The doped bike exists (video of pro version)!

[oldcrank]

Re: The doped bike (DON'T) exist!

The UCI buffoons make the Keystone Cops look like rocket scientists. This is the dumbest thing I have ever seen... dismantling the bottom bracket to see if a motor exists... BAH! And, I just love the way the UCI official spins the rear wheel and examines it as it spins. The look on his face clearly demonstrates he is somewhat puzzled by what he sees, sort of disbelief. Really? How shocking it must be to see a modern day bicycle wheel spin smoothly with little resistance. What'll they think of next?

No kidding.

What a joke.

Throw in the need to use a hammer to put the crankset back on. Really?

Here is the link to the article and video: UCI checks Alberto Contador's bike for motor

Can't believe I am favoring the opinion of a known doper over LeMond on this, but Contador appears to have his head screwed on correctly:

Alberto Contador has called suspicions that riders are using secret motors in their bikes "a joke ... something from science fiction"

Dave.

What we have here is two posters hating on Alberto's mechanic
because they think he is a UCI official. Somewhat embarrassing.

 

[blackcat]

Insiders cannot appreciate this is code for legitimacy/illegitimacy[sic]

ofcourse they will be indignant. perhaps they should

 

[D-Queued]

Re: The doped bike (DON'T) exist!

...

What we have here is two posters hating on Alberto's mechanic
because they think he is a UCI official. Somewhat embarrassing.

Err.

That makes the mechanic look even more stupid than if he were a UCI official.

And, what was with the hammer? REALLY STUPID if that was a team mechanic.

Dave.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: The doped bike (DON'T) exist!

...

What we have here is two posters hating on Alberto's mechanic
because they think he is a UCI official. Somewhat embarrassing.

Err.

That makes the mechanic look even more stupid than if he were a UCI official.

And, what was with the hammer? REALLY STUPID if that was a team mechanic.

Dave.

Eh, it's only a mechanic who's prepared bikes for over 80 GTs. I'm sure you know better than him

 

[D-Queued]

Re: The doped bike (DON'T) exist!

...

What we have here is two posters hating on Alberto's mechanic
because they think he is a UCI official. Somewhat embarrassing.

Err.

That makes the mechanic look even more stupid than if he were a UCI official.

And, what was with the hammer? REALLY STUPID if that was a team mechanic.

Dave.

Eh, it's only a mechanic who's prepared bikes for over 80 GTs. I'm sure you know better than him

I don't know much, this is true. But I do have an inkling of how wheels go around. And, perhaps I m misled without proper mechanic training, but I don't think that you should hammer your crankset into the BB. If you have to force it, isn't that suggestive of some sort of problem? Or, do the pro teams just not care about little things like that?

Perhaps you can explain his behavior for us. Is that what you learn from over 80 GTs?

Dave.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: The doped bike (DON'T) exist!

...

What we have here is two posters hating on Alberto's mechanic
because they think he is a UCI official. Somewhat embarrassing.

Err.

That makes the mechanic look even more stupid than if he were a UCI official.

And, what was with the hammer? REALLY STUPID if that was a team mechanic.

Dave.

Eh, it's only a mechanic who's prepared bikes for over 80 GTs. I'm sure you know better than him

I don't know much, this is true. But I do have an inkling of how wheels go around. And, perhaps I m misled without proper mechanic training, but I don't think that you should hammer your crankset into the BB. If you have to force it, isn't that suggestive of some sort of problem? Or, do the pro teams just not care about little things like that?

Perhaps you can explain his behavior for us. Is that what you learn from over 80 GTs?

Dave.

There's chase and face, but if that fails, use a mace?

 

[oldcrank]

Calling a rubber mallet a "hammer" three times
does not make it one, my friend.

 

[D-Queued]

Calling a rubber mallet a "hammer" three times
does not make it one, my friend.

If you used a rubber mallet like that on my bike I might break your nose.

