Motor doping thread

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

Remember folks, 60 Watts is ~0.8 W/kg boost for most riders. That's difference between 5.4 W/kg top third of the pack and 6.2 W/kg winning stages. A 60 Watt geared motor sourced off DH-Gate, TVC Mall, Alibaba, etc is 1 inch diameter and 2 inches long and costs less than $20 delivered. Tell me again why you couldn't build one into a hub...

John Swanson

I was thinking about the supposed wheel/magnet motors. Any thoughts on that?

It seems like an odd design decision, but I could see why someone would at least prototype the idea. Even a 0.5 W/kg boost would be enormous. 30 Watts is not a lot of power for a motor so I can see why people would try to be creative. Remember that Typhoon's hidden systems are capable of 250 Watts. A reduction in requirements of 5x is substantial.

Anybody want to finance an investigation into this? I'd love to do some R&D on rim and/or hub motors.

John Swanson

 

[StryderHells]

Re:

A Pro tour team TT bike does not have to weigh more than the minimum unless something is hidden inside.
If Sky TT bikes where 800gr heavier then they probably weighted 7,6kg.

Bradly Wiggins Pinarello Graal TT bike 2010 with full disk rear
http://www.velonews.com/2010/08/gallery/tech-gallery-team-skys-pinarello-graal-time-trial-bike_132244#cH8FLOLRODfFtqDo.99
Tisma said that Wiggins’s bike weighed just over 6.8kgT

That is rare for a TT bike to come in that light, I've worked as a wrench and built up a few top of he line TT framesets with full DA 9000 Di2 and light wheels and have seen them weighed and didn't see one come in under 7.5 kg's, One was a BMC TM01, another was a Specialized Shiv sWorks and another being a Trek Speed Concept, none of them had motors in them. I have no idea how the got Wiggins Graal down to 6.8

 

[Eyeballs Out]

Re:

Understanding that pro cyclists consider motor doping to be far worse than normal doping begs the question - Surely fellow pro's/teams would dob in anyone suspected of using motor's in bikes.

The reality is more likely to be to be that a top PED program trumps a motor (or at least any motor that has been deployed in the peloton so far). The riders of the mid 90s are still the fastest by far and almost certainly minus motors.

Judging by some of the recent comments riders couldn't be using a motor because they didn't win (as if motor = kawazaki) but this seems fuzzy logic. I think it's more likely that the motors used so far have been very much limited by size, tech, noise, a need to be somewhat discreet etc. The one case we know of for sure - Femke - I think she had some success / improvement as you would expect but I don't think it was the case that she was unbeatable ? (I'm sure somebody else would be able to shed some light on just what improvement she gained compared to what could be expected)

 

[sniper]

Good post Eyeballs Out. Fuzzy logic is a gentle understatement.

 

[Tom the Engine]

Re: Re:

Judging by some of the recent comments riders couldn't be using a motor because they didn't win but this seems fuzzy logic.

Yes but it's usually formulated the (logically equivalent) other way round: Whoever won (or even just dropped other riders in an attack) automatically was suspected to ride on a motor bike. This then consequentially has to be fuzzy logic, too.

 

[Tom the Engine]

Re:

Good post Eyeballs Out. Fuzzy logic is a gentle understatement.

I can't resist to comment that it makes me chuckle from time to time how you emphatically agree with every statement that seems to support your believes on a first look - but in fact completely demolishes your line of reasoning upon closer inspection..

 

[Tienus]

Re: Re:

A Pro tour team TT bike does not have to weigh more than the minimum unless something is hidden inside.
If Sky TT bikes where 800gr heavier then they probably weighted 7,6kg.

How does this relate to samhockings post above where he reports measured weights by GCN for different TT bikes? The GCN guy says in a video that many TT bikes he measured are even over 8 kg.
Are the measurements wrong or are these not the exact bikes that are effectively used by pros in the races?

I have no idea.
If the TT is flat with not to many corners heavy wheels have a nice flywheel effect.
Could be motors in them too.

 

[staubsauger]

Those lithium-ion batteries they put in the 99 Trek only became common in the early till mid-zeros which is why the pedelec / e-bike boom emerged around 2005, correct!?

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re:

Those lithium-ion batteries they put in the 99 Trek only became common in the early till mid-zeros which is why the pedelec / e-bike boom emerged around 2005, correct!?

I started my career at one of the first Li-Ion battery manufacturers in 1994. The specific type of cells useful for high power applications (26650 spinel carbon anode) were commercially available some time around 1997. The first applications were in cordless tools.

John Swanson

edit: I should have added that consumer products lagged the first availability because of cost. For many years the cells were quite expensive.

 

[Tienus]

That is rare for a TT bike to come in that light, I've worked as a wrench and built up a few top of he line TT framesets with full DA 9000 Di2 and light wheels and have seen them weighed and didn't see one come in under 7.5 kg's, One was a BMC TM01, another was a Specialized Shiv sWorks and another being a Trek Speed Concept, none of them had motors in them. I have no idea how the got Wiggins Graal down to 6.8

Most of the weight is down to the frame and wheels. I think the top riders get custom frames build which are lighter. What do you mean with light wheels? Many in the pro peloton are using the lightweight autobahn rear disc. In last tour it looks like Froome used a Dash Gretchen 25 rear disc wheel which is also around 800gr.

 

[Tom the Engine]

Re:

I think it's more likely that the motors used so far have been very much limited by size, tech, noise, a need to be somewhat discreet etc.

Those lithium-ion batteries they put in the 99 Trek only became common in the early till mid-zeros which is why the pedelec / e-bike boom emerged around 2005, correct!?

I guess we shouldn't be too focused on availability via mass-production, consumer products, wikipedia articles and so on.
Somebody with the skills, the commitment and the budget necessary will find a way to cleverly and secretly add a few extra watts to a bike. Technology is there and it probably has been there for longer than we might think.

edit: John Swanson beat me to it. He certainly knows a lot more about it than I do.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

A Pro tour team TT bike does not have to weigh more than the minimum unless something is hidden inside.
If Sky TT bikes where 800gr heavier then they probably weighted 7,6kg.

How does this relate to samhockings post above where he reports measured weights by GCN for different TT bikes? The GCN guy says in a video that many TT bikes he measured are even over 8 kg.
Are the measurements wrong or are these not the exact bikes that are effectively used by pros in the races?

There was a recent GCN video about Contador's new Trek Speed Concept TT bike and it's 7.8kg. According to the presenter that's rather light for a TT bike.

 

[samhocking]

Re:

That is rare for a TT bike to come in that light, I've worked as a wrench and built up a few top of he line TT framesets with full DA 9000 Di2 and light wheels and have seen them weighed and didn't see one come in under 7.5 kg's, One was a BMC TM01, another was a Specialized Shiv sWorks and another being a Trek Speed Concept, none of them had motors in them. I have no idea how the got Wiggins Graal down to 6.8

Most of the weight is down to the frame and wheels. I think the top riders get custom frames build which are lighter. What do you mean with light wheels? Many in the pro peloton are using the lightweight autobahn rear disc. In last tour it looks like Froome used a Dash Gretchen 25 rear disc wheel which is also around 800gr.

Your're putting far too much emphasis on TT weight. You will never find a 6.8kg TT rig in the Pro Tour. It could probably be done, but it would be like riding a bike made of noodles and ricepaper.
Many mechanic and riders are told to just say 6.8kg. Just watch the GCN clips and every rider think their bike is about a kg lighter than it is lol!

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

60 Minutes OT on hidden magnets in bikes:

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/hidden-magnets-the-next-big-cheat-in-cycling/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab0g

 

[Benotti69]

Considering how many bikes now have batteries inside frames how can they(UCI) be using a tablet to test for motors?????

 

[sniper]

Re:

60 Minutes OT on hidden magnets in bikes:

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/hidden-magnets-the-next-big-cheat-in-cycling/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab0g

Great link.

Lol, " UCI have made a great effort to TALK about how much they are doing".

Ow, and I guess Varjas just made that rim to look cool on tv or something. Must be a hoax.

 

[Tienus]

There was a recent GCN video about Contador's new Trek Speed Concept TT bike and it's 7.8kg. According to the presenter that's rather light for a TT bike.

I dont know why the bikes are so heavy. I noticed the same when CGN checked road bikes, a lot of them where well over the 6.8kg limit.

Looking at two bikes:
Tom Dumoulin's Giant Trinity Time Trial Bike at 9kg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP17D0Cndd8
Marco Pinotti's HTC-Columbia Scott Plasma 3 at 8.9kg with relative light HED wheels.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/pro-bike-marco-pinottis-htc-columbia-scott-plasma-3/

They are both designed by Simon Smart. In the article about Pinotti you can read that Smart was working with HTC-Columbia at the time.
http://www.drag2zero.co.uk/simon-smart-smart-aero-technology/
We act as technical consultants to pro tour teams

Same bikes of the shelf:
Scott 7.43kg
http://www.triradar.com/gear/best-tt-bikes-for-triathlon-scott-plasma-3-premium/
Giant 7.93
http://www.roadbike.de/rennraeder/test-giant-trinity-advanced-sl.721963.9.htm

Your're putting far too much emphasis on TT weight. You will never find a 6.8kg TT rig in the Pro Tour. It could probably be done, but it would be like riding a bike made of noodles and ricepaper.
Many mechanic and riders are told to just say 6.8kg. Just watch the GCN clips and every rider think their bike is about a kg lighter than it is lol!

I claim that it is no problem for a protour team to have a 6.8kg TT bike with rear disc wheel. There is only emphasis on the weight now because there could be hidden motors involved.

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

Understanding that pro cyclists consider motor doping to be far worse than normal doping begs the question - Surely fellow pro's/teams would dob in anyone suspected of using motor's in bikes.

The reality is more likely to be to be that a top PED program trumps a motor (or at least any motor that has been deployed in the peloton so far). The riders of the mid 90s are still the fastest by far and almost certainly minus motors.

Judging by some of the recent comments riders couldn't be using a motor because they didn't win (as if motor = kawazaki) but this seems fuzzy logic. I think it's more likely that the motors used so far have been very much limited by size, tech, noise, a need to be somewhat discreet etc. The one case we know of for sure - Femke - I think she had some success / improvement as you would expect but I don't think it was the case that she was unbeatable ? (I'm sure somebody else would be able to shed some light on just what improvement she gained compared to what could be expected)

So your response fairly much supports my post - That motors if they exist are used discreetly so that's why there is little noise from the pro peleton - Yes if cyclists dope they will probably improve, though it will depend on the individual, whereas its hard to go wrong with a motor.

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

Judging by some of the recent comments riders couldn't be using a motor because they didn't win but this seems fuzzy logic.

Yes but it's usually formulated the (logically equivalent) other way round: Whoever won (or even just dropped other riders in an attack) automatically was suspected to ride on a motor bike. This then consequentially has to be fuzzy logic, too.

You nailed it in your post.

 

[DanielSong39]

Usually the motor accusations start when riders make strange hand/body motions that precedes a superhuman acceleration. Cancellara's performance in the 2010 Tour of Flanders is a textbook example. They don't come out of thin air. (Otherwise, they'd just be accused of using standard doping)

If Cavendish's bike went perfectly straight while displaying zero signs of swivel during his sprints he'd be accused of using a motor as well.

 

[Tom the Engine]

Re: Re:

Ow, and I guess Varjas just made that rim to look cool on tv or something. Must be a hoax.

We have seen his nice wheel with the holes in the rim multiple times now. But whenever he demonstrates a motor that actually works right in front of our eyes then it's always the one that turns the cranks. And not a hub motor or a magnetic wheel. I wonder why? Doesn't he have a strong incentive to show that he can actually build them and not just talk about it?

 

[Cloxxki]

I bet the good stuff goes for a higher price if not demostrated on TV.

 

[samhocking]

Re:

There was a recent GCN video about Contador's new Trek Speed Concept TT bike and it's 7.8kg. According to the presenter that's rather light for a TT bike.

I dont know why the bikes are so heavy. I noticed the same when CGN checked road bikes, a lot of them where well over the 6.8kg limit.

Looking at two bikes:
Tom Dumoulin's Giant Trinity Time Trial Bike at 9kg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP17D0Cndd8
Marco Pinotti's HTC-Columbia Scott Plasma 3 at 8.9kg with relative light HED wheels.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/pro-bike-marco-pinottis-htc-columbia-scott-plasma-3/

They are both designed by Simon Smart. In the article about Pinotti you can read that Smart was working with HTC-Columbia at the time.
http://www.drag2zero.co.uk/simon-smart-smart-aero-technology/
We act as technical consultants to pro tour teams

Same bikes of the shelf:
Scott 7.43kg
http://www.triradar.com/gear/best-tt-bikes-for-triathlon-scott-plasma-3-premium/
Giant 7.93
http://www.roadbike.de/rennraeder/test-giant-trinity-advanced-sl.721963.9.htm

Your're putting far too much emphasis on TT weight. You will never find a 6.8kg TT rig in the Pro Tour. It could probably be done, but it would be like riding a bike made of noodles and ricepaper.
Many mechanic and riders are told to just say 6.8kg. Just watch the GCN clips and every rider think their bike is about a kg lighter than it is lol!

I claim that it is no problem for a protour team to have a 6.8kg TT bike with rear disc wheel. There is only emphasis on the weight now because there could be hidden motors involved.

Both those bikes you link to have standard wheels which are much lighter. I would add 1kg for a disc and tri spoke immediately so around 8.4kg and 8.9kg fully kitted out for TT use.

I just built Froomes 2015 Vuelta Bolide from manufacturers claimed weights off their websites and I got 8.24kg for a small. I could get about 1kg off it by selecting lighter wheels and lighter components, but Froomes hitting 8.5kg seems spot on to me and what it would probably build up as off the shelf. Same for all of them. Some frame manufacturers might lay some more plys within the mould for addition stiffness, but AFAIK, most teams ride exactly the same as you or I could buy. They have to, otherwise the UCI sticker isn't valid I would think.

 

[Huapango]

Re: Re:

The denial is strong with all of this motor-doping talk.

Something I have been wondering for awhile, but not sure if this has been brought up in the clinic:

How could Froome's staring at his cycling computer (power meter) potentially relate to motor-doping?

My thought is that if he was using a motor, he would need to look at his computer/power meter to ensure he wasn't going too fast to raise suspicion.

 

[DamianoMachiavelli]

Re:

I bet the good stuff goes for a higher price if not demostrated on TV.

The good stuff goes for a higher price when it is not demonstrated to be bogus in front of a TV audience.