|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 11:19:58 AM UTC-7, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 7:47:10 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-4, Lou Holtman wrote: On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 3:49:48 AM UTC+2, bob prohaska wrote: I found this not-entirely-ancient video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUEaN9FKGLE which posits that there's no efficiency gain using clipless (or traditional toe-clips) in terms of rider performance. That's a considerable surprise. It certainly _felt_ more efficient to use clips/straps, and then Shimano SPDs, compared to flat pedals. Am I a victim of self-deception? Or worse yet, marketing? Thanks for reading, bob prohaska The question is what is the power loss of flat pedals considering that you feet are positioned correctly? Being able to pull up with clipless doesn't per se mean it is more efficient. And efficiency isn't necessarily the same thing as power or speed, especially at less than maximum effort. For non-maximum power, lower efficiency may mean only that you'll want more snacks to replace more calories. I think the benefits of foot retention occur when sprinting at max effort, and perhaps when grinding up a climb at max effort - the only time I think it makes sense to consciously pull up in back. It's perhaps helpful on super-bumpy surfaces, to keep feet from slipping off pedals. But people used to claim huge power improvement when they moved from flat pedals to toe clips. People again claimed huge power improvements when they went from toe clips to clipless. I do think those claims are mistaken. - Frank Krygowski Efficiency is the ratio of what get out and what you put in, simple. What you pull on the during the up stroke you putting something in and here are claims that this is not efficient. Clipless pedals are intended as a safety benefit over toe clips and to get rid of dead toes (me), Toe clips have safety benefits over platform pedals. You can't slip of your pedals. I was a very early adaptor of clipless pedals and never ever looked back. I don't claim any efficiency benefits, but I like that my feet are always in the same position, my feet don't slip of the pedals and of course it got rid of my dead toes. That's it. All those efficiency claims come from people that don't understand efficiency hence my first question: what makes flat pedals less efficient? Rubber flat pedals are probably less efficient -- particularly the cheap ones with limber axles. I certainly pulled up or across the pedal when track racing, and if I pulled out, it could be catastrophic -- and thus double straps and later clipless (some racers used clipless and straps). Foot retention is important when sprinting and climbing out of the saddle. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...0.2020.1769201 JRA, its just personal preference, and like Lou, I like having a fixed foot position, particularly since I have mobile ankles, both repaired with Ti plates. Perhaps using flats would be a good training device for a more fluid pedal stroke, but I'm old and don't care about technique anymore except to the extent it keeps me upright. And shoes can make a big difference. I remember going from Detto, Vittoria or Italia (they all blended together) bicycling/bowling shoes of yore with little steel stiffeners and nail on cleats to Duegis with wood soles and bolt-on plastic cleats. https://www.classicsteelbikes.com/wp...-1-600x400.jpg That was huge -- like going from Michelin 50s to Vittoria CGs (I never rode silks). That was probably the single biggest component improvement I ever had. -- Jay Beattie. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
On 8/11/2020 1:29 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
Most if not all of the research on this is poor to useless... Do you have specifics on the research shortcomings? If most research is really useless, you should be able to cite specific papers and point out their weaknesses. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
On 8/11/2020 2:19 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 7:47:10 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-4, Lou Holtman wrote: On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 3:49:48 AM UTC+2, bob prohaska wrote: I found this not-entirely-ancient video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUEaN9FKGLE which posits that there's no efficiency gain using clipless (or traditional toe-clips) in terms of rider performance. That's a considerable surprise. It certainly _felt_ more efficient to use clips/straps, and then Shimano SPDs, compared to flat pedals. Am I a victim of self-deception? Or worse yet, marketing? Thanks for reading, bob prohaska The question is what is the power loss of flat pedals considering that you feet are positioned correctly? Being able to pull up with clipless doesn't per se mean it is more efficient. And efficiency isn't necessarily the same thing as power or speed, especially at less than maximum effort. For non-maximum power, lower efficiency may mean only that you'll want more snacks to replace more calories. I think the benefits of foot retention occur when sprinting at max effort, and perhaps when grinding up a climb at max effort - the only time I think it makes sense to consciously pull up in back. It's perhaps helpful on super-bumpy surfaces, to keep feet from slipping off pedals. But people