the mid section and tighter across your shoulds and hips." Yeah, right.

Why Carleton? Why, must you want an aero post? How much time do you think one will be worth? :-)

GhostSS

I prefer the shape of the Lotus 110 over the 108 myself.


I completely agree with you though, the UCI is ******ing innovation and variety. Even with things you've previously mentioned like bike weight or even body positions it definitely shows that they are more concerned with "tradition" than racing. It's really a shame.

Anyone remember the Group-B rally races? No restrictions rally racing was pretty much the most exciting, fast paced, and fun looking of any rally I've ever witnessed. Also because of fewer restrictions it allowed engineers to get creative and improve car technology that later had an impact on the car industry as a whole. That was banned too.


Heck, even Steher motor pace and tandem sprints need to make a comeback, those were great!

carleton

To summarize my stance on seatposts:

As the saying in Engineering goes: "First, make it work, then make it work better."

Aero seatposts skipped the first part and started in on the second. So many people of all sizes have had issues with them slipping. They don't work well as they are not reliable.

The best compromise that I've seen is the Alpina Wing seatpost which is round where it counts as well as being flat where it counts:



It comes in multiple lengths. You choose the one that best minimizes the exposed round area.



Tiemeyer (and others) addressed this by, instead of extending an aero seatpost, extending the aero seatube and only using a bit of round seatpost.



But, of course, that means you have to get the frame custom made to take advantage of that solution. The Alpina solution is much more accessible.

carleton

What is the name of this Casco helmet? It is not listed on their website, yet they display it in their banners.



When I worked at a record store in college (god, I feel old saying "record store"), we weren't allowed to play any music that we did not have in stock to sell. This is simply because the purpose of playing music in the store was to get customers to buy it...but if we didn't have it available to sell, that just frustrated the customer and sent them elsewhere to buy it.

carleton

At the highest levels of sport, the training regimens are more similar than different.

Here's the interesting thing about the man vs man concept, when "all things are equal" as far as equipment AND training go, it comes down to things outside of your control...genetics. To me, that would make things less interesting.

The history of sport as so many examples of men and women who were plucked from a daily humdrum life and, with some (relatively) minimal training, became champions. We've all read the stories. Joanna Rowsell and Phillip Hinds come to mind.

If anything, it is my humble opinion that equipment is more of an equalizer than anything. Engineering + Genetics beats Genetics alone

I think Technology/Engineering is another variable that keeps sport interesting. For example, in motorsport there is SOOOO much chatter about, "What tires will he run today?.." "Did he gamble on the right compound?"

Baby Puke

Anybody else have one of those Alpina seatposts start looking all squished in the clamping area?