geoffois

The fan would not be the primary purchase, the package I was looking at was the kickr, the climb and the headwind. The cost of the kickr and climb (undiscounted) would be the same as the trifecta. The primary purchase is more the kickr as an upgrade to the snap. The climb and headwind are more “nice to have”.Certainly when using the snap, I’ve never thought “I wish my fan speed would be variable”, as you have said, I usually just crank it to full power and make sure I pedal hard to warm up. Likewise I’ve never felt like I really need my front wheel to move vertically. That said, having a set of equipment that adds to immersion and more importantly detracts from the boredom of slogging on an IDT in the garage can’t hurt for training motivation. Today’s the day I’m going to sit on the demo station at cyclelab and see if it’s worth the cash outlay.

The fan does not affect resistance or trainer feel, merely as a cooling device. Centrifugal fans in general have a higher pressure airflow for a relatively lower air volume and tend to be more directional, thus higher air velocity over your skin. The kickr headwind (I stand to be corrected) operates in one of three modes. Manual where you set the air velocity, heart rate linked where it increases air velocity as heart rate climbs thus providing more cooling as effort increases or simulation mode where it is controlled by a metric of both effort and speed in game with something like zwift.My current big AEG fan sits about a metre to the front and right of my wheel block aimed at my torso, it does work but is not variable and, unless I get off the bike mid session, is fixed at whatever speed I set it. Also the air speed over the torso is adequate, but did not compare to the kickr headwind when I tried that at cyclelab.

This might work...

I’ve also got an AEG, one of those big ones. Definitely not quiet!

All that I can find is the good old axial fans. The centrifugal fans seem to only come in large mine ventilation versions... perhaps a bit strong for my delicate needs!

Thanks Christian, that is very reassuring!

Thanks guys. I think the deal includes a wahoo HRM and a lappie. I think I need one more run through the test rig. I’m gathering there’s not too many people overly enthusiastic regarding tacx over wahoo though

What I have been searching for is a centrifugal air blower, much higher air volume than a fan and somewhat more directional. Can’t find them in SA though. The headwind is closer to the blower than a fan. I do agree the “heart rate linked speed” of the fan is a complete load of marketing BS. But the air flow was very nice when I tried the demo thingy at cyclelab.

The fan is not really directional enough, I used to use a spare bedroom with an Aircon in my old house, new house I have a large “gym” area with a 40” TV and dedicated space for the trainer in the garage... so no Aircon but better zwift experience. As I say, I’ve had no issues with the snap, the constant calibration is a pain though. The Shane miller reviews are great, but he does have a lot of great things to say about the tacx neo as well. Just not so sure in the SA after sales environment. I’m torn between the “real road feel” of the tacx or the “real incline” of the climb. Or just the kickr with the headwind. First world problems

I do a fair amount of training on the IDT. Time and not wanting to be hit on the roads the two major factors. Current set up is a wahoo snap version 1 and a large floor fan from Makro. I’ve been itching for an upgrade and I see cyclelab has a special for the kickr 4.0, climb and headwind for 30k. Out of interest, has anyone moved from a snap to a kickr, is it a worthwhile change? Does anyone have the climb or headwind, are they worth it or just gimmicks? Lastly, would the tacx neo 2 be a better option? I’ve never had to deal with wahoo after sales support, but gather they’re quite good. I’m not sure if Tacx after sales is as good as wahoos is supposed to be? Anyway, thought, comments, suggestions...

What’s the vegan version of a tjop?