used to claim huge power improvement when they moved from flat pedals to toe clips. People again claimed huge power improvements when they went from toe clips to clipless. I do think those claims are mistaken. - Frank Krygowski Efficiency is the ratio of what get out and what you put in, simple. Right. But many people don't understand that fundamental fact. They have some colloquial, not scientific definition of "efficient." Clipless pedals are intended as a safety benefit over toe clips and to get rid of dead toes (me)... Well, those may be what you intend to gain from clipless pedals. As with many other gizmos, people adopt them for various reasons, some real and some imaginary. The research cited in the video was attempting to separate the real from the imaginary. was a very early adaptor of clipless pedals and never ever looked back. I don't claim any efficiency benefits, but I like that my feet are always in the same position, my feet don't slip of the pedals and of course it got rid of my dead toes. That's it. And all that sounds realistic. Even though I've made other choices. All those efficiency claims come from people that don't understand efficiency hence my first question: what makes flat pedals less efficient? -- - Frank Krygowski |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
On 8/11/2020 6:05 PM, jbeattie wrote:
I certainly pulled up or across the pedal when track racing, and if I pulled out, it could be catastrophic -- and thus double straps and later clipless (some racers used clipless and straps). Foot retention is important when sprinting and climbing out of the saddle. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...0.2020.1769201 It's a shame they didn't test stiff soled cycling shoes with toe clips. For a long time those were the default choice for avid cyclists. They're still my choice for long rides. But I'll point out, that paper (apparently) did not measure efficiency. The power improvements were huge (9.7 ± 8.7% power gain by adding toe clips to soft shoes, and 16.6 ± 10.2% gain with rigid shoes and clipless). On a five percent grade, that corresponds to a very noticeable increase in speed. If those gains were due to lack of efficiency of soft soles, those soles must have been soaking up a hell of a lot of power. That means they should get very hot. We can discuss this, but I suspect a lot of the gains measured were due to the "red bikes are faster" effect. Testers were probably preconditioned to think toe clips help a lot, and REAL cycling shoes and clipless are what professionals use. That's a recipe for a powerful placebo. If not that, then what made the power difference? Where would the power have been previously lost? We should be able to talk about that in detail. And shoes can make a big difference. I remember going from Detto, Vittoria or Italia (they all blended together) bicycling/bowling shoes of yore with little steel stiffeners and nail on cleats to Duegis with wood soles and bolt-on plastic cleats. https://www.classicsteelbikes.com/wp...-1-600x400.jpg That was huge -- like going from Michelin 50s to Vittoria CGs (I never rode silks). That was probably the single biggest component improvement I ever had. Again, we should be able to analyze the exact source of the improvement. The shoes are not a source of power; they are a simple device for transmitting power from your foot to the pedal. I don't doubt that some changes allow better biomechanics and thus better power output. But it's hard for me to see how shoes do that. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 21:03:42 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 8/11/2020 6:05 PM, jbeattie wrote: I certainly pulled up or across the pedal when track racing, and if I pulled out, it could be catastrophic -- and thus double straps and later clipless (some racers used clipless and straps). Foot retention is important when sprinting and climbing out of the saddle. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...0.2020.1769201 It's a shame they didn't test stiff soled cycling shoes with toe clips. For a long time those were the default choice for avid cyclists. They're still my choice for long rides. But I'll point out, that paper (apparently) did not measure efficiency. The power improvements were huge (9.7?±?8.7% power gain by adding toe clips to soft shoes, and 16.6?±?10.2% gain with rigid shoes and clipless). On a five percent grade, that corresponds to a very noticeable increase in speed. If those gains were due to lack of efficiency of soft soles, those soles must have been soaking up a hell of a lot of power. That means they should get very hot. We can discuss this, but I suspect a lot of the gains measured were due to the "red bikes are faster" effect. Testers were probably preconditioned to think toe clips help a lot, and REAL cycling shoes and clipless are what professionals use. That's a recipe for a powerful placebo. If not that, then what made the power difference? Where would the power have been previously lost? We should be able to talk about that in detail. And shoes can make a big difference. I remember going from Detto, Vittoria or Italia (they all blended together) bicycling/bowling shoes of yore with little steel stiffeners and nail on cleats to Duegis with wood soles and bolt-on plastic cleats. https://www.classicsteelbikes.com/wp...-1-600x400.jpg That was huge -- like going from Michelin 50s to Vittoria CGs (I never rode silks). That was probably the single biggest component improvement I ever had. Again, we should be able to analyze the exact source of the improvement. The shoes are not a source of power; they are a simple device for transmitting power from your foot to the pedal. I don't doubt that some changes allow better biomechanics and thus better power output. But it's hard for me to see how shoes do that. Well, given that the power of a cyclist comes from the leg muscles it is doubtful that any sort of shoe can effect the "power" however a hard soled shoe of some sort that prevented the pain of the serrated pedal "digging into" the foot might well effect the amount of power applied by the leg to the pedal :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
