Motor doping thread

[Maxiton]

Re: Re:

You can do more miracles with electricity than chemistry, it’s also less damaging to your health. -- Industry "guru" of moto-doping

The new frontier is far more technologically advanced and ten times as expensive. It’s in the rear wheel: it costs 200,000 Euros, and there’s a waiting list of six months. -- Gazzetta dello Sport

The above quotes are from the article cited earlier. The industry guru, whoever he is, seems pretty convinced. I imagine that if you don't care about your health, you can do even more miracles with the two in combination.

Meanwhile, notice that the Gazzetta dello Sport reporter isn't conjecturing about whether these electromagnetic wheels are possible; he's saying they're already in production, and that the backlog for them is six months. He's also saying that they have a price, two-hundred thousand euros each. That can only mean they are in production and being produced at a profit. And at that price they are not being bought for grand fondos.

These things are always impossible. Until they're not. From 2010 I recall reading some very good responses to the question of bottom bracket motors that drew upon seemingly solid knowledge of engineering and physics, and that said such motors were, if not impossible, impractical. Some of these arguments were so compelling that the debate was pretty much at a standstill - until little Femke Van den Driessche showed up, teary-eyed, with her motor bought with parakeet money.

I would suggest that Gazetta Dello Sport has printed quite a lot of fiction in its history. Italian sports media is not exactly Scientific American.

Perhaps not. But the reporter is so specific (price, length of backlog) that he is either lying outright, believing someone else's outright lies; or, onto something.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
I think the way to approach this would be to embed electrical contacts in each dropout, with the locknuts and axle completing the circuit, put the coil (windings) on the axle, with ferrous inserts or magnets in the hub shell. You'd need to electrically insulate the rest of the drivetrain. Problem is, the hub on a pro road bike is skinny, and the axle has to be hollow and mechanically strong enough for a rider bombing down a mountain at 60 mph. That leaves very little room for a motor to produce enough power to make the whole thing worthwhile. If we start seeing pro bikes with bizarrely large diameter rear hubs, then someone should go put a magnetometer next to the hub shell - or toss a paperclip at it.

ok, so you're saying that basically it's possible, but UCI's rigorous bike testing and the critical eye of the average cycling fan will prevent it from being implemented?

sarcasm aside:
in your opinion what could one stick away in a disk wheel?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re:

You can do more miracles with electricity than chemistry, it’s also less damaging to your health. -- Industry "guru" of moto-doping

The new frontier is far more technologically advanced and ten times as expensive. It’s in the rear wheel: it costs 200,000 Euros, and there’s a waiting list of six months. -- Gazzetta dello Sport

The above quotes are from the article cited earlier. The industry guru, whoever he is, seems pretty convinced. I imagine that if you don't care about your health, you can do even more miracles with the two in combination.

Meanwhile, notice that the Gazzetta dello Sport reporter isn't conjecturing about whether these electromagnetic wheels are possible; he's saying they're already in production, and that the backlog for them is six months. He's also saying that they have a price, two-hundred thousand euros each. That can only mean they are in production and being produced at a profit. And at that price they are not being bought for grand fondos.

These things are always impossible. Until they're not. From 2010 I recall reading some very good responses to the question of bottom bracket motors that drew upon seemingly solid knowledge of engineering and physics, and that said such motors were, if not impossible, impractical. Some of these arguments were so compelling that the debate was pretty much at a standstill - until little Femke Van den Driessche showed up, teary-eyed, with her motor bought with parakeet money.

One of the things on it was that to keep the structural integrity of the downtube and also benefit most from the motor, additional carbon was required. This is where Maud Kaptheijns' interview where she points this out and that Peter van den Driessche does carbon repairs was known. This need for the additional carbon likely accounts for the suspect downtube of Femke's bike that drew such attention. But it's not the bike she was using at Koppenbergcross, when she has the most apparent motor-assisted acceleration. Maybe that bike was not durable enough with the motor, maybe it was just fine but the benefits were too little for the worse conditions the further into the season you go. When the bikes she's used were identified, the fat downtube bike with the non-standard frame has been given the name "bike 1", the Koppenbergcross bike "bike 2" and the Koppenbergcross spare bike / bike she went away on after DNFing at the Worlds, not believed to be motorized, "bike 3". A previously-used white bike was also identified, but not seen this season. Attention was also given to a slightly off paint job on bike 1, which is a non-standard Wilier frame (as Kaptheijns pointed out, Wilier only make one sort of frame for the type of bike, which is the frame that bikes 2 and 3 have. Makes me wonder if the frame of the old, no-longer-used bike had been modified and given a new lick of paint).

 

[Hawkwood]

Re:

You can do more miracles with electricity than chemistry, it’s also less damaging to your health. -- Industry "guru" of moto-doping

The new frontier is far more technologically advanced and ten times as expensive. It’s in the rear wheel: it costs 200,000 Euros, and there’s a waiting list of six months. -- Gazzetta dello Sport

The above quotes are from the article cited earlier. The industry guru, whoever he is, seems pretty convinced. I imagine that if you don't care about your health, you can do even more miracles with the two in combination.

Meanwhile, notice that the Gazzetta dello Sport reporter isn't conjecturing about whether these electromagnetic wheels are possible; he's saying they're already in production, and that the backlog for them is six months. He's also saying that they have a price, two-hundred thousand euros each. That can only mean they are in production and being produced at a profit. And at that price they are not being bought for grand fondos.

These things are always impossible. Until they're not. From 2010 I recall reading some very good responses to the question of bottom bracket motors that drew upon seemingly solid knowledge of engineering and physics, and that said such motors were, if not impossible, impractical. Some of these arguments were so compelling that the debate was pretty much at a standstill - until little Femke Van den Driessche showed up, teary-eyed, with her motor bought with parakeet money.

As you point out above the article comes from a journalist, Claudio Ghisalberti, his name appears on another site in a post about power outputs on climbs, the author wasn't very impressed with his work: `Aside from that affront to physics by Gazzetta dello Sport's Claudio Ghisalberti...'

 

[Catwhoorg]

Re: Re:

in your opinion what could one stick away in a disk wheel?

Disk wheels on TT bikes could easily be used to hide a hub motor.
Which is obvious, and potentially a race winning move on a decent length TT stage.

Disk wheels need much tighter scrutiny

 

[Escarabajo]

Re: Re:

Thought you might enjoy this. Seat tube motor in a road bike, back in the (looks like) 1970s.

https://youtu.be/9YXDL7P7_zY

Moto doping has been going on since 1979 and the 1st 'bust' was in 2016. Good job UCI.......

Freewheel in the chainset, so you stop pedalling and the chainrings keep going round, might that not have been a bit of a give away?

That was what Froome had in PSM

 

[Farcanal]

Re:

You can do more miracles with electricity than chemistry, it’s also less damaging to your health. -- Industry "guru" of moto-doping

The new frontier is far more technologically advanced and ten times as expensive. It’s in the rear wheel: it costs 200,000 Euros, and there’s a waiting list of six months. -- Gazzetta dello Sport

The above quotes are from the article cited earlier. The industry guru, whoever he is, seems pretty convinced. I imagine that if you don't care about your health, you can do even more miracles with the two in combination.

Meanwhile, notice that the Gazzetta dello Sport reporter isn't conjecturing about whether these electromagnetic wheels are possible; he's saying they're already in production, and that the backlog for them is six months. He's also saying that they have a price, two-hundred thousand euros each. That can only mean they are in production and being produced at a profit. And at that price they are not being bought for grand fondos.

These things are always impossible. Until they're not. From 2010 I recall reading some very good responses to the question of bottom bracket motors that drew upon seemingly solid knowledge of engineering and physics, and that said such motors were, if not impossible, impractical. Some of these arguments were so compelling that the debate was pretty much at a standstill - until little Femke Van den Driessche showed up, teary-eyed, with her motor bought with parakeet money.

Send the guy an order for his wonder wheel. I'm sure he will take a big down payment as deposit and you will never see any wheel. Of course, you won't realise you've been stung for the first six months anyway because you won't be expecting them, by which time he's long gone.

How come you intelligent people, and that is said sincerely, are so hugely sceptical about everything else in the cycling press, with some justification, yet you swallow a story like this hook, line and sinker and even argue its corner?

 

[Farcanal]

Re: Re:

...
The 'rim drive' concept is a complete non-starter. When I read the report from Gazettta I had tears streaming down my face before the end. I have no idea what the guy's motivation is, probably just self publicity, but even if his system were to generate enough emf to turn the wheel the weight disadvantage at the rim would be huge (and remember the effect of inertia at the rim of a flywheel is proportional to the square of the radius).

yeah, i remember that

Yeah I knew you would

So it's enormous significance is not lost on you either then?