Isn’t it meant to be “pedal assist?” [emoji848] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok Momsen. I bought one... very nice bike. Any way I can get a user manual to get all the torque specs? I like to check everything myself before I ride a new bike... also I see there is a little opening on the underside of the top tube for (what I assume) would be cable routing for the rear shock. Is there a cover for this hole that can be obtained? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Certainly. It's Friday and I liked the picture [emoji48] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is where data contradicts you. Trauma and road traffic and forensic registries show that, as a whole in vehicle related cycling accidents, mortality and injury severity scores are less.Let's apply a similar logic paradigm. If I go off to Afghanistan, and I wear a bullet proof vest, on whole would I be safer? Oh but if a tank shoots me I'd die either way, so it must be useless! Can we extrapolate Netherlands data to RSA? I don't think we can. Are there other factors at play that makes the Netherlands (apparently) safer? Certainly. There is strong evidence that higher cycling rates translates into lower per capita accident rates (not per kilometre rates as has been requested). Are helmets to blame for lower cycling rates outside the Netherlands? I don't think anyone can conclusively claim that with out inference and assumption. Lastly, there is no link in any of the articles provided that say that helmet use increases ACTUAL accident rates. Risk taking behaviour is even controversial in the articles themselves where the authors acknowledge that their data is contrary to preceding studies. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No one here, I believe, would disagree with you that behaviour needs to change. I have a couple very interesting articles on alcohol use and cycling related deaths. Would these change yours or others habits of having a pint(or10) with the friends before/during/after a ride? I doubt it. Human nature doesn't work that way. As for risk modifying behaviour, one thing certainly works. That is consequence. Fall on your kop once, develop epilepsy and you'll always wear the helmet after that! HAPPY FRIDAY! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170106/9e0b8743da8c73212f05ba9fa38092cd.jpg Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I certainly agree with you. But until accident rates are reduced, helmets will continue to reduce severity of head injuries.What the answer is when it comes to reducing accident rates, I don't know. But certainly something needs to change. I do agree that harsher policing and prosecution of vehicle related traffic offences is one factor, but it is most likely far deeper than that. There is a social issue in this country that seems to increase risk taking behaviour. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170105/22e2c5ac424fbfb2cc3a3e8d1d48ecb9.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170105/5eda0395728ac820665a57a3a24049ec.jpg In reference to the Australia vs Netherlands comparison you alluded to. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for that, I certainly see where your argument arises.Here are my concerns: 1. This is lay media reporting on an interpretation of the literature. I would really like to see these studies. 2. Further issues are alluded to and I feel that there is a confusion of multiple variables. One such variable would be why are more accidents occurring? Is it increased traffic? Mobile phones? Cyclists wearing headphones? I certainly think that identifying these key variables is far more important. 3. Of these incidents that occur, where does the blame lie? Is it with the cyclist riding faster or is it the drivers not adhering to road rules? Again, possible (assumed) change in cyclists behaviour may or may not be a factor. Certainly when an incident DOES occur, higher speed = higher force = assumed greater severity of head trauma. There may be more factors in the cyclists speed. 4. Efficacy of bicycle helmets in limiting time in hospital, cost of hospitalisation and mortality is well documented. What the opening paragraph states is helmet use did not decrease hospitalisation rates (no mention of cost or length of stay) in people that already have had a head injury. 5. Cycle helmet design is (and this is my opinion) often structurally suboptimal. I would prefer more occipital and temporal coverage. Thus I can agree with the point raised that perhaps for certain directional forces, protection may be suboptimal. 6. The "New Zealand doctors" anecdotal comments are exactly that, anecdotal. The literature on limiting extent of cerebral injury is well documented in medical literature. Papers are still being published to support this stance, the most recent of which I can find was from Q3 2016. 7. The possibility of increased rotational force to the cranium and neck when subjected to a tangential force is, I believe, of concern especially with helmets with extra "hair room" related to the increased moment of the force. Has it been shown to increase severity of head injury when compared to helmet-less victims? I can not find data to support this. 8. Does lack of exercise contribute to increased cardiovascular mortality? Undoubtedly. Would losing the helmet requirement directly reduce cardiovascular death? I think the problems may be more multifactorial than that. 9. Using your example of the Netherlands, was their accident rate lower or their head injury severity lower? Helmets don't stop accidents, they are there to limit head injury severity if an accident occurs. This brings us back to the multifactorial components of bicycle safety. What do they do differently that is ACTUALLY decreasing their accident rate? I appreciate the discussion. Perhaps I am a little biased having seen my fair share of severe head injuries. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170105/c82878d120170a2f17f6c1e03babcdde.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170105/d68911c00451fe96e5b9ae6ef50d86bf.jpg I suspect this is one of the links you couldn't open Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is certainly the key. I feel that this may be a different discussion (but far more important) than the one raised here.My concern is, as was mentioned before, that cyclists disregard for the law does not in fact improve the cyclists safety nor does it improve cyclist/motorist relations. The two conversations are most likely the same core issue. Realising that adherence to laws is not "optional" and that if laws are broken consequences must ensue in order to limit future risk taking behaviour in society as a whole. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In this country, a single beer (330ml) will not put you over the legal limit.Yes, I call out people who drink and drive. I deal with traumatic brain injuries often, and the consequences of which can be devastating. This is not an injury to be trifled with. Follow up review of the data on the walker study that was mentioned found his data to be overstated and likely misinterpreted. The most revealing aspect of his published study seems to be proximity of cars to the rider related to rider distance from the curb... oh, and colour of the car. Meta-analysis of trauma data clearly shows a lower ACCIDENT risk in helmet wearers, thus a lower risk of all incidents. There is no controlled trial that I can find that shows an increase in risk taking behaviour when wearing helmets. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I certainly have not found any articles from reputable, peer reviewed sources that contradict any and all of these studies. I would really appreciate a link to your studies, if there is contradictory evidence I would (completely honestly) like to read them. My apologies about the links not working, I have been copying from a subscription site. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Although, have a look at the studies I've listed https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/24158210/?i=24&from=/26786638/related Here they state that wearing a helmet may in fact be an indicator of safer riding practices... logic does correlate with observational studies! [emoji851] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk