Longer crankarms

In article , chris
wrote:

I caught Ferrari's comment and I wrote him (haven't heard from him,
though, and don't expect to). I both agree and challenge his
comments. He clearly has spent little time researching anything.
Itherwise he would realize what I made note of to him. Its easy for
people to criticize the lack of real world research, but few realize
the logistics of such research.

What makes you think he hasn't done some research with the riders he
has worked with?

-WG

In article , chris
wrote:

I caught Ferrari's comment and I wrote him (haven't heard from him,
though, and don't expect to). I both agree and challenge his
comments. He clearly has spent little time researching anything.
Itherwise he would realize what I made note of to him. Its easy for
people to criticize the lack of real world research, but few realize
the logistics of such research.

What makes you think he hasn't done some research with the riders he
has worked with?

-WG

warren wrote:
Ferrari offers some other reasons and then concludes with this little
needle, "Only when physiologists get out of their laboratories and
dedicate themselves to the study of top-level cyclists, will
information be applicable to athletes..."

What an odd and revealing thing to say.

warren wrote:
Ferrari offers some other reasons and then concludes with this little
needle, "Only when physiologists get out of their laboratories and
dedicate themselves to the study of top-level cyclists, will
information be applicable to athletes..."

What an odd and revealing thing to say.

"Jiyang Chen" wrote in message ...
Are there any evidence that longer crankarms are more efficient? It
seems like it would produce more torque since there's more leverage.

More torque, yes. More power, not necessarily. Just looking at the
basic physics and ignoring the relative complexity of the
physiological considerations, keep in mind that to increase speed on a
bicycle, *power* (i.e. rpm x torque) must be increased. And to
increase power you can increase either torque or rpm. Formula 1 race
cars (and some guy named Lance) generate large amounts of power with
engines that turn at very high rpm. Diesel trucks and diesel/electric
locomotives get their power mostly from high torque at low rpms.

And then, of course, you have to define what you mean by "more
efficient."

DR

"Jiyang Chen" wrote in message ...
Are there any evidence that longer crankarms are more efficient? It
seems like it would produce more torque since there's more leverage.

More torque, yes. More power, not necessarily. Just looking at the
basic physics and ignoring the relative complexity of the
physiological considerations, keep in mind that to increase speed on a
bicycle, *power* (i.e. rpm x torque) must be increased. And to
increase power you can increase either torque or rpm. Formula 1 race
cars (and some guy named Lance) generate large amounts of power with
engines that turn at very high rpm. Diesel trucks and diesel/electric
locomotives get their power mostly from high torque at low rpms.

And then, of course, you have to define what you mean by "more
efficient."

DR

His comments make me believe that; unless of course he has funded all
his research from his own stash of cash. He clearly doesn't get it,
though. If he did, he would understand how hard it is to get anything
funded, let alone the logistics of field testing. Case in point:

I'll leave out much of detail here, and just touch on the cost and
logistics of looking at data collection for an 8 day stage race. Nor
will I include payment for services rendered.

Pre and post (simple) lactate testing (5 riders) - $300
power meters for all (assuming they'll all ride a power tap & you get
a deal on them) - $2500
Hct samples (~80 samples) - $30
Airfare to get your personnel there - $600
Accommodations (with luck)- $900
Plus a bunch of stuff I missed and a boat load of time plus finding
riders to do this...THEN ALL THE DATA ANALYSIS.

~$4500.00

Please remit payment to me or forward bill to Ferrari and I'll get
started!

CH


...
In article , chris
wrote:

I caught Ferrari's comment and I wrote him (haven't heard from him,
though, and don't expect to). I both agree and challenge his
comments. He clearly has spent little time researching anything.
Itherwise he would realize what I made note of to him. Its easy for
people to criticize the lack of real world research, but few realize
the logistics of such research.

What makes you think he hasn't done some research with the riders he
has worked with?

-WG

His comments make me believe that; unless of course he has funded all
his research from his own stash of cash. He clearly doesn't get it,
though. If he did, he would understand how hard it is to get anything
funded, let alone the logistics of field testing. Case in point:

I'll leave out much of detail here, and just touch on the cost and
logistics of looking at data collection for an 8 day stage race. Nor
will I include payment for services rendered.

Pre and post (simple) lactate testing (5 riders) - $300
power meters for all (assuming they'll all ride a power tap & you get
a deal on them) - $2500
Hct samples (~80 samples) - $30
Airfare to get your personnel there - $600
Accommodations (with luck)- $900
Plus a bunch of stuff I missed and a boat load of time plus finding
riders to do this...THEN ALL THE DATA ANALYSIS.

~$4500.00

Please remit payment to me or forward bill to Ferrari and I'll get
started!

CH


...
In article , chris
wrote:

I caught Ferrari's comment and I wrote him (haven't heard from him,
though, and don't expect to). I both agree and challenge his
comments. He clearly has spent little time researching anything.
Itherwise he would realize what I made note of to him. Its easy for
people to criticize the lack of real world research, but few realize
the logistics of such research.

What makes you think he hasn't done some research with the riders he
has worked with?

-WG

DirtRoadie wrote:
Formula 1 race cars (and some guy named Lance) generate large
amounts of power with engines that turn at very high rpm.

I'm not so sure that's a fair characterization of Armstrong. During his
climb of Alpe d'Huez a couple of years ago I estimated he was averaging
in the ballpark of 425W at perhaps 100-105rpm or so. That means his rpm's
were slightly higher than most of us but he was producing *lots* more
power, i.e., his torque was pretty high.

DirtRoadie wrote:
Formula 1 race cars (and some guy named Lance) generate large
amounts of power with engines that turn at very high rpm.

I'm not so sure that's a fair characterization of Armstrong. During his
climb of Alpe d'Huez a couple of years ago I estimated he was averaging
in the ballpark of 425W at perhaps 100-105rpm or so. That means his rpm's
were slightly higher than most of us but he was producing *lots* more
power, i.e., his torque was pretty high.