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re: Re:

in your opinion what could one stick away in a disk wheel?

Disk wheels on TT bikes could easily be used to hide a hub motor.
Which is obvious, and potentially a race winning move on a decent length TT stage.

Disk wheels need much tighter scrutiny

I think that for time trial bikes they would be the only possibility. A cursory glance at modern time trial frames would show that the down tube is not realistically a practicable place to fit the other kind. But I certainly would not want to try to pedal a heavier disk than normal without the power on (and I do ride disk wheels regularly). I don't know what the extra weight would be, but it would surely be significant. I don't think people should discount what Farcanal has contributed with regard to the issue of inertia and other practical issues.
Just wondering whether anyone is willing to comment on that and not just dismiss doubts about practicability out of hand, especially as it is likely to be the case that none of us has practical experience of these concepts.

 

[Maxiton]

You can do more miracles with electricity than chemistry, it’s also less damaging to your health. -- Industry "guru" of moto-doping

The new frontier is far more technologically advanced and ten times as expensive. It’s in the rear wheel: it costs 200,000 Euros, and there’s a waiting list of six months. -- Gazzetta dello Sport

The above quotes are from the article cited earlier. The industry guru, whoever he is, seems pretty convinced. I imagine that if you don't care about your health, you can do even more miracles with the two in combination.

Meanwhile, notice that the Gazzetta dello Sport reporter isn't conjecturing about whether these electromagnetic wheels are possible; he's saying they're already in production, and that the backlog for them is six months. He's also saying that they have a price, two-hundred thousand euros each. That can only mean they are in production and being produced at a profit. And at that price they are not being bought for grand fondos.

These things are always impossible. Until they're not. From 2010 I recall reading some very good responses to the question of bottom bracket motors that drew upon seemingly solid knowledge of engineering and physics, and that said such motors were, if not impossible, impractical. Some of these arguments were so compelling that the debate was pretty much at a standstill - until little Femke Van den Driessche showed up, teary-eyed, with her motor bought with parakeet money.

One of the things on it was that to keep the structural integrity of the downtube and also benefit most from the motor, additional carbon was required. This is where Maud Kaptheijns' interview where she points this out and that Peter van den Driessche does carbon repairs was known. This need for the additional carbon likely accounts for the suspect downtube of Femke's bike that drew such attention. But it's not the bike she was using at Koppenbergcross, when she has the most apparent motor-assisted acceleration. Maybe that bike was not durable enough with the motor, maybe it was just fine but the benefits were too little for the worse conditions the further into the season you go. When the bikes she's used were identified, the fat downtube bike with the non-standard frame has been given the name "bike 1", the Koppenbergcross bike "bike 2" and the Koppenbergcross spare bike / bike she went away on after DNFing at the Worlds, not believed to be motorized, "bike 3". A previously-used white bike was also identified, but not seen this season. Attention was also given to a slightly off paint job on bike 1, which is a non-standard Wilier frame (as Kaptheijns pointed out, Wilier only make one sort of frame for the type of bike, which is the frame that bikes 2 and 3 have. Makes me wonder if the frame of the old, no-longer-used bike had been modified and given a new lick of paint).

Interesting. The fact that Femke and her father almost pulled this off (and likely did pull it off for a while), using artisanal technique and off the shelf bits, and with almost no budget: makes me wonder what could be (or has been) done by people with access to professionals and money to spend.

As you point out above the article comes from a journalist, Claudio Ghisalberti, his name appears on another site in a post about power outputs on climbs, the author wasn't very impressed with his work: `Aside from that affront to physics by Gazzetta dello Sport's Claudio Ghisalberti...'

Right, but just because he slept through physics class doesn't mean, necessarily, that he's a lousy reporter. He may be a lousy reporter, but who knows . . . .

How come you intelligent people, and that is said sincerely, are so hugely sceptical about everything else in the cycling press, with some justification, yet you swallow a story like this hook, line and sinker and even argue its corner?

Au contraire. I merely cited the article, pointing out by implication that if the reporter did his job then it has profound implications for this question.

 

[jyl]

A full disk wheel could contain a hub motor plus batteries. Heavy and easily detected with a magnetometer, but visually probably not detectable, assuming the charging port is well concealed (under the tubular glue would do it). Maybe more useful in a short TT. The longer the TT, the more time the wheel would be dead weight.

 

[jyl]

Re:

You can do more miracles with electricity than chemistry, it’s also less damaging to your health. -- Industry "guru" of moto-doping

The new frontier is far more technologically advanced and ten times as expensive. It’s in the rear wheel: it costs 200,000 Euros, and there’s a waiting list of six months. -- Gazzetta dello Sport

The above quotes are from the article cited earlier. The industry guru, whoever he is, seems pretty convinced. I imagine that if you don't care about your health, you can do even more miracles with the two in combination.

Meanwhile, notice that the Gazzetta dello Sport reporter isn't conjecturing about whether these electromagnetic wheels are possible; he's saying they're already in production, and that the backlog for them is six months. He's also saying that they have a price, two-hundred thousand euros each. That can only mean they are in production and being produced at a profit. And at that price they are not being bought for grand fondos.

These things are always impossible. Until they're not. From 2010 I recall reading some very good responses to the question of bottom bracket motors that drew upon seemingly solid knowledge of engineering and physics, and that said such motors were, if not impossible, impractical. Some of these arguments were so compelling that the debate was pretty much at a standstill - until little Femke Van den Driessche showed up, teary-eyed, with her motor bought with parakeet money.

One of the things on it was that to keep the structural integrity of the downtube and also benefit most from the motor, additional carbon was required. This is where Maud Kaptheijns' interview where she points this out and that Peter van den Driessche does carbon repairs was known. This need for the additional carbon likely accounts for the suspect downtube of Femke's bike that drew such attention. But it's not the bike she was using at Koppenbergcross, when she has the most apparent motor-assisted acceleration. Maybe that bike was not durable enough with the motor, maybe it was just fine but the benefits were too little for the worse conditions the further into the season you go. When the bikes she's used were identified, the fat downtube bike with the non-standard frame has been given the name "bike 1", the Koppenbergcross bike "bike 2" and the Koppenbergcross spare bike / bike she went away on after DNFing at the Worlds, not believed to be motorized, "bike 3". A previously-used white bike was also identified, but not seen this season. Attention was also given to a slightly off paint job on bike 1, which is a non-standard Wilier frame (as Kaptheijns pointed out, Wilier only make one sort of frame for the type of bike, which is the frame that bikes 2 and 3 have. Makes me wonder if the frame of the old, no-longer-used bike had been modified and given a new lick of paint).

Interesting. The fact that Femke and her father almost pulled this off (and likely did pull it off for a while), using artisanal technique and off the shelf bits, and with almost no budget: makes me wonder what could be (or has been) done by people with access to professionals and money to spend.

As you point out above the article comes from a journalist, Claudio Ghisalberti, his name appears on another site in a post about power outputs on climbs, the author wasn't very impressed with his work: `Aside from that affront to physics by Gazzetta dello Sport's Claudio Ghisalberti...'

Right, but just because he slept through physics class doesn't mean, necessarily, that he's a lousy reporter. He may be a lousy reporter, but who knows . . . .

How come you intelligent people, and that is said sincerely, are so hugely sceptical about everything else in the cycling press, with some justification, yet you swallow a story like this hook, line and sinker and even argue its corner?

Au contraire. I merely cited the article, pointing out by implication that if the reporter did his job then it has profound implications for this question.

The reporter's job was to get clicks and sell papers, so he did it.

 

[sniper]

slept through physics class
and still he came up with a pretty darn interesting electromagnetic system that according to specialists is at least theoretically possible.
I bet he sucked that story straight out of his thumb.

 

[Farcanal]

Re: Re:

You can do more miracles with electricity than chemistry, it’s also less damaging to your health. -- Industry "guru" of moto-doping

The new frontier is far more technologically advanced and ten times as expensive. It’s in the rear wheel: it costs 200,000 Euros, and there’s a waiting list of six months. -- Gazzetta dello Sport

The above quotes are from the article cited earlier. The industry guru, whoever he is, seems pretty convinced. I imagine that if you don't care about your health, you can do even more miracles with the two in combination.

