• 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!

Power Data Estimates for the climbing stages

Page 154 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 22, 2022
2
2
15
Visit site
Has there ever been a scientific test to compare modern bikes to bikes from different eras on a climb? It should be fairly easy to do on a set climb using a steady effort.

My guess would be that modern bikes are materially faster than the early to mid 90s bikes, mainly due to being a few kgs lighter and stiffer.
However I think the gains from the early to mid 00s bikes would be almost negligible once they were generally down to the weight limit. There might be more of a difference on the flat and downhill with improvements in brakes and aero, but not up the hills.

It would be good if there was something like this to put some more context on comparing climbing times from decades ago.
 
Has there ever been a scientific test to compare modern bikes to bikes from different eras on a climb? It should be fairly easy to do on a set climb using a steady effort.

My guess would be that modern bikes are materially faster than the early to mid 90s bikes, mainly due to being a few kgs lighter and stiffer.
However I think the gains from the early to mid 00s bikes would be almost negligible once they were generally down to the weight limit. There might be more of a difference on the flat and downhill with improvements in brakes and aero, but not up the hills.

It would be good if there was something like this to put some more context on comparing climbing times from decades ago.
The crazy thing is just the increase in performance since 2019 alone.
 
Has there ever been a scientific test to compare modern bikes to bikes from different eras on a climb? It should be fairly easy to do on a set climb using a steady effort.

My guess would be that modern bikes are materially faster than the early to mid 90s bikes, mainly due to being a few kgs lighter and stiffer.
However I think the gains from the early to mid 00s bikes would be almost negligible once they were generally down to the weight limit. There might be more of a difference on the flat and downhill with improvements in brakes and aero, but not up the hills.

It would be good if there was something like this to put some more context on comparing climbing times from decades ago.

It's not like they didn't know that lighter=faster uphill. There's plenty of articles about modifications done to bikes back in 90s.
One of Pantani's climbing bikes used in 1998 is claimed to weigh 6.96kg, which is lighter than most pros use nowdays.
View: https://imgur.com/a/fbZyKzf
 
Light/aero bikes (and riding practice) will probably make the most difference on steadier 6%-7%-ish climbs - it would be interesting to calculate if the "estimated" VAM/WKG numbers have increased more on climbs like Peyresorude, Arcalis or even La Plange versus something with really steep ramps (that's not a new, novelty-climb) like the Marie-Blanque.

Not putting this as an explanation for everything but even a few years ago it seemed like every team had a special super-light bike for the climbers- even these now have aerodynamic elements and it's no longer unusual to just see teams straight up use the "aero bike" on mountain stages (or like Jumbo when they had Bianchis, just using the Oltre all-rounder bike for everything)
 
Last edited:
Possibly the chain mechanism has improved. Team Sky had those Osymetric chainrings. Jumbo uses Dynamic Speed Wax. I don't know what difference it makes.

The different form was never proven to make a difference.
The dynamic speed wax... didn't pog also use something similar? if it mattered even a single W, all teams would use it since it is an easy thing to add.
 
  • Like
Reactions: meat puppet
It was a super mighty VAM effort, but it's not comparable to efforts like Vingegaard's in the Tour or even Hindley on Fedaia. Tre Cime is the only proper benchmark in the Giro for that, but that quickly becomes a matter of how it is raced. I'm curious about Crans-Montana, I hope it won't be a peloton at the bottom, but it could likely be so. Then we'll see how fast they can go after some fatigue.
 
It was a super mighty VAM effort, but it's not comparable to efforts like Vingegaard's in the Tour or even Hindley on Fedaia. Tre Cime is the only proper benchmark in the Giro for that, but that quickly becomes a matter of how it is raced. I'm curious about Crans-Montana, I hope it won't be a peloton at the bottom, but it could likely be so. Then we'll see how fast they can go after some fatigue.
Comparable maybe to Covadonga 2021? Rog did 6.0-6.1 I think after pacing the valley too.
 

TRENDING THREADS