On Monday, August 10, 2020 at 9:37:43 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
For my own use I like clips as they tend to keep my feet on the pedals :-) One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that clipless pedals allow the rider to unclip one leg to momentarily rest, say, a sore Achilles tendon. The remaining leg can keep the bike going with both up and down strokes. Not for long, in my experience, but it can be useful. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/11/2020 6:05 PM, jbeattie wrote: I certainly pulled up or across the pedal when track racing, and if I pulled out, it could be catastrophic -- and thus double straps and later clipless (some racers used clipless and straps). Foot retention is important when sprinting and climbing out of the saddle. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...0.2020.1769201 It's a shame they didn't test stiff soled cycling shoes with toe clips. For a long time those were the default choice for avid cyclists. They're still my choice for long rides. But I'll point out, that paper (apparently) did not measure efficiency. The power improvements were huge (9.7 ± 8.7% power gain by adding toe clips to soft shoes, and 16.6 ± 10.2% gain with rigid shoes and clipless). On a five percent grade, that corresponds to a very noticeable increase in speed. If those gains were due to lack of efficiency of soft soles, those soles must have been soaking up a hell of a lot of power. That means they should get very hot. We can discuss this, but I suspect a lot of the gains measured were due to the "red bikes are faster" effect. Testers were probably preconditioned to think toe clips help a lot, and REAL cycling shoes and clipless are what professionals use. That's a recipe for a powerful placebo. If not that, then what made the power difference? Where would the power have been previously lost? We should be able to talk about that in detail. And shoes can make a big difference. I remember going from Detto, Vittoria or Italia (they all blended together) bicycling/bowling shoes of yore with little steel stiffeners and nail on cleats to Duegis with wood soles and bolt-on plastic cleats. https://www.classicsteelbikes.com/wp...-1-600x400.jpg That was huge -- like going from Michelin 50s to Vittoria CGs (I never rode silks). That was probably the single biggest component improvement I ever had. Again, we should be able to analyze the exact source of the improvement. The shoes are not a source of power; they are a simple device for transmitting power from your foot to the pedal. I don't doubt that some changes allow better biomechanics and thus better power output. But it's hard for me to see how shoes do that. Hey Frank. Let me take a couple of guesses why track riders can put out more power with better shoes. 1) If you are not connected to the pedal in some way, you need to keep a minimum force on the pedal during the upstroke just to ensure enough friction that your door doesn’t slide off. If your shoe is clamped to the pedal (toe clips, power straps, clipless pedals), then you can apply zero or negative force to the pedal on the upstroke, with a commensurate increase in torque. Your efficiency may not increase, but without clamping your shoe to the pedal you cannot apply a force approaching or exceeding your body weight to the pedal. 2) If your shoe has a very soft sole, part of the force that you are applying to the pedal is also going to deform your foot. A stiff shoe may allow the large muscles in your legs to apply full force to the pedal without forcing the little muscles in your foot to tire themselves out trying to keep your foot from collapsing. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
Ralph Barone wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/11/2020 6:05 PM, jbeattie wrote: I certainly pulled up or across the pedal when track racing, and if I pulled out, it could be catastrophic -- and thus double straps and later clipless (some racers used clipless and straps). Foot retention is important when sprinting and climbing out of the saddle. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...0.2020.1769201 It's a shame they didn't test stiff soled cycling shoes with toe clips. For a long time those were the default choice for avid cyclists. They're still my choice for long rides. But I'll point out, that paper (apparently) did not measure efficiency. The power improvements were huge (9.7 ± 8.7% power gain by adding toe clips to soft shoes, and 16.6 ± 10.2% gain with rigid shoes and clipless). On a five percent grade, that corresponds to a very noticeable increase in speed. If those gains were due to lack of efficiency of soft soles, those soles must have been soaking up a hell of a lot of power. That means they should get very hot. We can discuss this, but I suspect a lot of the gains measured were due to the "red bikes are faster" effect. Testers were probably preconditioned to think toe clips help a lot, and REAL cycling shoes and clipless are what professionals use. That's a recipe for a powerful placebo. If not that, then what made the power difference? Where would the power have been previously lost? We should be able to talk about that in detail. And shoes can make a big difference. I remember going from Detto, Vittoria or Italia (they all blended together) bicycling/bowling shoes of yore with little steel stiffeners and nail on cleats to Duegis with wood soles and bolt-on plastic cleats. https://www.classicsteelbikes.com/wp...-1-600x400.jpg That was huge -- like going from Michelin 50s to Vittoria CGs (I never rode silks). That was probably the single biggest component improvement I ever had. Again, we should be able to analyze the exact source of the improvement. The shoes are not a source of power; they are a simple device for transmitting power from your foot to the pedal. I don't doubt that some changes allow better biomechanics and thus better power output. But it's hard for me to see how shoes do that. Hey Frank. Let me take a couple of guesses why track riders can put out more power with better shoes. 1) If you are not connected to the pedal in some way, you need to keep a minimum force on the pedal during the upstroke just to ensure enough friction that your foot doesn’t slide off. If your shoe is clamped to the Damned autocorrect... pedal (toe clips, power straps, clipless pedals), then you can apply zero or negative force to the pedal on the upstroke, with a commensurate increase in torque. Your efficiency may not increase, but without clamping your shoe to the pedal you cannot apply a force approaching or exceeding your body weight to the pedal. 2) If your shoe has a very soft sole, part of the force that you are applying to the pedal is also going to deform your foot. A stiff shoe may allow the large muscles in your legs to apply full force to the pedal without forcing the little muscles in your foot to tire themselves out trying to keep your foot from collapsing. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 6:03:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/11/2020 6:05 PM, jbeattie wrote: I certainly pulled up or across the pedal when track racing, and if I pulled out, it could be catastrophic -- and thus double straps and later clipless (some racers used clipless and straps). Foot retention is important when sprinting and climbing out of the saddle. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...0.2020.1769201 It's a shame they didn't test stiff soled cycling shoes with toe clips. For a long time those were the default choice for avid cyclists. They're still my choice for long rides. But I'll point out, that paper (apparently) did not measure efficiency. The power improvements were huge (9.7 ± 8.7% power gain by adding toe clips to soft shoes, and 16.6 ± 10.2% gain with rigid shoes and clipless). On a five percent grade, that corresponds to a very noticeable increase in speed. If those gains were due to lack of efficiency of soft soles, those soles must have been soaking up a hell of a lot of power. That means they should get very hot. We can discuss this, but I suspect a lot of the gains measured were due to the "red bikes are faster" effect. Testers were probably preconditioned to think toe clips help a lot, and REAL cycling shoes and clipless are what professionals use. That's a recipe for a powerful placebo. If not that, then what made the power difference? Where would the power have been previously lost? We should be able to talk about that in detail.. And shoes can make a big difference. I remember going from Detto, Vittoria or Italia (they all blended together) bicycling/bowling shoes of yore with little steel stiffeners and nail on cleats to Duegis with wood soles and bolt-on plastic cleats. https://www.classicsteelbikes.com/wp...-1-600x400.jpg That was huge -- like going from Michelin 50s to Vittoria CGs (I never rode silks). That was probably the single biggest component improvement I ever had. Again, we should be able to analyze the exact source of the improvement. The shoes are not a source of power; they are a simple device for transmitting power from your foot to the pedal. I don't doubt that some changes allow better biomechanics and thus better power output. But it's hard for me to see how shoes do that. A couple of things: (1) your ankle is not a spring, dropping as the sole flexes. Old cycling shoes were really like bowling shoes and not very stiff. (2) Deeper, more secure cleats -- for better or worse. It was not a subtle change for me at all. Others agree: http://stevetilford.com/2016/05/26/cycling-shoes-2/ YMMV. These days, most high end shoes are stiff, light and give good support and the big deal is shape and comfort. I'm getting a pair of $400 S-Works shoes tomorrow for absolutely free when my son comes to visit. It will be my first set of boa shoes. I'll see how those work out. My SIDIs are giving me hotfoot and always have. The high-end Shimano shoes are supposed to be the bees knees, but I don't get those for free. -- Jay Beattie. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Clipless pedals no more efficient than flat?
