BikeMax

A hard race or race effort of about 90km would give a 70kg rider about 1900 Kcals - if you weigh less than this then your energy requirement will be less.

Here; http://www.bikemaxpower.com/components/blog/show_blog/7/id?blog=289

An interesting study done here; http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-1503651.html Rolling resistance is minimally different in my opinion but I would still argue that pinch flats are reduced on tubulars (and my anecdotal experience backs this up) and that due to the shape and profile of the tubular (more like a rear motorcycle tyre) that handling through corners is superior. Safety once unctured is an issue and tubulars will provide a safer platfrom if at speed. That having been said - 400 odd grams is a significant weight saving at the rim in my book.

You are correct about the lower rolling resistance of the best clinchers, but tubular rims give a significant weight advantage, tubulars puncture far less frequently and also handle better. On top of that a punctured tubular stays on the rim and you in turn on the bike. For a race wheel and tyre combination I would choose tubular rims and wheels over clinchers 100% of the time.

Paul Jacobs

One very good option would be to chat to Johan B and get him to hand buld you a custom set of wheels around decent hubs and to suit your needs & budget. He makes great wheels, and build qulity is a very big contributor to ride feel and satisfaction.

Deep section wheels rarely cause a problem unless wind is gale force. I have ridden 40s's and similar for 4 years here and never had a problem once you get used to the feel of the deeper rim. That having been said they are by no means essential and really only a nice to have in comparison to light and durable, well built wheels that can be trued and maintained easily.

Well at least your boys in pink are gonna feel at home - we caught most of them on Saturday

I have updated the power stats spreadsheet on my blog to include WCE for those that are interested. http://www.bikemaxpower.com/blog/Peter_Wright/286

Tough call AL - I know you are a sceptic but this is where some sort of direct measure is needed. You may well be too fatigued to do anything meaningful the day after the ride you described - but if you weren't you might not know it by looking at HR (which may be depressed due to fatigue) I guess you could look at speed and try to establsih if the ride was likely to be at a decent power output or pace. It is normal to find that effort to power ratio gets higher as you fatigue (in other words it feels harder for the same power) and this is ok as long as the quality is there, but if the quality is poor then you would be better of resting and saving the ride for the next day. BikeMax2007-11-01 01:58:22

On balance I think you are correct - quality is the key and more is not necessarily better. Pops is doing Epic though so he needs endurance too. For road racing at a decent level - 8-9 hours is great as long as every session counts.

To add to what Bruce has already said - you may have more fast twitch fibres than some, and although this may make you less ideally suited to endurance events, it does not necessarily mean you are handicapped. If you build your aerobic fitness with the right training then you will find that your fast twitch make up can be a big advantage in road racing. There are many slow twitchers who never win a race because although they are always there at the end, they have no explosiveness and cannot win.

Need to alter that FTP figure in your WKO+ Simon - then these IF figures will be more realistic (and Jason can stress less ;-)

Efficiency is not about how you produce power but rather the amount of power you produce for a given 02 uptake. It is in theory possible to improve your cycling efficiency by a small amount but as in the case of Armstrong, the most recent Coyle study hypothesised that this was likely a result of riding 3-6 hours per day for many years. Added to that most of the other literature disagrees with Coyles conclusion. For the sake of this discussion I do not think it is significant and will only serve to confuse the issue.

Very interesting. One more q, can you "teach" your muscles to adapt to higher cadence and thus put out higher wattage? You can certainly teach your muscles to adapt to a higher cadence - but your power output is still going to be limited by your aerobic capacity. All you may do is move your optimum cadence up a notch or two. The only reason you may want to do this would be to reduce fatigue in the muscle for longer stage races or races with lots of climbing - think Lance and the tour. Remember that you cannot increase your work capacity just by changing the way you produce the work - the ceiling is still in place, and if your working muscles cannot get enough 02 then work will be reduced.

325w normalised for an hour sounds right based on my power stats for the season. One morning when it is raining and I feel brave' date=' I will try 2x20 mins and see. Out of interest what sort of gradient would you use on a COmputrainer course to do the test on ?[/quote'] That would explain poor Jason thinking you were cruising around and he was dying ! I normally just get the guys to do a 1 x 20 test at full gas and take 95% as a starter - use that as FTP and key all your zones of that. You can do the test in any gradient but if on a CT then I would use a flat course.

Hi Peter I did not have a power meter so I can't really say for sure how much time I spent in L4. The first day only had one significant climb. It was however a really long one (about 15 kms I think). It was at the start so I tried to ride it fairly conservatively and would judge my effort to be top end of L3. The rest of the stage was relatively flat, but on very tough terrain. 1kTT has a very much higher FTP than I do. Mine is currently at 265w, hence the greater energy expenditure to do the same time. Maybe not such a big difference after all Jason - 1kmTT is 4.4 w/kg (if his 340w number is actually FTP and not 20 min power as he says) whereas yours is 4.2w/kg. So he only has the equivalent of another 13w on you, and should have been working at a broadly similar %age of FTP as you were to finish in the same time.