Weight vs Speed
- foo on patrol
- Posts: 9056
- Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 11:12 am
- Location: Sanstone Point QLD
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby foo on patrol » Sat Jul 21, 2012 5:30 pm
Foo
Goal 6000km
- RonK
- Posts: 11508
- Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:08 pm
- Location: If you need to know, ask me
- Contact:
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby RonK » Sat Jul 21, 2012 7:27 pm
But it was published on the Internet, so it must be true. Well, at least if it supports your point of view.Alex Simmons/RST wrote:And it was a pretty ordinary piece of science writing too. I sure hope the same Doc doesn't do medical research.clackers wrote:A UK doctor a couple of years ago kept meticulous records of alternating a long fast commute each day between a carbon and a steel bike, and published the results in Lancet, IIRC. Nothing between them.
Actually I read that report, and couldn't understand how you could draw valid conclusions about riding a short distance on a course that includes traffic controls. Turns out it was written for the Xmas edition of his college newsletter. The Xmas edition is apparently well-known for its spoof reports.
I challenged Australian Cyclist magazine for publishing it as fact a couple of years ago.
- clackers
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 10:48 am
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby clackers » Sat Jul 21, 2012 9:53 pm
Turns out you're wrong, Ron.RonK wrote:. Turns out it was written for the Xmas edition of his college newsletter.
http://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c6801.full
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 11:37 am
- Location: Templestowe, VIC
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby Cadel » Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:35 pm
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:There is so much slop in HR response that any speed difference would be less than the noise associated with such a variable.PawPaw wrote:Add 3kg in the form of 2x 1 litre water bottles to your bidons, and strap another to your top tube.
Then see if you can sustain the same average speed over 20 minutes, for roughly the same heart rate.
In order for it to be accurate, you will need to know, precisely, the environmental conditions in order to do such an analysis.PawPaw wrote:What would even be more accurate is to use a power meter before and after, and hold the watts at the same level for both intervals, and see what difference you get in average speed.
Even a minor change in wind undetectable to a human would be enough to mask such results.
Thank you all again.
Due to my ignorance, it never crossed my mind that weight has a far bigger impact on climbs than on flat roads, but it does make perfect sense!
Now, the next question (and last for a while) that I have is What impact does the air resistance have to a commuter (Kona dew city) vs a road bike (like giant defy) on a flat surface assuming the same conditions?
Would my avg speed increase on a giant defy because my sitting position is more 'aerodynamic'? Would the increase be noticeable or not really...?
I know, the easiest thing to do would be to hire the defy for a day and try it myself, but I imagine that someone on the forum has both a commuter and road bike and is able to share their experience...
And the second part of the question , which may sound silly but then again I hope someone has the patience to answer Would a racer like giant TCR be noticeable faster than an entry bike (defy) considering the more aggressive position? A rough estimate please...
Cadel
- jimsheedy
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:01 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby jimsheedy » Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:57 pm
Not when your going downhillCadel wrote:
Would I notice a speed increase by applying the same force, considering the total weight 87kg dropped by 3.5% to 84kg?
Assume the bike geometry, tires profile etc remain the same.
...
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 11:37 am
- Location: Templestowe, VIC
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby Cadel » Sun Jul 22, 2012 8:07 pm
Have you tried stand up comedy?jimsheedy wrote:Not when your going downhillCadel wrote:
Would I notice a speed increase by applying the same force, considering the total weight 87kg dropped by 3.5% to 84kg?
Assume the bike geometry, tires profile etc remain the same.
...
- jimsheedy
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:01 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby jimsheedy » Sun Jul 22, 2012 8:12 pm
Cadel wrote:Have you tried stand up comedy?jimsheedy wrote:Not when your going downhillCadel wrote:
Would I notice a speed increase by applying the same force, considering the total weight 87kg dropped by 3.5% to 84kg?
Assume the bike geometry, tires profile etc remain the same.
...
I'm here all week. Try the Veal
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 11:37 am
- Location: Templestowe, VIC
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby Cadel » Sun Jul 22, 2012 9:21 pm
Isn't the waitress worth tipping??!!jimsheedy wrote:
I'm here all week. Try the Veal
- clackers
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 10:48 am
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby clackers » Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:50 am
I think Alex's graph showed air resistance becomes the major impediment at high speed.Cadel wrote:
Now, the next question (and last for a while) that I have is What impact does the air resistance have to a commuter (Kona dew city) vs a road bike (like giant defy) on a flat surface assuming the same conditions?
At 30 kmh your chest is unfortunately acting as a sail.
Have a look at those time triallers who are trying to fold their body up into a downhill skier's stance to avoid this.
Or the road descenders who get off the seat altogether and hold themselves over the frame with their rear effectively under the saddle!
- PawPaw
- Posts: 1244
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:53 am
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby PawPaw » Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:27 pm
Have always been aware that 70-80% of my effort is against wind resistance, and am surprised more are not.
The bars make a ~3kph diff in the 30s - I can comfortably sit on 35kph on the drops for half an hour, but on the aerobars it jumps to 37-38 for a similar HR and RPE.
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 11:37 am
- Location: Templestowe, VIC
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby Cadel » Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:12 pm
Thaks PawPaw, that is exactly what I read in a cycling b ook that I picked up from the library today.PawPaw wrote:The bars make a ~3kph diff in the 30s -.
