Jump to content

BikeMax

Members
  • Posts

    875
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BikeMax

  1. Depending on your current level of fitness (assuming you have been training for this) you probably want to ride at a decent intensity, but no more than say 90 mins on Mon & Tues and then ease off - maybe Wed off and Thurs an easy ride, Fri off and then Saturday an easy hour with some jumps. A long taper is not really necessary for a fit rider riding what is an endurance event - just a reduction in hours and overall load.
  2. I am feeling some Q ring overload coming on ...
  3. Thanks Domenic. There is a limited selection in stock. I suggest calling Adrian on 072 383 6804 to see what is available.
  4. Maybe because it is far more aero and only a little heavier - having raced on both I prefer the 404 as an all round wheel - also a fair bit stiffer and stronger than the 303. As Titus says though the Reynolds Strata DV is a better wheel than both IMO - very well made and a different carbon structure that allows higher spoke tension.
  5. And there I was preparing myself for some sort of article proving the Q-rings as hogwash..... Guess bikemax is not so biast as they all say.... Q-rings AND a SRM' date=' no PT in sight... Seriously, Bikemax. I'm willing to be your quinnee pig. What test protocol do you want me to do on the bike to see if I can find any difference between Q-rings and normal rings?[/quote'] That study is too complicated to be done by us I am afraid - needs a control and a way to demonstrate that any improvement is entirely dowin to the rings (as opposed to the fitness gains you will be experiencing due to the superior training you are now doing )
  6. Thought you Q rings boys might liek this.. http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=/photos/2007/tech/features/tour_california/Davide_Frattini_Colavita_Rotor_Q-Rings
  7. Cmon MW - quoting a top ex physiologist is surely a reasonable approach given that he has more info on the topic than I do. On top of that I support what he says here and think his quote is relevant. As for your gym bike experience - that has less to do with pedalling in circles and more to do with the high torque on gym bikes and the effectiveness of clipless pedals vs the crap toe straps in gyms..
  8. Not wanting to be the voice of skepticism but please be aware that there is little to show that a better pedal stroke does much for performance - this is a quote from one of the top ex physiologists in the UK (this aside - if it works for you then go for it..) Originally Posted by ric_stern/RST Notonly is 'circular' pedalling overrated, the evidence appears to be against it -- in general, all the research that had examinded actual pedal forces tends to show that less good cyclist are more 'circular', while better cyclists simply stomp down harder. As i said in another thread i would not worry about how you pedal (for the vast majority -- MTBers are an exception due to issues of steep and slippy hills) -- all you want to do is aim to produce the greatest power over the duration of your ride ric
  9. Mmm now I'm not so sure .... Surely not questioning Go Lefty's credibility
  10. Didn't you read his post ?? He is trying to buy it back from you - not sell you another one (trust me - that is the last thing on his mind...)
  11. He really had his wings clipped by the looks of it...
  12. Hi all For those that are interested, I have posted some comparative data for various riders from the weekend's race at bikemaxpower.com
  13. It actually is all about physics, irrespective of whichever power device you are talking about. And the effect of riding in bunches would only be relevant if you mounted the ibike at the top of your helmet or wherever you could where it would not feel the difference in wind speed. Sensibly placed on your handlebar, it will not be less accurate in a bunch. amen. On the bars the wind speed will be less since you're drafting and therefore needing less power to keep up... I-bike should reflect this. Come on,.......this is drafting 101, first year cycling. Or have power meters suddenly changed Bernoulli's theorems as well..... **** you never know hey cos Heavier carbon bars can suddenly make a bike lighter at the scales too... saw it myself so it must be true.. If only it were that simple ... "Drafting I did one ride with two other riders, where I spent about 40% of the time in a draft. It was apparent during the ride that the iBike was underreporting my power output in the draft by about 40-50 watts. The pressure port should have accounted for the change in wind resistance, so why the inaccurate reading? My guess is that the iBike sits in the sweet spot of the draft, right at butt level of the rider in front. Most of my body is catching more wind than the iBike, so I'm doing my work than it thinks I am, hence the low wattage. The overall wattage for that ride was 8% too low. I got in touch with John Hamman of iBike and he confirmed this anomaly. He told me that it performs more accurately in a big pack, where the draft is bigger and more consistent. A couple of reports from message boards back up that assertion"
  14. http://lists.topica.com/lists/iBikeProPowerMeter/read/ http://www.cyclingforums.com/t-341477-15-3.html You will have to trawl through them I am afraid as I don;t have the time to find the individual refs at the moment.
  15. It actually is all about physics, irrespective of whichever power device you are talking about. And the effect of riding in bunches would only be relevant if you mounted the ibike at the top of your helmet or wherever you could where it would not feel the difference in wind speed. Sensibly placed on your handlebar, it will not be less accurate in a bunch. I don't follow - the effect of air flow in a bunch and it's efect is well documented. How can an instrument mounted on the bars not read differently if the air flow is distorted by other riders ? Ibike have acknowledged that the device is not as accurate in small bunches or on a TT bike (due to air flow)
  16. You really do have a vivid imagination GL..
  17. Why not go and read the recent post by Bruce on the other thread - I certainly consider (as do many others) any device that measures strain/torque and angular velocity to be a "direct" measure and a device that measures the forces a rider has to overcome and then calculates power to be an "indirect" measure - we will have to agree to disagree. Weight can change by up to 4kg - say 2 water bottles and 2ks weight loss during a race - certainly possible and material I would have thought. How can you say that it will give as "reliable" information as the PT when there are well documented issues regarding draft (air flow), road surface etc that have a significant effect on power readings. Guys have reported up to 25% difference in NP over a ride of a few hours - this is not an acceptable variance. Do you never change position when training or racing ? I move regularly from hoods to tops to drops - wnat me to recalibrate to get an accurate reading ??
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout