• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Motorized bikes: technical & theoretical

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

Libertine Seguros said:
It would be interesting to see if the same button-pressing action is used when racing bike 3 (or did she have to change bike due to eg a mechanical in those races?). Did she necessarily race all races with the motor?

I might be digressing a bit too much, and it is probably covered somewhere, but.. This entire notion of button pressing seems very misguided to me. Not that it doesn't exist, but it is so completely amateur. The kind of system mentioned here would be quite easy to implement.
 
Jun 4, 2015
499
0
0
Visit site
Any thoughts of wheel systems on the track?

1. Races here are often won by 1/100ths of a second so even a small system that gave say a 20 watt advantage would help a lot.
2. Additional weight is not so much of an issue and teams often add ballast into the bikes to make them up to 6.8 Kgs as the bikes don't have brakes gears etc.
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Visit site
Re:

The Carrot said:
Any thoughts of wheel systems on the track?

1. Races here are often won by 1/100ths of a second so even a small system that gave say a 20 watt advantage would help a lot.
2. Additional weight is not so much of an issue and teams often add ballast into the bikes to make them up to 6.8 Kgs as the bikes don't have brakes gears etc.

My thoughts are that wheels are actually very easy to check for motors simply by weight. It wouldn't take long to create a spreadsheet with wheel, sprocket (cassette for road) and tyre weights of the main suppliers with a bit extra for the glue, click on wheel w, sprocket x and tyre y to arrive at weight z. In the case of handbuilt wheels you'd have rim, spoke, nipple and tyre weights to factor in. Any wheel plus or minus for example 50 or 100 grams could then be flagged as suspicious. The types of systems people have been postulating would add considerably to the wheel weights, plus wheels aren't areas that are ballasted to add weight as frames have been. Taking the example of Cancellara, we can even estimate fairly accurately what weights the wheels he used in the Ronde and PR were, just from the photos, or the Cycling News write ups on the bikes.
 
Jun 4, 2015
499
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Hawkwood said:
The Carrot said:
Any thoughts of wheel systems on the track?

1. Races here are often won by 1/100ths of a second so even a small system that gave say a 20 watt advantage would help a lot.
2. Additional weight is not so much of an issue and teams often add ballast into the bikes to make them up to 6.8 Kgs as the bikes don't have brakes gears etc.

My thoughts are that wheels are actually very easy to check for motors simply by weight. It wouldn't take long to create a spreadsheet with wheel, sprocket (cassette for road) and tyre weights of the main suppliers with a bit extra for the glue, click on wheel w, sprocket x and tyre y to arrive at weight z. In the case of handbuilt wheels you'd have rim, spoke, nipple and tyre weights to factor in. Any wheel plus or minus for example 50 or 100 grams could then be flagged as suspicious. The types of systems people have been postulating would add considerably to the wheel weights, plus wheels aren't areas that are ballasted to add weight as frames have been. Taking the example of Cancellara, we can even estimate fairly accurately what weights the wheels he used in the Ronde and PR were, just from the photos, or the Cycling News write ups on the bikes.


Some interesting ideas on how things might be done, but that's not how they are done. The bike is weighed as a whole entity. The mechanic will take bikes to the commissaire for checking, well before a race and then again just before the start, removing and weighing wheels a few mins before a start ain't gonna happen.

Anyway, re track racing, rims have been made heavier on the track for some endurance events, citing a flywheel effect.

Someone once told me there's a track team who build and design there own kit. Anyone on here know the wheel weights?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
Re: Re:

Hawkwood said:
The Carrot said:
Any thoughts of wheel systems on the track?

1. Races here are often won by 1/100ths of a second so even a small system that gave say a 20 watt advantage would help a lot.
2. Additional weight is not so much of an issue and teams often add ballast into the bikes to make them up to 6.8 Kgs as the bikes don't have brakes gears etc.

My thoughts are that wheels are actually very easy to check for motors simply by weight. It wouldn't take long to create a spreadsheet with wheel, sprocket (cassette for road) and tyre weights of the main suppliers with a bit extra for the glue, click on wheel w, sprocket x and tyre y to arrive at weight z. In the case of handbuilt wheels you'd have rim, spoke, nipple and tyre weights to factor in. Any wheel plus or minus for example 50 or 100 grams could then be flagged as suspicious. The types of systems people have been postulating would add considerably to the wheel weights, plus wheels aren't areas that are ballasted to add weight as frames have been. Taking the example of Cancellara, we can even estimate fairly accurately what weights the wheels he used in the Ronde and PR were, just from the photos, or the Cycling News write ups on the bikes.

The whole, "BC team have rounder wheels hidden under covers" thing from 2012 Olympic track events all of a sudden -- for me -- has a whole new meaning.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
Hawkwood said:
The Carrot said:
Any thoughts of wheel systems on the track?

1. Races here are often won by 1/100ths of a second so even a small system that gave say a 20 watt advantage would help a lot.
2. Additional weight is not so much of an issue and teams often add ballast into the bikes to make them up to 6.8 Kgs as the bikes don't have brakes gears etc.

My thoughts are that wheels are actually very easy to check for motors simply by weight. It wouldn't take long to create a spreadsheet with wheel, sprocket (cassette for road) and tyre weights of the main suppliers with a bit extra for the glue, click on wheel w, sprocket x and tyre y to arrive at weight z. In the case of handbuilt wheels you'd have rim, spoke, nipple and tyre weights to factor in. Any wheel plus or minus for example 50 or 100 grams could then be flagged as suspicious. The types of systems people have been postulating would add considerably to the wheel weights, plus wheels aren't areas that are ballasted to add weight as frames have been. Taking the example of Cancellara, we can even estimate fairly accurately what weights the wheels he used in the Ronde and PR were, just from the photos, or the Cycling News write ups on the bikes.

The whole, "BC team have rounder wheels hidden under covers" thing from 2012 Olympic track events all of a sudden -- for me -- has a whole new meaning.

Yep that occurred to me. The whole track frames not available to joe public and the secrecy around the wheels all point to 'other stuff'.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
their wheels aint rounder. they reinvented the wheels. the wheels needed to be designed much better, and have some muscular christianity and gordonstoun pluck inserted in them.
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
Dear Wiggo said:
Hawkwood said:
The Carrot said:
Any thoughts of wheel systems on the track?

1. Races here are often won by 1/100ths of a second so even a small system that gave say a 20 watt advantage would help a lot.
2. Additional weight is not so much of an issue and teams often add ballast into the bikes to make them up to 6.8 Kgs as the bikes don't have brakes gears etc.

My thoughts are that wheels are actually very easy to check for motors simply by weight. It wouldn't take long to create a spreadsheet with wheel, sprocket (cassette for road) and tyre weights of the main suppliers with a bit extra for the glue, click on wheel w, sprocket x and tyre y to arrive at weight z. In the case of handbuilt wheels you'd have rim, spoke, nipple and tyre weights to factor in. Any wheel plus or minus for example 50 or 100 grams could then be flagged as suspicious. The types of systems people have been postulating would add considerably to the wheel weights, plus wheels aren't areas that are ballasted to add weight as frames have been. Taking the example of Cancellara, we can even estimate fairly accurately what weights the wheels he used in the Ronde and PR were, just from the photos, or the Cycling News write ups on the bikes.

The whole, "BC team have rounder wheels hidden under covers" thing from 2012 Olympic track events all of a sudden -- for me -- has a whole new meaning.

Yep that occurred to me. The whole track frames not available to joe public and the secrecy around the wheels all point to 'other stuff'.

At London Kenny's wheels in the final appeared to be Mavic, the same ones as used by Bauge. Mavic said it supplied the same wheels to all the teams. As for the frames it was said that the German team's FES ones were also not easy to buy.
 
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
Hawkwood said:
The Carrot said:
Any thoughts of wheel systems on the track?

1. Races here are often won by 1/100ths of a second so even a small system that gave say a 20 watt advantage would help a lot.
2. Additional weight is not so much of an issue and teams often add ballast into the bikes to make them up to 6.8 Kgs as the bikes don't have brakes gears etc.

My thoughts are that wheels are actually very easy to check for motors simply by weight. It wouldn't take long to create a spreadsheet with wheel, sprocket (cassette for road) and tyre weights of the main suppliers with a bit extra for the glue, click on wheel w, sprocket x and tyre y to arrive at weight z. In the case of handbuilt wheels you'd have rim, spoke, nipple and tyre weights to factor in. Any wheel plus or minus for example 50 or 100 grams could then be flagged as suspicious. The types of systems people have been postulating would add considerably to the wheel weights, plus wheels aren't areas that are ballasted to add weight as frames have been. Taking the example of Cancellara, we can even estimate fairly accurately what weights the wheels he used in the Ronde and PR were, just from the photos, or the Cycling News write ups on the bikes.

The whole, "BC team have rounder wheels hidden under covers" thing from 2012 Olympic track events all of a sudden -- for me -- has a whole new meaning.

There was definitely something different about their wheels. They weren't mavic wheels according to someone who worked on the support team.
 
As seems to be at least a reasonable consensus, the discussion of the various potential systems for motorizing bikes, their implementation and disguise, and the practicalities of this, needs a thread of its own, for it has outgrown the "First Rider Caught" thread which now has multiple strands of conversation which are on-topic.

Hopefully the mods can move many of the technical posts from that thread into here, so that if this thread actually fulfils its job, it can enable conversation to pick up where it left off and not just start off in medias res.
 
Libertine Seguros said:
As seems to be at least a reasonable consensus, the discussion of the various potential systems for motorizing bikes, their implementation and disguise, and the practicalities of this, needs a thread of its own, for it has outgrown the "First Rider Caught" thread which now has multiple strands of conversation which are on-topic.

Hopefully the mods can move many of the technical posts from that thread into here, so that if this thread actually fulfils its job, it can enable conversation to pick up where it left off and not just start off in medias res.
Great topic! I agree it was time to split threads. I'll move some posts but when that happens your post will probably drop down a couple pages. Or, we can start fresh? It's up to you Libertine.