Meanwhile, notice that the Gazzetta dello Sport reporter isn't conjecturing about whether these electromagnetic wheels are possible; he's saying they're already in production, and that the backlog for them is six months. He's also saying that they have a price, two-hundred thousand euros each. That can only mean they are in production and being produced at a profit. And at that price they are not being bought for grand fondos.

These things are always impossible. Until they're not. From 2010 I recall reading some very good responses to the question of bottom bracket motors that drew upon seemingly solid knowledge of engineering and physics, and that said such motors were, if not impossible, impractical. Some of these arguments were so compelling that the debate was pretty much at a standstill - until little Femke Van den Driessche showed up, teary-eyed, with her motor bought with parakeet money.

One of the things on it was that to keep the structural integrity of the downtube and also benefit most from the motor, additional carbon was required. This is where Maud Kaptheijns' interview where she points this out and that Peter van den Driessche does carbon repairs was known. This need for the additional carbon likely accounts for the suspect downtube of Femke's bike that drew such attention. But it's not the bike she was using at Koppenbergcross, when she has the most apparent motor-assisted acceleration. Maybe that bike was not durable enough with the motor, maybe it was just fine but the benefits were too little for the worse conditions the further into the season you go. When the bikes she's used were identified, the fat downtube bike with the non-standard frame has been given the name "bike 1", the Koppenbergcross bike "bike 2" and the Koppenbergcross spare bike / bike she went away on after DNFing at the Worlds, not believed to be motorized, "bike 3". A previously-used white bike was also identified, but not seen this season. Attention was also given to a slightly off paint job on bike 1, which is a non-standard Wilier frame (as Kaptheijns pointed out, Wilier only make one sort of frame for the type of bike, which is the frame that bikes 2 and 3 have. Makes me wonder if the frame of the old, no-longer-used bike had been modified and given a new lick of paint).

Interesting. The fact that Femke and her father almost pulled this off (and likely did pull it off for a while), using artisanal technique and off the shelf bits, and with almost no budget: makes me wonder what could be (or has been) done by people with access to professionals and money to spend.

As you point out above the article comes from a journalist, Claudio Ghisalberti, his name appears on another site in a post about power outputs on climbs, the author wasn't very impressed with his work: `Aside from that affront to physics by Gazzetta dello Sport's Claudio Ghisalberti...'

Right, but just because he slept through physics class doesn't mean, necessarily, that he's a lousy reporter. He may be a lousy reporter, but who knows . . . .

How come you intelligent people, and that is said sincerely, are so hugely sceptical about everything else in the cycling press, with some justification, yet you swallow a story like this hook, line and sinker and even argue its corner?

Au contraire. I merely cited the article, pointing out by implication that if the reporter did his job then it has profound implications for this question.

The reporter's job was to get clicks and sell papers, so he did it.

I'm out. Over to you Mulder.....

 

[poupou]

Re:

A full disk wheel could contain a hub motor plus batteries. Heavy and easily detected with a magnetometer, but visually probably not detectable, assuming the charging port is well concealed (under the tubular glue would do it). Maybe more useful in a short TT. The longer the TT, the more time the wheel would be dead weight.

There is not need of a charging port, induction is fine, time is not a matter.

Just FYI, there is small electric system directly powered by "our" electromagnetic waves, those used by WIFI, phones, TV...

 

[jyl]

Re: Re:

...
I think the way to approach this would be to embed electrical contacts in each dropout, with the locknuts and axle completing the circuit, put the coil (windings) on the axle, with ferrous inserts or magnets in the hub shell. You'd need to electrically insulate the rest of the drivetrain. Problem is, the hub on a pro road bike is skinny, and the axle has to be hollow and mechanically strong enough for a rider bombing down a mountain at 60 mph. That leaves very little room for a motor to produce enough power to make the whole thing worthwhile. If we start seeing pro bikes with bizarrely large diameter rear hubs, then someone should go put a magnetometer next to the hub shell - or toss a paperclip at it.

ok, so you're saying that basically it's possible, but UCI's rigorous bike testing and the critical eye of the average cycling fan will prevent it from being implemented?

sarcasm aside:
in your opinion what could one stick away in a disk wheel?

I'm saying a motor built into a hub is conceptually possible (Copenhagen Wheel etc), which we all know anyway, but to be workable will likely require a hub shell much larger diameter than what pro bikes use, and would still be easily detected with a magnetometer (or thermal scanner).

