Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:54 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 143 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 6:34 pm 
Old School Hero

Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 2:29 pm
Posts: 229
I’m not questioning your evidence but it’s much easier to decide when you can see the evidence


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 6:40 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:01 pm
Posts: 4548
:roll: Dude you stumped me with that last post !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 6:50 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:01 pm
Posts: 4548
A 29er wheel has roughly 10% more rolling circumference than an equivalent 26er. Each to their own. Not trying to knock the latest specs, just saying the actual benefits/differences are much much smaller than people realise. Its sometimes easier to justify buying a new whizzo bike than to loose some lbs and get fitter. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So is it 26 or 27.5"
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 6:53 pm 
Old School Hero

Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 2:29 pm
Posts: 229
In comparative tests the difference between HT, ST & FS bikes on a 2/3mile cx course ( all other things being as equal as possible) is ~ 1.4secs or less per lap. Important if you are a serious racer.

I was referring to this

I really must remember to use quotes.

Trying to edit and use quotes from my phones is terrible sorry.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So is it 26 or 27.5"
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 7:01 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:01 pm
Posts: 4548
Timoth27 wrote:
In comparative tests the difference between HT, ST & FS bikes on a 2/3mile cx course ( all other things being as equal as possible) is ~ 1.4secs or less per lap. Important if you are a serious racer.

I was referring to this

I really must remember to use quotes.

Trying to edit and use quotes from my phones is terrible sorry.


No worries. These magazine tests were carried out by a young fit skilled rider. The average slightly portly 40 something Rber would see much smaller differences in such a ‘test’.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So is it 26 or 27.5"
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 7:37 pm 
Old School Hero

Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 2:29 pm
Posts: 229
M-Power wrote:
Timoth27 wrote:
In comparative tests the difference between HT, ST & FS bikes on a 2/3mile cx course ( all other things being as equal as possible) is ~ 1.4secs or less per lap. Important if you are a serious racer.

I was referring to this

I really must remember to use quotes.

Trying to edit and use quotes from my phones is terrible sorry.


No worriesThese magazine tests were carried out by a young fit skilled rider. The average slightly portly 40 something Rber would see much smaller differences in such a ‘test’.


No probs I guess what I was trying to say (badly) was if someone quotes a test it would be useful to the other people reading the post to include where the test came from or even better a link to the test.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 7:54 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:01 pm
Posts: 4548
I wish I could find the one i saw on FB around a year ago but the search function isnt great. The timed differences on a cx circuit were tiny. They used a premium bike brand iirc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So is it 26 or 27.5"
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 8:37 pm 
Retro Guru

Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:42 am
Posts: 2939
CX course.
FFS. The one place where the differences trend to zero.
Probably cycling weakly.

Did they mention that all the bikes were thoroughly trounced by a 50 year old bloke riding a canti braked steel frame from the 80s?

And the word is anecdotal, not empirical.
There has actually been some proper testing done with a power meter and corrections made to ratios, weight and geometry. The difference is small, but not insignificant.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So is it 26 or 27.5"
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 8:51 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader

Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:48 am
Posts: 7660
Location: Bristol
M-Power wrote:
Timoth27 wrote:
In comparative tests the difference between HT, ST & FS bikes on a 2/3mile cx course ( all other things being as equal as possible) is ~ 1.4secs or less per lap. Important if you are a serious racer.

I was referring to this

I really must remember to use quotes.

Trying to edit and use quotes from my phones is terrible sorry.


No worries. These magazine tests were carried out by a young fit skilled rider. The average slightly portly 40 something Rber would see much smaller differences in such a ‘test’.


conversely, the slower you are, the more you benefit from faster equipment because you're on the course for longer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 9:29 pm 
MacModerator
MacModerator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 8:59 pm
Posts: 20986
Location: Sol Kitts
My tuppence. I own 26 ,27.5, 29, 29+ and 26 fat. 26 is purely retro and the modern bikes that I had that were 26 were on the whole pretty good at the time and I had no complaints. Until I started riding 29. The 29 does roll better, you will carry more speed and it will get you out of trouble too. In my opinion us that are a bit longer in the tooth and are no longer as fast or accurate would be well served by the benefits of the big wheel. I have followed the emergence of 29 and the negative opinions are nothing new, if you could read back on other forums 5/10 years ago you'd be reading the same thing. Only now most people are more accepting of them and indeed believe the benefits to actually be true. If it is indeed marketing then it is probably the most successful brainwashing in history :wink:

As for 27.5 well I have less evidence, the bike I have the wheel size is not the biggest factor, suspension and geometry play a bigger part here.

29+ , the bike is rigid and the big tyres provide hassle free comfort and again roll very well. I've used this for the Strathpuffer race where again it kept me out of trouble and in relative comfort without any suspension. Great for this type of thing , endurance events.

Fat bike is great again, very forgiving and it is indeed harder to pedal but unless you are racing (though I have also used this for the puffer) it is wonderful. Allows you to keep your head up and appreciate the countryside rather than focusing on the line you have to take. It's been said that fat bike reminds people of a big BMX and they really can be this much fun.

At the end of the day though a bikes a bike fur aw that. Two wheels, pedals and wotnot. Only now you have the choice to buy whatever you want. And remember it is up to you, you don't need to buy into it but I do think that you should at least try some of them. Not everyone is merely trying to justify there purchases or have had the wool pulled over there eyes by the evil bike industry.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 143 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group