The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
I have been waiting 2weeks to do a comparative test on the 11.5mile hilly tt course on the PowerCranks Frank Day and could wait no longer. Last week was heavy rain, this week wasn't much better.
2weeks ago in good weather I got 27mins 23secs. Tonight I only raced maybe 75% if that, freewheeled some of the time, took it very carefully around corners as it was raining and the roads were extremely wet and dangerously slippy. I did 27mins 46secs. I could have easily gone 2 or 3mins faster in good conditions. Quite simply the PC's are faster, harder work but faster. If you don't believe me get a pair and try them yourself. Type in the code 'Hoppo2014' and you will get discount and support my RAAM. You can't lose
FrankDay said:This probably belongs here. From a world champ who has been training on PowerCranks getting ready for RAAM. We have been pushing him to do some of the RAAM on his PowerCranks as we thought it would help him. He wasn't sure so he decided to do a TT on regular cranks and PowerCranks to compare. Here is his post of the comparison.
He has resisted going shorter. That is an awful lot of change for an elite to make in a short period of time (remember, he just started training on the PowerCranks about a month ago). Perhaps, in view of this result (which I am sure he found surprising as he had resisted racing on the cranks) he might consider going a little shorter now as we think this would be especially beneficial to him for the flats on this 3000 mile race. We will see what he does.sciguy said:Hopefully you've got him riding his cranks set to 125mm so he can really tear up the RAAM this year I'll be following his near certain domination of the race.
Hugh
Tapeworm said:Wow, that's like science or something.
Not a biased opinion at all in any way shape or form.
FrankDay said:I did 27mins 46secs. I could have easily gone 2 or 3mins faster in good conditions. Quite simply the PC's are faster, harder work but faster. If you don't believe me get a pair and try them yourself. Type in the code 'Hoppo2014' and you will get discount and support my RAAM. You can't lose
42x16ss said:Hmmm
Totally not an advert
FrankDay said:I thought this data from Dr. Jim Martin (originally posted in the PowerCranks thread) should be reposted here. In it he separates out the muscular from non-muscular forces that result in the total pedal force.
I think moving forward, when we talk about pedaling technique we should understand that pedal forces are not muscular forces.
Show us it is possible then we can break down how it happens.coapman said:You can see from above data that the application of maximal torque through 12, 1 and 2 will involve the application of greater muscular power than the maximal used for 3 o'c torque.
FrankDay said:Show us it is possible then we can break down how it happens.
Yes, but you haven't shown that the forces you say you generate are the forces you actually generate. When you show us you are actually doing what you think you are doing then I will believe your "breakdown". I simply don't believe you are doing what you think you are doing.coapman said:There is no need to break down how it happens, I have already explained that.
FrankDay said:Yes, but you haven't shown that the forces you say you generate are the forces you actually generate. When you show us you are actually doing what you think you are doing then I will believe your "breakdown". I simply don't believe you are doing what you think you are doing.
elapid said:Hmmm ... sounds familiar. Why do you ask for something you yourself cannot provide?
I don't think that is what he said. His myth #1 was "Riding a fixed gear improves pedaling efficiency and leg speed" Do you have any evidence that riding a fixed gear hard improves pedaling efficiency and leg speed? You don't. But, you criticize him because you believe one can improve performance training on a fixed gear if one trains hard. Of course that is true but it doesn't negate what his original thought was so what you said was really off topic.Alex Simmons/RST said:Fixed gear or free hub, what matters is the power output. Making such blanket statements as these without proper context is misleading and unhelpful.
One can very well improve performance with a fixed gear, but not by tooling around. Saying fixed gear is not good for your development because some people don't ride hard on them is just a dumb argument.
Your implying that he implied that fixed gear bikes "pedal for you" is just plain silly. What he said is that fixed gear bikes force the pedals around whether one is pedaling with good form or no form because all of the momentum of the bike is put into the pedals if one "stops pedaling" and we simply are not strong enough to resist such forces.Likewise if you tool around on a free hub bike, you won't improve either.
And implying a fixed gear pedals for you is also silly.
True, but he didn't say anything to the contrary, he was talking about pedaling technique.Your speed is a function of your power output and the resistance forces. That relationship doesn't change whether on fixed or free hub.
This I can agree with. Our experience is, if we are using PowerCranks as a measure of what constitutes good pedaling technique (it is as we define it, your definition may differ), that some who train on fixed gear bikes have excellent technique while most do not.It's also equally disingenuous to claim one must train on a fixed gear to improve.
Bio_McGeek said:Alex, Hamish, and Hugh:
Have you guys noticed that this forum is always you rational guys vs. coapman and FrankDay? What percentage of the posts on this forum come from the five of you? 90+%?
You, the rationals, try to debunk things but you just can't win. Every thread is a Tar Baby.
Also, I have recently developed a suspicion that coapman doesn't really believe anything he posts. Rather he is trolling to see how much of a response he can get out of you rational guys. He thinks to himself "How can I really push their buttons?" If I'm right he must get tremendous entertainment.
Try not posting to this forum for six months and see what happens. At worst the other two will post some silliness but no one will pay any attention. I reckon the forum will be nearly dormant.
Of course, if you enjoy these arguments then by all means keep it up. Finally, remember that all press is good press. So every time you guys respond to a post about a certain product you are doing FD a favor.
Cheers,
Jim
Bio_McGeek said:Alex, Hamish, and Hugh:
Have you guys noticed that this forum is always you rational guys vs. coapman and FrankDay? What percentage of the posts on this forum come from the five of you? 90+%?
You, the rationals, try to debunk things but you just can't win. Every thread is a Tar Baby.
Also, I have recently developed a suspicion that coapman doesn't really believe anything he posts. Rather he is trolling to see how much of a response he can get out of you rational guys. He thinks to himself "How can I really push their buttons?" If I'm right he must get tremendous entertainment.
Try not posting to this forum for six months and see what happens. At worst the other two will post some silliness but no one will pay any attention. I reckon the forum will be nearly dormant.
Of course, if you enjoy these arguments then by all means keep it up. Finally, remember that all press is good press. So every time you guys respond to a post about a certain product you are doing FD a favor.
Cheers,
Jim
"CGN does science", Ugh, not quite.coapman said:
FrankDay said:"CGN does science", Ugh, not quite.