How many reporters and bloggers would love to be the one to break the scandalous news of a concealed motor in Froome's rear hub? How many revenue-generating clicks would be drawn by a video of a "positive" thermal scan or a magnetometer reading of a Team Sky Pinarello? You can buy a Fluke thermal imager for $1500 (probably find a used one for $200) and a magnetometer is as cheap as "free". At the races, reporters and fans can get right up to the riders and their bikes. You know people will be (are) scanning bikes and photographing them in detail, hoping to make their reputation and get their 15 minutes of fame. Any pro team knows this too. In this day and age, a private person with easily available technology and access to social media is a "threat" that can't be overlooked.

For smart riders and teams to take the risk, a doping method, whether pharmaceutical or technological, needs to be undetectable - or nearly so - in the context of the detection technology existing and in use at the time. At one time, injecting big doses of Epogen was undetectable; no longer, so smart riders/teams who are drug doping have moved to other forms of doping. At one time, motors in seat tubes were undetectable; no longer, so smart riders/teams who are motor doping will move to something else. (Just because a U23 cyclocross rider and her dad/brother didn't get the memo, don't assume a WT pro team is that stupid.)

When we think about what else they might move to, we need to think critically. Don't believe everything Gazzetta tells you; if the reporter wrote that "no Italian teams dope", based on an anonymous and uncorroborated source, would you believe it?

 

[jyl]

In fact, it occurs to me that it would be easy to create a video of a Fluke thermal imager purporting to show a suspicious heat signature in a bicycle seat tube. Because these imagers have SD cards and store images in memory. Simply heat up a seat tube on a Specialized Tarmac, image it, save the image, then go walk around a race, point the imager at a rider's Tarmac shortly after the stage, call up the stored image, video it, post on Youtube, get zillions of clicks, make some money.

I'll expect a percentage share for my idea, thank you.

 

[jyl]

Re: Re:

A full disk wheel could contain a hub motor plus batteries. Heavy and easily detected with a magnetometer, but visually probably not detectable, assuming the charging port is well concealed (under the tubular glue would do it). Maybe more useful in a short TT. The longer the TT, the more time the wheel would be dead weight.

There is not need of a charging port, induction is fine, time is not a matter.

Just FYI, there is small electric system directly powered by "our" electromagnetic waves, those used by WIFI, phones, TV...

Are you saying the disk wheel should charge up internal batteries by rotating, rather than from an external power source? Yes, you possibly could do this. Have the bike in the truck, with the rear wheel rotating in the frame for some hours prior to the race.

Or use a wireless charging mat, similar to those used by some smartphones.

So, yes, you could probably omit the charging port. Full disk wheels definitely should be scrutinized.

 

[Maxiton]

Re:

slept through physics class
and still he came up with a pretty darn interesting electromagnetic system that according to specialists is at least theoretically possible.
I bet he sucked that story straight out of his thumb.

Exactly. The story may be a total fabrication, but I doubt it's the reporter's fabrication. LeMond seems to think it's credible.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

slept through physics class
and still he came up with a pretty darn interesting electromagnetic system that according to specialists is at least theoretically possible.
I bet he sucked that story straight out of his thumb.

Exactly. The story may be a total fabrication, but I doubt it's the reporter's fabrication. LeMond seems to think it's credible.

indeed.
in fact he spoke about that technology already in 2015.

At last year’s Tour LeMond spoke about the need to not only test bikes, but also to screen wheels. Some doubted the technology to cheat that way existed, but this week La Gazzetta dello Sport detailed the problem and suggested it was very real.

CyclingTips’ James Huang spoke to experts and concluded that the technology is likely indeed there.

“Now the pressure needs to be on the wheels,” said LeMond, who said he had real reasons for believing that this method of cheating had been used in professional competition.

He declined to elaborate further at this point in time, but is convinced of the issue.
http://cyclingtips.com/2016/02/motors-in-bikes-greg-lemonds-six-ways-to-eradicate-mechanical-doping/

he was right last time.
seems only fair to take him (very) seriously this time.