On Wednesday, August 12, 2020 at 5:28:05 AM UTC+2, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 6:03:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/11/2020 6:05 PM, jbeattie wrote: I certainly pulled up or across the pedal when track racing, and if I pulled out, it could be catastrophic -- and thus double straps and later clipless (some racers used clipless and straps). Foot retention is important when sprinting and climbing out of the saddle. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...0.2020.1769201 It's a shame they didn't test stiff soled cycling shoes with toe clips. For a long time those were the default choice for avid cyclists. They're still my choice for long rides. But I'll point out, that paper (apparently) did not measure efficiency. The power improvements were huge (9.7 ± 8.7% power gain by adding toe clips to soft shoes, and 16.6 ± 10.2% gain with rigid shoes and clipless). On a five percent grade, that corresponds to a very noticeable increase in speed. If those gains were due to lack of efficiency of soft soles, those soles must have been soaking up a hell of a lot of power. That means they should get very hot. We can discuss this, but I suspect a lot of the gains measured were due to the "red bikes are faster" effect. Testers were probably preconditioned to think toe clips help a lot, and REAL cycling shoes and clipless are what professionals use. That's a recipe for a powerful placebo. If not that, then what made the power difference? Where would the power have been previously lost? We should be able to talk about that in detail. And shoes can make a big difference. I remember going from Detto, Vittoria or Italia (they all blended together) bicycling/bowling shoes of yore with little steel stiffeners and nail on cleats to Duegis with wood soles and bolt-on plastic cleats. https://www.classicsteelbikes.com/wp...-1-600x400.jpg That was huge -- like going from Michelin 50s to Vittoria CGs (I never rode silks). That was probably the single biggest component improvement I ever had. Again, we should be able to analyze the exact source of the improvement.. The shoes are not a source of power; they are a simple device for transmitting power from your foot to the pedal. I don't doubt that some changes allow better biomechanics and thus better power output. But it's hard for me to see how shoes do that. A couple of things: (1) your ankle is not a spring, dropping as the sole flexes. Old cycling shoes were really like bowling shoes and not very stiff.. (2) Deeper, more secure cleats -- for better or worse. It was not a subtle change for me at all. Others agree: http://stevetilford.com/2016/05/26/cycling-shoes-2/ YMMV. These days, most high end shoes are stiff, light and give good support and the big deal is shape and comfort. I'm getting a pair of $400 S-Works shoes tomorrow for absolutely free when my son comes to visit. It will be my first set of boa shoes. I'll see how those work out. My SIDIs are giving me hotfoot and always have. The high-end Shimano shoes are supposed to be the bees knees, but I don't get those for free. -- Jay Beattie. You will like the BOA system. I am very disappointed in my SIDI shoes. Although they fit my wide feet the ratchening strap keeps loosening and only on my right foot. I have to tighten it 20 times during a ride. Crap. Because of the ordering disaster of my gravelbike I got a pair of LAKE MX238 for free as compensation. Those have two BOA knobs(?). They are the best shoes I ever had. So good that I got the road version of them shortly after(LAKE CX238). Lou |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Clipless Pedals? | landotter | Techniques | 2 | August 26th 09 07:43 PM |
Clipless pedals | Antonio | General | 28 | September 23rd 05 01:07 PM |
Clipless pedals | Mikefule | Unicycling | 27 | September 10th 05 07:00 AM |
FS: Clipless Pedals | Frankie | Marketplace | 0 | December 21st 04 07:09 PM |
Clipless Pedals - Anything I should know.. | ebola | UK | 4 | August 11th 03 09:14 PM |