Robrider Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 If every single variable is kept constant - and as others have said, there are many - I would say the smaller bike would be faster for 3 reasons. Smaller bikes weigh less, they are more aero (less cross sectional area), and are stiffer. It would be so negligible though, almost every other variable will be more important, so it is a bit of a silly question to try and answer.
xnadu Posted November 25, 2015 Author Posted November 25, 2015 Ok - So when my wife buy a extra small 27.5" bike she would be faster then me that will be on a 26" bike or will I be faster then her on a 29" bike ???
dre Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Ok - So when my wife buy a extra small 27.5" bike she would be faster then me that will be on a 26" bike or will I be faster then her on a 29" bike ??? EDIT: To answer your question - no. The stronger of the two of you will be faster. If you are going down hill and none of you pedal, the heavier of the two of you will be faster. You can't compare like this - you can only compare against yourself; thus you take the large bike and go down a hill without pedaling, get your time over a certain distance and do it again on the smaller bike. Thus at least one less variable if the rider stays the same. Point being; it's not about the bike. Fairly simple.
xnadu Posted November 25, 2015 Author Posted November 25, 2015 EDIT: To answer your question - no. The stronger of the two of you will be faster. If you are going down hill and none of you pedal, the heavier of the two of you will be faster. You can't compare like this - you can only compare against yourself; thus you take the large bike and go down a hill without pedaling, get your time over a certain distance and do it again on the smaller bike. Thus at least one less variable if the rider stays the same. Point being; it's not about the bike. Fairly simple. ok
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.