 

[Hawkwood]

Re:

You can do more miracles with electricity than chemistry, it’s also less damaging to your health. -- Industry "guru" of moto-doping

The new frontier is far more technologically advanced and ten times as expensive. It’s in the rear wheel: it costs 200,000 Euros, and there’s a waiting list of six months. -- Gazzetta dello Sport

The above quotes are from the article cited earlier. The industry guru, whoever he is, seems pretty convinced. I imagine that if you don't care about your health, you can do even more miracles with the two in combination.

Meanwhile, notice that the Gazzetta dello Sport reporter isn't conjecturing about whether these electromagnetic wheels are possible; he's saying they're already in production, and that the backlog for them is six months. He's also saying that they have a price, two-hundred thousand euros each. That can only mean they are in production and being produced at a profit. And at that price they are not being bought for grand fondos.

These things are always impossible. Until they're not. From 2010 I recall reading some very good responses to the question of bottom bracket motors that drew upon seemingly solid knowledge of engineering and physics, and that said such motors were, if not impossible, impractical. Some of these arguments were so compelling that the debate was pretty much at a standstill - until little Femke Van den Driessche showed up, teary-eyed, with her motor bought with parakeet money.

One of the things on it was that to keep the structural integrity of the downtube and also benefit most from the motor, additional carbon was required. This is where Maud Kaptheijns' interview where she points this out and that Peter van den Driessche does carbon repairs was known. This need for the additional carbon likely accounts for the suspect downtube of Femke's bike that drew such attention. But it's not the bike she was using at Koppenbergcross, when she has the most apparent motor-assisted acceleration. Maybe that bike was not durable enough with the motor, maybe it was just fine but the benefits were too little for the worse conditions the further into the season you go. When the bikes she's used were identified, the fat downtube bike with the non-standard frame has been given the name "bike 1", the Koppenbergcross bike "bike 2" and the Koppenbergcross spare bike / bike she went away on after DNFing at the Worlds, not believed to be motorized, "bike 3". A previously-used white bike was also identified, but not seen this season. Attention was also given to a slightly off paint job on bike 1, which is a non-standard Wilier frame (as Kaptheijns pointed out, Wilier only make one sort of frame for the type of bike, which is the frame that bikes 2 and 3 have. Makes me wonder if the frame of the old, no-longer-used bike had been modified and given a new lick of paint).

Interesting. The fact that Femke and her father almost pulled this off (and likely did pull it off for a while), using artisanal technique and off the shelf bits, and with almost no budget: makes me wonder what could be (or has been) done by people with access to professionals and money to spend.

As you point out above the article comes from a journalist, Claudio Ghisalberti, his name appears on another site in a post about power outputs on climbs, the author wasn't very impressed with his work: `Aside from that affront to physics by Gazzetta dello Sport's Claudio Ghisalberti...'

Right, but just because he slept through physics class doesn't mean, necessarily, that he's a lousy reporter. He may be a lousy reporter, but who knows . . . .

How come you intelligent people, and that is said sincerely, are so hugely sceptical about everything else in the cycling press, with some justification, yet you swallow a story like this hook, line and sinker and even argue its corner?

Au contraire. I merely cited the article, pointing out by implication that if the reporter did his job then it has profound implications for this question.

I didn't write what's in your second quote above purporting to be from me. If you're going to quote me please ensure you're actually quoting me!

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Re:

You can do more miracles with electricity than chemistry, it’s also less damaging to your health. -- Industry "guru" of moto-doping

The new frontier is far more technologically advanced and ten times as expensive. It’s in the rear wheel: it costs 200,000 Euros, and there’s a waiting list of six months. -- Gazzetta dello Sport

The above quotes are from the article cited earlier. The industry guru, whoever he is, seems pretty convinced. I imagine that if you don't care about your health, you can do even more miracles with the two in combination.

Meanwhile, notice that the Gazzetta dello Sport reporter isn't conjecturing about whether these electromagnetic wheels are possible; he's saying they're already in production, and that the backlog for them is six months. He's also saying that they have a price, two-hundred thousand euros each. That can only mean they are in production and being produced at a profit. And at that price they are not being bought for grand fondos.

These things are always impossible. Until they're not. From 2010 I recall reading some very good responses to the question of bottom bracket motors that drew upon seemingly solid knowledge of engineering and physics, and that said such motors were, if not impossible, impractical. Some of these arguments were so compelling that the debate was pretty much at a standstill - until little Femke Van den Driessche showed up, teary-eyed, with her motor bought with parakeet money.

