Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
They are uncomfortable if you have short legs. Never having had long legs I cant say if they are better with long limbs but as a short legged person I would never use a triple again
Eh ? I have short legs and never suffered on my old triple because it wasn’t a double or single ring. Crank arms that were too long or noticeable Q-factor issues maybe, but not the tiny difference between a 2 and 3 ring crank. What is it that you think is making them inherently uncomfortable – Q-factor presumably (given there’s nothing else..) ?
There you go. Built by me. I’ve posted this bike before but have since changed the forks and stuck some 650b’s on it and gone through a load of mud. Love it.Super nice.
Irritating sticker (outside
Irritating sticker (outside of the Camel Trophy vehicle use) – get that – but what’s the hate of rally ? It’s OK as long as it’s on a race track somewhere you say, but.. it’s a rally … i’m missing something here clearly.
CXR94Di2 wrote:
If he can push more 1000 Watts for any sustained period, I`d be amazed. Kickr, tacx. Select Erg mode at what ever watts you think you are capable of and spin at desired cadence.Aye the top end resistance is more than adaquate for pretty much any normal human, it’s the way they deal with the really slow stuff that can make a difference.
Two weeks later see physio for knee ligament strain 🙂 only kidding😀 only sort of kidding !
Which would you guys personally go for between the Tacx Flux and Genius Smart?If I were given one, and didn’t really, really want the higher slope replication, i’d go for the Flux – for 80-90% of the stuff I do it’s more than fine. For the lower speeds, real high resistance i’d still probably go with the Genius – it’s older and wheel on* but a stronger brake, marginally less work to set up and a fair amount cheaper (at the moment) but either are good choices IMO.
* The wear from it is very small, unlike my KK RoadMachine for some reason, so just use my road bike as-is. If I was worried about wear i’d just use my spare trainer wheel/tyre – takes about the same time to set up as the wheel off trainers.
Edit : I realise that the OP was asking for a wheel-off trainer but thought i’d suggest the Genius due to the lack of wear on the wheel mentioned above – sorry if that’s a deal-breaker.
For low cadence, high
For low cadence, high resistance work without massive spend – the only suggestion I can think of at the moment would be to maybe try and get a good deal on a Tacx Genius Smart (or, at a push a Bushido Smart). The Genius brake is good for ~20% gradients and still seems to be one of the best at low speeds – worth looking at the resistance graph on this page to see it’s suitable for what you want
http://www.tacx.com/en/products/trainers/genius-smart#tab_2
Costs new for the Genius are in the region of £ 550-580, worth looking at the German online outlets in particular (for trainers in general actually) especially as Wiggle, for one, will price match some of them.
I wasn’t saying they’re no
I wasn’t saying they’re no good, quite the opposite, just that their puncture protection may not be quite as (theoretically) robust as some other similar tyres (e.g. according to a popular tyre-geek website) and if puncture resistance is more important than Crr then it may be worth considering some others as well.
Hyper looks a good choice
Hyper looks a good choice unless perhaps the puncture protection is considered – everything else seems top notch. Some other light weight “touring” type tyres that might be considered otherwise.
Non-interactive can be a
Non-interactive can be a laugh too, especially with Sufferfest videos or Zwift. I was running a Kurt Kinetic Road Machine with InRide as a dumb trainer on TrainerRoad and Zwift and a Tacx Genius as interactive under Tacx TTS. The dumb trainer wasn’t as engaging as the interactive one, but still had a blast racing on Zwift, Tour of Sufferlandria and so on – now the Genius has had a Smart upgrade the elevations on Zwift are great and workouts on Zwift, TR etc in erg mode are useful and it’s nice to only need/setup the one trainer but i’d happily use the RoadMachine for stuff if the Genius ever went off-line.
Just staring at the wall on a dumb trainer though…. agree – very dull, very quickly IME.
@scott You do realise the
@scott You do realise the average age of the threads you’re posting on is a little over 4 years ? Just a thought.
..actually, having seen
..actually, having seen madcarews reply i’m off to do some reading myself too.
@SP59 Â Why don’t we start
@SP59 Why don’t we start with this study and the studies it was based on. I’m not overly convinced by their ultimate conclusion but you sound way ahead of me with your own analysis of it. After all you’ve already called them out for their “total bollocks, meta-analysis ‘study'” and examined the sub-studies to determine that the majority of them are “also cack and had poor/non existant methodology/set out to prove what they intended to look for using very limited ‘facts’ to suit an arguement.” so I expect that your counter-arguments and proof should be reasonably well formed and detailed. Lets have them on here and we’ll have a look at them and the data and see where the evidence points – I don’t know exactly where that might be, let’s see if you’re right.
We all know the far bigger danger of very serious injury to cyclists are motor vehicles, and bicycle helmets don’t provide anywhere near the protection some seem to think it gives… Motor cycle helmets however 😉I’ve always felt that a motorbike helmet would throw off your centre of gravity quite a bit if you were riding a bicycle while wearing one…
Have a look at this article, about how big a bicycle helmet actually needs to be to offer similar protection, if made out of bike helmet materials: http://www.bhsi.org/concussionhelmet.htm
That’s an article about creating a helmet solely from EPS which yields less than 100g on all tests – not about one that offers similar protection to a motorbike helmet. (They also don’t seem to have much of a clue about the causes of concussion or, if so, didn’t mention it)
Simon E wrote:
Would suggest you look at what are now called ‘gravel’ bikes instead of CX models, which have shorter wheelbase and twitchier steering than a true go-anywhere machine as they are really designed for racing cyclo-cross.Agree with the suggestion, but the most of the new ‘gravel bikes’ i’ve seen no longer seem to be rebranded models designed for ‘cross – the head angles, rake, wheel-base and BB height are moving away from the more traditional race values. Small changes to be sure, but enough to change the intended character – in particular there seems to be a move to greater stability off-tarmac at the (marginal) expense of some change of direction speed.
grip in the wet despite no tread. I read somewhere that compound is more important for wet grip than tread for road tyres because they are soo thin to make tread patterns work.I believe this is correct. Tread on (normal, as opposed to off-road) car tyres is for shifting water from under the tyres to avoid aquaplaning. I recall an advert claiming that a particular tyre’s tread shifted 8 pints per second or something like that. Bicycle road tyres aren’t wide enough, and the forces of movement generally insufficient, to cause aquaplaning.
Mostly true I believe – some tyre manufacturers have reported evidence that some tread can help with grip on certain surfaces (ones which aren’t completely flat) assuming the tyre carcass and pressure are suitable to deform in surface features (i.e. not for preventing aqua-planing).
