Velouria Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 Beats the 2 watts that Cervelo is offering on their new S3 Disc. Although, 2 watts + 12 watts + 10 watts for shaving my legs + 4.4 watts for an aero bar + 15 watts for a skin suit and before you know it I'll have an eBike that powers itself!
Patchelicious Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 easily 24watts if you put snake oil in it...Why would you sprinkle USN on your chain? http://www.bravotv.com/sites/nbcubravotv/files/styles/blog-post--mobile/public/field_blog_image/2017/01/the-feast-salt-bae.jpg?itok=oACl1z77×tamp=1484155085
pe3nguin Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 Jissus....that dude's calves should go down in the book of all things legendary...!!! Gino Sciardis
Gen Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 Nibali uses the same oiler, but he holds the car while the oil it.He holds on to the car while they look for lube on the car floor[emoji106]
Bateleur1 Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 Orica (or who ever is testing this) is a bit late to the party. Nothing new . This model could even lube anywhere on the chain. Infinitely variable. PS and with calves like that, that guy defiantly scoffed at a measly 12 watt With those calves I actually think that is coolant instead of lubricant they are putting on.
RocknRolla Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 so it's a scott oiler for a bicycle... So is it actually cool now to have the oily chainring tattoo on the inside of the leg.. "because the pro's are doing it...."
Fat Boab Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 so it's a scott oiler for a bicycle... So is it actually cool now to have the oily chainring tattoo on the inside of the leg.. "because the pro's are doing it...." Kickstarter......https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/821072597/scottoiler-cycle-s1-automatic-bicycle-chain-lube-s I previously suggested the 12 W figure should be taken in context.....
Slowbee Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 If this moves me from 29875 place to 29870th place at argus I am in. If this means it will give me 12 watt for nothing while cycling through the Karoo in December, hell sign me up for 2!
NelAndre Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 I need one of those for the bedroom!Shot for a solid laugh
Skinnyone Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 If this moves me from 29875 place to 29870th place at argus I am in. If this means it will give me 12 watt for nothing while cycling through the Karoo in December, hell sign me up for 2!What's happening in the Karoo in December...? That is probably the main event that I would say this would be a "life saver"
Pure Savage Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 Shot for a solid laugh Thats what she said...
Fat Boab Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 I need one of those for the bedroom! Still confused on wet and dry lube, huh?
JanJan Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 Hopefully there is somebody with better mathematic abilities to solve their "12W" saving, because according to me: A perfect chain doesn't move relative to it's sprockets, so power cannot be quantified. The only area where power could possibly be lost, is at the jockey's pin with the jockey wheel's relative rotation. A clean/lubricated chain doesn't save you any power.. Their methodology is all wrong. Edit: Spelling
Skinnyone Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 UMMMMmmm...Jan, perhaps look how a chain interacts with the sprockets and how it is made before making assumptions....
Fat Boab Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 Hopefully there is somebody with better mathematic abilities to solve their "12W" saving, because according to me: A perfect chain doesn't move relative to it's sprockets, so power cannot be quantified. The only area where power could possibly be lost, is at the jockey's pin with the jockey wheel's relative rotation. A clean/lubricated chain doesn't save you any power.. Their methodology is all wrong. Edit: Spelling Hmmm, not quite sure of what you're suggesting. But let me try it this way. Consider a single speed, so chainwheel, chain and sprocket. Apply power, or energy in a fixed time, on the chainwheel and the chain will at least bend and straighten as it travels round the chainwheel and sprocket, yes? So there's energy required to do this? Lost energy (or power). You can hear the chain running? So mechanical power has been converted to sonic power, again a loss. Etc etc. The end result is less power arrives on the rear axle than was applied on the chainwheel. Edit: take this a step further. Dry, unlubricated chain, sounds noisy? Lubricated chain, preferably not with Superglue, sounds....less noisy! Lube reduces lost power. Scale-up with more chain bending and straightening round jockey wheels, more lost power.
Patchelicious Posted January 18, 2017 Posted January 18, 2017 Hopefully there is somebody with better mathematic abilities to solve their "12W" saving, because according to me: A perfect chain doesn't move relative to it's sprockets, so power cannot be quantified. The only area where power could possibly be lost, is at the jockey's pin with the jockey wheel's relative rotation. A clean/lubricated chain doesn't save you any power.. Their methodology is all wrong. Edit: SpellingWell let's conduct an experiment to see if the movement of chain links has any bearing on power required to turn pedals; Go home, lube your chain with super glue and come give feedback on how that worked out for you.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.