One of the things on it was that to keep the structural integrity of the downtube and also benefit most from the motor, additional carbon was required. This is where Maud Kaptheijns' interview where she points this out and that Peter van den Driessche does carbon repairs was known. This need for the additional carbon likely accounts for the suspect downtube of Femke's bike that drew such attention. But it's not the bike she was using at Koppenbergcross, when she has the most apparent motor-assisted acceleration. Maybe that bike was not durable enough with the motor, maybe it was just fine but the benefits were too little for the worse conditions the further into the season you go. When the bikes she's used were identified, the fat downtube bike with the non-standard frame has been given the name "bike 1", the Koppenbergcross bike "bike 2" and the Koppenbergcross spare bike / bike she went away on after DNFing at the Worlds, not believed to be motorized, "bike 3". A previously-used white bike was also identified, but not seen this season. Attention was also given to a slightly off paint job on bike 1, which is a non-standard Wilier frame (as Kaptheijns pointed out, Wilier only make one sort of frame for the type of bike, which is the frame that bikes 2 and 3 have. Makes me wonder if the frame of the old, no-longer-used bike had been modified and given a new lick of paint).

Interesting. The fact that Femke and her father almost pulled this off (and likely did pull it off for a while), using artisanal technique and off the shelf bits, and with almost no budget: makes me wonder what could be (or has been) done by people with access to professionals and money to spend.

As you point out above the article comes from a journalist, Claudio Ghisalberti, his name appears on another site in a post about power outputs on climbs, the author wasn't very impressed with his work: `Aside from that affront to physics by Gazzetta dello Sport's Claudio Ghisalberti...'

Right, but just because he slept through physics class doesn't mean, necessarily, that he's a lousy reporter. He may be a lousy reporter, but who knows . . . .

How come you intelligent people, and that is said sincerely, are so hugely sceptical about everything else in the cycling press, with some justification, yet you swallow a story like this hook, line and sinker and even argue its corner?

Au contraire. I merely cited the article, pointing out by implication that if the reporter did his job then it has profound implications for this question.

I didn't write what's in your second quote above purporting to be from me. If you're going to quote me please ensure you're actually quoting me!

Sorry! Not sure how that happened. It was Farcanal who wrote that. Fixed now, both here and in my original post.

 

[GJB123]

Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

I don't know about you guys but whenever I read something in the news papers on my personal field of expertise it contains serious flaws in 90% of the cases. I have no reason to believe that Gazetta is an exception to that rule and all of a sudden their sports journalists all have physics PhD's. They don't.

 

[jyl]

Re: Re:

One of the things on it was that to keep the structural integrity of the downtube and also benefit most from the motor, additional carbon was required. This is where Maud Kaptheijns' interview where she points this out and that Peter van den Driessche does carbon repairs was known. This need for the additional carbon likely accounts for the suspect downtube of Femke's bike that drew such attention. But it's not the bike she was using at Koppenbergcross, when she has the most apparent motor-assisted acceleration. Maybe that bike was not durable enough with the motor, maybe it was just fine but the benefits were too little for the worse conditions the further into the season you go. When the bikes she's used were identified, the fat downtube bike with the non-standard frame has been given the name "bike 1", the Koppenbergcross bike "bike 2" and the Koppenbergcross spare bike / bike she went away on after DNFing at the Worlds, not believed to be motorized, "bike 3". A previously-used white bike was also identified, but not seen this season. Attention was also given to a slightly off paint job on bike 1, which is a non-standard Wilier frame (as Kaptheijns pointed out, Wilier only make one sort of frame for the type of bike, which is the frame that bikes 2 and 3 have. Makes me wonder if the frame of the old, no-longer-used bike had been modified and given a new lick of paint).

I wonder if Wilier may have changed the downtube size. Here are pictures of two Wilier carbon cyclocross bikes. The first one has a larger downtube (near the bottom bracket) than the second one, to my eyes anyway. Take a look - are my eyes fooling me?

http://cx.cxmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/laura-verdonschot-wilier-cyclocross-crossvegas-img_9769-ayee_1_1.jpg

http://content.competitivecyclist.com/images/items/1200/WLY/WLY0020/MATBK.jpg

 

[Buffalo]

Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

Did Henao have a disc wheel at his TdS recon crash? Have always been curious why sky left the frame but took the wheels.