Cheers
 
Jul 15, 2012
226
1
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

jyl said:
Cloxxki said:
I agree that there should be a separate thread for (theoretical) mech fraud systems.

I did not emphasize, but my little fraud seems to be very much speed dependent for power assist. If I am right, it could (if powerful enough to maintain 3 oçlock 90º optimum) only produce good power at high speeds. There is no gear reduction. No, it will not be like a motorbike up a hill where you can just coast. It's a mass on a lever.
I can think of ways to boost the output (inner rim spinning faster) but then you need to involve the hub as a gear. What i have here is a rim motor that doesn't need interaction with coils or magnets on the frame. This wheel would go all by itself. And it would GO. Imagine a 4kg wheel of which 2kg is moving inside the rim. It would get up to pretty nice speeds by itself. And as said at higher speed be able tooffer more power. Just a diminishing percentage of leg power (on flat road).

Is your drive merely propelling a 4 kg wheel? Very little power required. Or a 85 kg bike and rider? Far more power required, which your drive can't provide.

I encourage you to fasten a 2 kg weight to your wheel (just tie some lead weights, or even a couple of hammers, to some spokes), position yourself facing uphill on a very modest hill, place the weight at 3 oclock, and see what happens. It is an easy experiment, just try it.
This is too much...
You don't seem to grasp even high school level physics like this, yet you keep bashing every idea or concept that pops up here. You do know that Cloxxkis innovative concept would generate 100W at 18k/h? And that it could self-propel the "85 kg bike and rider" at >2% incline?
Or don't you?


As I said here :http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=1860406#p1860406
If you don't master the engineering and the ingenuity required for this level of cheating, don't argue what can and can't be done.
You seem to be the master of none (more a quack of all trades...)
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Nicko. said:
jyl said:
Cloxxki said:
I agree that there should be a separate thread for (theoretical) mech fraud systems.

I did not emphasize, but my little fraud seems to be very much speed dependent for power assist. If I am right, it could (if powerful enough to maintain 3 oçlock 90º optimum) only produce good power at high speeds. There is no gear reduction. No, it will not be like a motorbike up a hill where you can just coast. It's a mass on a lever.
I can think of ways to boost the output (inner rim spinning faster) but then you need to involve the hub as a gear. What i have here is a rim motor that doesn't need interaction with coils or magnets on the frame. This wheel would go all by itself. And it would GO. Imagine a 4kg wheel of which 2kg is moving inside the rim. It would get up to pretty nice speeds by itself. And as said at higher speed be able tooffer more power. Just a diminishing percentage of leg power (on flat road).

Is your drive merely propelling a 4 kg wheel? Very little power required. Or a 85 kg bike and rider? Far more power required, which your drive can't provide.

I encourage you to fasten a 2 kg weight to your wheel (just tie some lead weights, or even a couple of hammers, to some spokes), position yourself facing uphill on a very modest hill, place the weight at 3 oclock, and see what happens. It is an easy experiment, just try it.
This is too much...
You don't seem to grasp even high school level physics like this, yet you keep bashing every idea or concept that pops up here. You do know that Cloxxkis innovative concept would generate 100W at 18k/h? And that it could self-propel the "85 kg bike and rider" at >2% incline?
Or don't you?


As I said here :http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=1860406#p1860406
If you don't master the engineering and the ingenuity required for this level of cheating, don't argue what can and can't be done.
You seem to be the master of none (more a quack of all trades...)

Can you explain how Cloxxkis' design can work when the valve stem would stop the weight dead? I put this to Cloxxkis and the reply appeared to be that you'd need to use non-pneumatic tyres. So as it stands, with the tyres all pros use, the design would generate zero watts at 18k/h or indeed any other speed. As you write `if you don't master the engineering.....'
 
I think I also wrote about the ultra-common side-valve option.
Works for cars, skates, etc.
Valves go where they can. Or are sponsor supplied innertubes mandatory?
Please get over the incline thing. No-one on earth wants a conceiled motor to roll up ANY part of road by itself. It's to ASSIST, the PEDALING. It says something if a train of thought goes a bit too theoretical.
 
Jul 15, 2012
226
1
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Hawkwood said:
Can you explain how Cloxxkis' design can work when the valve stem would stop the weight dead? I put this to Cloxxkis and the reply appeared to be that you'd need to use non-pneumatic tyres. So as it stands, with the tyres all pros use, the design would generate zero watts at 18k/h or indeed any other speed. As you write `if you don't master the engineering.....'
Way to miss the point...

I wasn't 'defending' the feasability of Cloxxkis concept (it shure would be a tall order to make it work...), I pointed out the fact that a non-skilled person bashed a conceptual idea without even mastering basic physics.

Funny how you chime in and provide a nice sample regarding the ingenuity part...

Sheez...
 
Aug 4, 2011
3,647
0
0
Visit site
1932 Nikola Tesla states: I have harnessed the cosmic rays and caused them to operate a motive device

2013 Fabian Cancellara states: I have harnessed the cosmic rays and caused them to operate a motive device
 

TRENDING THREADS