A good time for 10km TT?

http://uralmoto.ru/ ?

;-)

Joseph

cat6 wrote:
When i was 14 (1987) my best time was 12.59, and that was reg setup no
aero setup and Soviet made steel bike


Wrote:
Hi All,

Now that I know my time trial course is flat, I'd like to see how the
local riders stack up to others around the world.

The best guys in our club 10km TT are all just under 14 minutes. There
are a bunch under 14:30. They all have full-on TT bikes. How good are
these guys? What USCF cat-level is that, sort of?

I have a best of 15:45 on a regular bike. How good is that?

I don't have much else to compare because our road races are all
rather
hilly I'm off the back (at 100kg+) and thus never get a clear picture
of where I stand. At least not any clearer than off-the-back
somewhere!

Thanks,

Joseph


--
cat6

wrote:

I don't have any personal experience with either. The only difference,
though, is the hub, and I haven't seen anything to suggest that the SL
hub is significantly more reliable than the one you get with a Pro
system. (The bearing in the SL hub may last longer, however.)

Andy Coggan (SRM or original PowerTap standard, depending on the
day/bike)

Hey Andy:

Whatever happened to that Rotor test you were doing?

wrote:

If I had to guess, I would say "an increase in the mitochondrial
content/respiratory capacity of normally hard-to-recruit type II
fibers". Note, though, that long rides aren't the only way of induced
such an adaptation (although they may be the most pleasant way).

Are you recommending fattie masters hook their legs up to an EMS machine
while they sit at their desks?

Donald Munro wrote:
what effect do such long rides have in increasing ability to tolerate
or recover from intensity during races as I (empirically only) think there
is (for me) an improvement ?

acoggan wrote:
If I had to guess, I would say "an increase in the mitochondrial
content/respiratory capacity of normally hard-to-recruit type II
fibers". Note, though, that long rides aren't the only way of induced
such an adaptation (although they may be the most pleasant way).

Thanks. I won't be volunteering for weekly muscle biopsies to further
scientific knowledge though.

In article
.com,
wrote:

Only if the increase in your 20 min power is due to an increase in
metabolic fitness, and not due to an increase in anaerobic capacity.

What precise physiological or metabolic or biochemical
adaptations constitute increased anaerobic capacity?

--
Michael Press

Michael Press wrote:

In article
.com,
wrote:

Only if the increase in your 20 min power is due to an increase in
metabolic fitness, and not due to an increase in anaerobic capacity.

What precise physiological or metabolic or biochemical
adaptations constitute increased anaerobic capacity?

I was using the term as it implicitly defined in the Monod critical
power model, which is essentially as "resistance to fatigue during very
high intensity exercise". In terms of the specific muscular
adaptations, however, there would likely be many, including but not
limited to an increase in muscle buffering capacity.

Andy Coggan

wrote:
Michael Press wrote:

In article
.com,
wrote:

Only if the increase in your 20 min power is due to an increase in
metabolic fitness, and not due to an increase in anaerobic capacity.

What precise physiological or metabolic or biochemical
adaptations constitute increased anaerobic capacity?

I was using the term as it implicitly defined in the Monod critical
power model, which is essentially as "resistance to fatigue during very
high intensity exercise". In terms of the specific muscular
adaptations, however, there would likely be many, including but not
limited to an increase in muscle buffering capacity.

I think I am suffering from buffer overflow. Is there a patch
available?

Joseph

Robert Chung wrote:
The head units are the same. The difference is mostly(*) that the SL hub
weighs 160g less. It costs about $300 more, so that's $2/g.

* the SL has sealed bearings on both sides. The Pro has a sealed bearing
on the LHS but a POS cone on the RHS. You can replace it when it wears out
with a Dura-Ace part.

Thanks. Being a fatty master I suppose I should get the lightest most
expensive one. Especially if it comes in Discovery colours.

BTW your power training page is pretty good. I guess I'll have some
reading to do when I do get a powertap.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Tom Kunich wrote:
wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:

The fact is that aero stuff and TT bikes make almost no contribution
to
a person unless they're already averaging over 25 mph.

This is nonsense. There is no minimal speed at which a reduction in
aerodynamic drag isn't helpful (even if only to a very small degree).
In fact, in terms of absolute time saved, slower riders stand to gain
the most from the use of aerodynamic equipment

And yet below about 25 mph averages the total decrease in TT times
would be offset by the rider simply sitting up too often which of
course he would do at lower speeds where it takes so much time to
complete the TT.

Non-sequitor.

No Andy it ISN'T a non-sequitor just because you think that he would obtain
SOME advantage. The truth is that it takes quite a bit of effort to gain an
advantage from aero equipment and the gain is very small unless you're
pretty fast to begin with and those gains are very easily lost to wiggling
and sitting up and all those sorts of things that slower riders do.

In ANY case, a person should be setting records for his area without
Aero stuff before he starts using it.

Why?

Buying into the "aero" crap before you can ride is about as smart as
purchasing a Ferrari in California where the speed limit is 70 mph.

So now you're the arbiter of other's purchasing decisions?

No, I'm the arbitor of what I think to be common sense. I do not believe
that LeMond won the Tour de France because he had aero bars. He said that
later in the wind tunnel there was almost no difference between his drag
with and without the bars. If a man that rides at 32 mph makes scant gains,
saying that someone that travels at 23 mph will make gains is being
pedantic.

I can play that final TT on DVD and there's LeMond riding smoothly, keeping
a perfectly good position on the bike. Then there's Fignon jumping and
bobbing right from the start. It was plain that Laurent was having a very
bad day and LeMond a perfect day and yet everything was pinned on the aero
bars.

All that glitters isn't gold - some of it is metal flakes in the horse
turds.

wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:

wrote:

Tom Kunich wrote:


The fact is that aero stuff and TT bikes make almost no contribution to
a person unless they're already averaging over 25 mph.

This is nonsense. There is no minimal speed at which a reduction in
aerodynamic drag isn't helpful (even if only to a very small degree).
In fact, in terms of absolute time saved, slower riders stand to gain
the most from the use of aerodynamic equipment

And yet below about 25 mph averages the total decrease in TT times
would be offset by the rider simply sitting up too often which of
course he would do at lower speeds where it takes so much time to
complete the TT.


Non-sequitor.

Dammit, I can so too spell non-sequitur.