For all the enthusiasts interested to learn more, your local library will probably have a few good books written by professional riders.
For the clowns who suggested that I should train harder and not worry about weight , I'm not worried..., just curious.
- Mrfenejeans
- Posts: 417
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:01 pm
- Location: Kingsley
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby Mrfenejeans » Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:49 pm
Here's an Example to show you what difference Training harder can have:
I weigh 92kgs and can average 34.5km/h over 50km's, this has taken me 18months to get to where i am now and currently ride 10hours a week and go to the gym.
Weight alone doesn't contribute to over all speed, its the combination of the both weight and strength. Heck if i weighed 75kg's id be Flying.
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 11:37 am
- Location: Templestowe, VIC
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby Cadel » Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:54 pm
You are absolutely right mate!Mrfenejeans wrote:I wouldn't say that the "Train Harder" advocates are Clowns.
I've only called them clowns because they state the obvious but didn't contribute anything else:)
If you don't mind me asking, what was your average speed after 3 months into it and how did you progress throughout the 18 months?
-
- Posts: 844
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:30 am
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby __PG__ » Tue Jul 24, 2012 4:10 pm
It was published in either the Christmas (or April fool's?) edition that has a tradition of including a 'light hearted' medical research article. It wasn't designed to be a rigorous scientific study, rather a good chuckle.Alex Simmons/RST wrote:And it was a pretty ordinary piece of science writing too. I sure hope the same Doc doesn't do medical research.clackers wrote:A UK doctor a couple of years ago kept meticulous records of alternating a long fast commute each day between a carbon and a steel bike, and published the results in Lancet, IIRC. Nothing between them.
-
- Posts: 844
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:30 am
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby __PG__ » Tue Jul 24, 2012 4:12 pm
The difference between the newer bikes and my old steel beast are night and day, especially when accelerating. Some of that can be attributed to better power transfer due to a stiffer frame, but a lot of it will be due to weight.
-
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:37 pm
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby Snoopy007 » Sat Sep 08, 2012 12:07 pm
I can't give you a calculation method unfortunately. But from prior experience (even though it is very little i have realised that really weight shouldn't be relied on too much, in this case dropping 3kg i think would be a good idea, but things like paying 90$ to buy a bottle cage that is 12 grams lighter then your current one is just a waste of money. Personally in your case i would try to get near that 9.5-9kg (or if it costs too much buy a new bike!) but in most cases it wont really make a difference.
I have a Merida Race Lite 904, with my pedals and everything onboard (speedo etc) it weighs around 9.2kg. I bought being a bit uncertain as there were other bikes that had a similar price but they weighed a few hundred grams less. The reason i went with this one was i found that it had full 105 rather then a few FSA components (nothing wrong with that though).
The best piece of advice i can give you if you would really want to gain speed is get better rims and tires, buy a good pump for 30$ and make sure they're pumped to the correct pressure before each ride and this will give you the best chance for being quicker. Also if it doesn't destroy your comfort, you could try lower your saddle a bit more and get into a more aerodynamic position.
Final verdict: Shed that 3kg also get a good set of tyres and rims. Even if you shed 1-2kg it would hep but the main thing is just to get kilometres into your legs =)
- scotto
- Posts: 2380
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:38 am
- Location: Baulkham Hills
- Contact:
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby scotto » Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:18 pm
Just listen to foo and train harder. The bike is the least important part of the equation. Unless you're in the bicycle trade!
-
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:44 pm
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby azeng97 » Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:31 pm
So with a 12kg bike: F(constant)=12a
therefore a = F/12
With a 9kg bike: F(constant)=9a
therefore a = F/9
so the 9kg bike will have a 12/9 increase in acceleration, but obviously other factors have to be considered such as friction etc but yeah you have the idea...
- clackers
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 10:48 am
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby clackers » Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:36 pm
Ummm, you have a rider on this thing, right?azeng97 wrote:..
So with a 12kg bike: F(constant)=12a
therefore a = F/12
With a 9kg bike: F(constant)=9a
therefore a = F/9
so the 9kg bike will have a 12/9 increase in acceleration.
If they weigh 70kg, remember the increase in acceleration is only 82/79, not 4/3 as you calculated.
That's 1% instead of 33%.
And this is only for the seconds taken to accelerate, not its maximum speed, which is typically limited by power generated vs air resistance, not weight.
This is how big blokes like Cancellara can win time trials against whippets.
But climbs ....
And to complicate things, a 500g saving in your wheels lets you accelerate quicker than a 500g lighter frame!
-
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:44 pm
Re: Weight vs Speed
Postby azeng97 » Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:33 am
Oh yeah oops forgot about the rider lol...you're right hahaclackers wrote:Ummm, you have a rider on this thing, right?azeng97 wrote:..
So with a 12kg bike: F(constant)=12a
therefore a = F/12
With a 9kg bike: F(constant)=9a
therefore a = F/9
so the 9kg bike will have a 12/9 increase in acceleration.
If they weigh 70kg, remember the increase in acceleration is only 82/79, not 4/3 as you calculated.
That's 1% instead of 33%.
And this is only for the seconds taken to accelerate, not its maximum speed, which is typically limited by power generated vs air resistance, not weight.
This is how big blokes like Cancellara can win time trials against whippets.
But climbs ....
And to complicate things, a 500g saving in your wheels lets you accelerate quicker than a 500g lighter frame!
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.