YMMV

Dave.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Calling a rubber mallet a "hammer" three times
does not make it one, my friend.

If you used a rubber mallet like that on my bike I might break your nose.

YMMV

Dave.

Might break your nose, my friend.

 

[fishtacos]

Re: The doped bike (DON'T) exist!

...

What we have here is two posters hating on Alberto's mechanic
because they think he is a UCI official. Somewhat embarrassing.

Err.

That makes the mechanic look even more stupid than if he were a UCI official.

And, what was with the hammer? REALLY STUPID if that was a team mechanic.

Dave.

Eh, it's only a mechanic who's prepared bikes for over 80 GTs. I'm sure you know better than him

I don't know much, this is true. But I do have an inkling of how wheels go around. And, perhaps I m misled without proper mechanic training, but I don't think that you should hammer your crankset into the BB. If you have to force it, isn't that suggestive of some sort of problem? Or, do the pro teams just not care about little things like that?

Perhaps you can explain his behavior for us. Is that what you learn from over 80 GTs?

Dave.

Sorry, just had to jump in here after reading that -

"without proper mechanic training" - That might be why you don't know that many cranks have to be 'persuaded' with a rubber mallet. It's standard procedure to remove or install both external bearing and press fit crank spindles if the friction fit is a little too tight to remove/install by hand. Source: 7 years pro mechanic experience.

So, yeah, the pro mechanic probably knows more about installing and removing cranks than you do, and probably cares even more, since if he screws up it can cost a race, or worse yet, lead to a customer complaining.

Feel free to check out the Park Tools "Repair Help" web page to get you started...

 

[D-Queued]

Re: The doped bike (DON'T) exist!

...

Sorry, just had to jump in here after reading that -

"without proper mechanic training" - That might be why you don't know that many cranks have to be 'persuaded' with a rubber mallet. It's standard procedure to remove or install both external bearing and press fit crank spindles if the friction fit is a little too tight to remove/install by hand. Source: 7 years pro mechanic experience.

So, yeah, the pro mechanic probably knows more about installing and removing cranks than you do, and probably cares even more, since if he screws up it can cost a race, or worse yet, lead to a customer complaining.

Feel free to check out the Park Tools "Repair Help" web page to get you started...

Well, it must feel good to be a know-it-all then.

So I took your suggestion literally and have read through the entirety of the Park Tools "Repair Help" pages.

I checked out the pages on installing:

- Square spindle
- ISIS Drive or Octalink
- External Bearing Crank Systems
- Self Extracting or One-Key Release Systems

Oddly, I even have at least one of each of these in my personal collection. And, to be truthful, each has been threatened with a mallet on multiple occasions.

Then, I read on about cranks that are not in my collection:

- BMX Three Piece Crank
- SRAM HammerSchmidt

In none of these cases is there a recommendation to use a hammer, block of wood, mallet or another driver to insert the crank/axle past the right hand (drive side) bearing, which is what we see in the video.



Hitting the crank arm while passing the hardened steel spline/threads/business end through the drive side bearing sure seems like a great way to damage the bearing surface, though. Maybe that is why Park Tools doesn't suggest that after all.

Admittedly, there is a suggestion that a "gentle use of a mallet" may be required for the last part of an XTR crank. That, however, could only be well after the risk of scoring the bearings is no longer an issue. And, this is not what we saw in the video.

Thus, this begs the question: In your seven years of being a professional mechanic, how often did you actually read your manual?

Dave.

 

[MarkvW]

This is pretty funny.

 

[sniper]

it is.

to get back to that bit of footage: it shows just how 'serious' the UCI take motorization. To post that footage as some sort of evidence that Contador's bike has been satisfactorily checked for motors is just another insult to the brain.
Apparently the UCI official isn't allowed to touch the bike (or remove things from it), so ffs give the guy a heat gun or whatever scanning device he needs to simply go over the tube/saddle and check for unusual stuff.
Also, there is nothing to guarantee that it is actually Contador's finish bike, and who knows Contador changed bikes midway. Moreover, Bertie's allegedly dodgy wheel change happened [some days, ed.] before, leading to those public insinuations from Cippo and [later also] those Lemond comments. Assuming (for the sake of the argument) Berty was using a motor that day, what are the effing odds that he is gonna use a motor again the days after, when Cippo's insinuations have been hitting the news and UCI have announced testing.
I don't think Dirty was using a motor at any point during the giro, but regardless: the whole 'testing procedure' is a farce that makes my eyes rain.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Fwiw Cipo's insinuations were after stage 5

@D-Queued.
This man has been a mechanic for professional teams for 30 years. I am quite sure he knows what he's doing. You trying to make it seem like he's just a clueless idiot while you yourself have zero years as a bike mechanic is quite a sad sight.

 

[WillemS]

And I'm here waiting for them to find a bag of discarded motors in the trash, like those needles in the Tour during the Lance years.

 

[fishtacos]

Re: The doped bike (DON'T) exist!

Dear Dave,

Let me help you with some reading comprehension. From the Park Tools advice on external bearing cranksets:
"Push from right side until spindle comes out left cup. Fit is snug, and in some cases gentle use of a mallet may help."
"Next, loosen and remove arm cap and slide arm off. It it sometimes necessary to gently tap arm with mallet."

Now, obviously Park isn't necessarily the only word in working on bicycles, but I'm pretty sure they've done their homework on what does and does not work, and what may or may not damage your parts. Perhaps you know more than they do about being a mechanic? I'm also trying to figure out how hitting the end of the spindle with a rubber mallet is going to hurt the bearing surfaces... And, if you can reliably pull every single Campy, Shimano, FSA, Specialized, etc. crank out without a little persuasion, then I'm real impressed. But, the truth is that real live paid pro mechanics are whacking on cranks all the time to get them to go in or out, without any issues whatsoever. Let me know when you've actually pulled 10 or 15 different cranks in one week.

Seriously, if you're going to go to snark and insults, you should really try being right first.

Andddddd back to the motors!

 

[sniper]

Re:

Fwiw Cipo's insinuations were after stage 5

tnx, edited accordingly.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

it is.

to get back to that bit of footage: it shows just how 'serious' the UCI take motorization. To post that footage as some sort of evidence that Contador's bike has been satisfactorily checked for motors is just another insult to the brain.
Apparently the UCI official isn't allowed to touch the bike (or remove things from it), so ffs give the guy a heat gun or whatever scanning device he needs to simply go over the tube/saddle and check for unusual stuff.
Also, there is nothing to guarantee that it is actually Contador's finish bike, and who knows Contador changed bikes midway. Moreover, Bertie's allegedly dodgy wheel change happened [some days, ed.] before, leading to those public insinuations from Cippo and [later also] those Lemond comments. Assuming (for the sake of the argument) Berty was using a motor that day, what are the effing odds that he is gonna use a motor again the days after, when Cippo's insinuations have been hitting the news and UCI have announced testing.
I don't think Dirty was using a motor at any point during the giro, but regardless: the whole 'testing procedure' is a farce that makes my eyes rain.

I dont think it necessarily proves the UCI is serious about anything?

next we could argue the UCI is serious about getting PEDs out of the sport.

what it does prove, it proves the UCI is serious about being seen as serious about enforcement of no motors. #meta #simulcrum

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

it is.

to get back to that bit of footage: it shows just how 'serious' the UCI take motorization. To post that footage as some sort of evidence that Contador's bike has been satisfactorily checked for motors is just another insult to the brain.
Apparently the UCI official isn't allowed to touch the bike (or remove things from it), so ffs give the guy a heat gun or whatever scanning device he needs to simply go over the tube/saddle and check for unusual stuff.
Also, there is nothing to guarantee that it is actually Contador's finish bike, and who knows Contador changed bikes midway. Moreover, Bertie's allegedly dodgy wheel change happened [some days, ed.] before, leading to those public insinuations from Cippo and [later also] those Lemond comments. Assuming (for the sake of the argument) Berty was using a motor that day, what are the effing odds that he is gonna use a motor again the days after, when Cippo's insinuations have been hitting the news and UCI have announced testing.
I don't think Dirty was using a motor at any point during the giro, but regardless: the whole 'testing procedure' is a farce that makes my eyes rain.

I dont think it necessarily proves the UCI is serious about anything?

next we could argue the UCI is serious about getting PEDs out of the sport.

what it does prove, it proves the UCI is serious about being seen as serious about enforcement of no motors. #meta #simulcrum

agree, hence 'serious' as in ' serious '
#facetious

 

[blackcat]

Re:

Fwiw Cipo's insinuations were after stage 5

@D-Queued.
This man has been a mechanic for professional teams for 30 years. I am quite sure he knows what he's doing. You trying to make it seem like he's just a clueless idiot while you yourself have zero years as a bike mechanic is quite a sad sight.

actually, in support of Dave, he is merely attempting to focus ones eyes on the prize (idiom). The prize in this instance, is the legitimacy of the sport, and the entrenched culture of PEDs.

to sum up D-Q's postion (without wishing to put words in Dave's mouth) "if we seek to question legitimacy, why be sidetracked by some conspiracy which may or may not be a conspiracy, the elephant in the room in cycling wrt legitimacy and cheating, is not motors, but it is PEDs."

a devil's advocate on D-Q's position, lets say an instance of hypothetical motor doping has occurred, let that be the premise. This brouhaha has now brought it slap bang into the open, and the peloton may enforce their own rules and deterrent. They know what is possible, Boonen knows what is possible, and if someone can come onto the scene and destroy him up the Muur.

*but Spartacus did not just come onto the scene.

 

[blackcat]

edit:

Sniper, often I read the first line or two, then I reply to the whole post.

I was wrong and took the first line in your post verbatim, as literal. When you were using rhetoric, and then explicating the point. sorry to reply in this way, because when I read your full post, I clearly understood I had taken away the complete opposite of your contribution. apologies

 

[sniper]

that's a pretty favorable way of summing up d-queued's position.
I'd sum it up thus:
"small hidden motors in road bikes is science fiction".
To keep on saying that in the face of twenty-ish links including state television programs demonstrating the technology in detail, that's odd (to put it mildly), and as fishtacos subtly pointed out, d-queued has responded rather snarky-ish to posts suggesting he's wrong ("you should watch more cycling").
Now he's shown to have it wrong again albeit on a minor issue, and again is responding as if his manhood depended on it.

Further to your point: nobody to my knowledge is denying that PEDs are a far more urgent and rampant form of cheating.
But this thread happens not to be about that (although of course when analyzing e.g. Cancellara 2010 it's not really possible to discuss the two forms of cheating apart, because the underlying question is whether or not PEDs alone can explain those accelerations).

 

[sniper]

Re:

edit:

Sniper, often I read the first line or two, then I reply to the whole post.

I was wrong and took the first line in your post verbatim, as literal. When you were using rhetoric, and then explicating the point. sorry to reply in this way, because when I read your full post, I clearly understood I had taken away the complete opposite of your contribution. apologies

no probs brotha (albeit from anotha motha )

 

[blackcat]

Re:

But this thread happens not to be about that (although of course when analyzing e.g. Cancellara 2010 it's not really possible to discuss the two forms of cheating apart, because the underlying question is whether or not PEDs alone can explain those accelerations).

yes, and to add to that, comparing like-to-like, ceteris parabus, had we seen the equivalent form from spartacus when he had been on an equivalent doping program. because ofcourse he always doped, so we have to assume he was on the equivalent program and regime.

 

[sniper]

I wanna see Wiggo's HR bike turned inside out both before and after the race.
I wanna see him riding his bike through a friggin airport scanner.
or is a champion like Wiggo free of suspicion?