Slashdot Mirror


Tour De France Showcases Multitude Of Tech

whoda writes "When you think of a bicycle, you most likely think of 2 tires, a chain, some gearing of some sort, and other assorted mechanical bits. However, when Lance Armstrong, Jan Ullrich, and over 180 other riders get together to compete at the Tour de France every year, there is a lot of technology that comes along for the ride too. From Lance's Sunglass'/MP3 Player to the advanced use of composites seen on Tyler Hamilton's time trial bike, there are many examples of high technology making the racers faster through better training, materials and aerodynamics."

427 comments

  1. Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know they've changed the rules to make it harder for him to win his 6th straight.

    First Greg Lemond, now Lance? Whatever shall the Europeans do?

    Oh... and another thing... what the hell is the name of the thing that connects the crank arms? I just can't remember the f'en name for it.

    1. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The part that connects the cranks together is called the bottom bracket. Its a cylindrical piece which screws into the bottom of the frame (junction of the down tube, seat tube, and chainstays) which contains an axle that the crank arms friction fit to.

      Its also a mother to put in correctly ;)

    2. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Bottom Bracket?

    3. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be the "bottom bracket". Very descriptive, eh?

    4. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by mr.capaneus · · Score: 1

      Its also a mother to put in correctly ;) Yeah. You have to screw it in. Into BOTH sides. It's tough.

    5. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by wk633 · · Score: 1

      Crankarm Spindle (is the actual piece of metal that both crankarms attach to directly)

    6. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by 3terrabyte · · Score: 4, Informative
      They're not changing the rules to make it harder for him to win. I can only think of one thing that can make you say that: Team Time Trials.

      They have made it so that the most you can lose is 3:00

      It's true that this keeps a well-trained team like Team Postal from tearing up the General Classification, but that's all it's doing. Their goal was to keep so many teams from being out of it due to one team trial.

      As Lance said, it's their race, their rules. They knew about the changes in advance, and the rules apply to everyone, so he just has to ride it.

      Besides, it's the mountains that make the biggest difference in overall time, and is also where Lance excels at.

      --

      Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?

    7. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because he's good, it somehow reflects on you or your country.

      Fuck that - Lance's achievements are his own.

    8. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by PeelBoy · · Score: 1

      From what I understand they changed the course to have less hills which are Lances strong point.

    9. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by DHR · · Score: 1

      They also moved the long, solo time trial to near the end of the race where it's most likely going to be irrelevant, instead of before the mountains.

    10. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by 3terrabyte · · Score: 1
      Thanks, I didn't know that.

      However, I'm sure there's plenty to make most of them cry :)

      --

      Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?

    11. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by strictnein · · Score: 1

      Euro 2004 anyone?

    12. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by 3terrabyte · · Score: 1
      Wouldn't you think it would make it more relevant? Less time to make up for it. Lance is strong in the time trials. Seems like a coup to me.

      Last year we watched Ullrich do nothing during the last few days. He 'knew' he couldn't make a difference, even though he really wasn't that far off. You know Lance would have made a breakaway attempt if he needed to... even on the last day.

      --

      Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?

    13. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by zors · · Score: 1

      i mean, jesus christ, people are proud of someone for doing extremely well at something. What the fuck is that? Its like they're inspired by what he's done or something.

      Bullshit.

    14. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by TheWizardOfCheese · · Score: 2, Informative

      From what I understand they changed the course to have less hills which are Lances strong point.

      Just the opposite. They have helped out the climbing specialists by increasing the importance of the mountain stages. For instance, the first individual TT is practically just L'Alpe d'Huez.

      Armstrong doesn't really have a strong point; or rather, he has no weakness, being extremely good at both climbing and TT. However, he is not small enough to be quite as good as the very best of the pure climbers.

      --

      "The good reader is a rarer swan than the good writer."
    15. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also consider that the difference betwwen the fastest team and the slowest team in last years TTT was only 3:40

    16. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I understand they changed the course to have less hills which are Lances strong point.

      Hmm, I read the opposite, that this Tour has one of the most difficult collection of mountains since decades. What is a bit unusual, though, is that they reach the mountains quite late in the Tour...

    17. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the time trial was before the mountains, Lance could put some more time between him and the rest, demoralizing them before the mountains. As the race is this year, there was very little anyone could do to pull a lead with all the flat stages and the stupid time trial rules.

    18. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Knos · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about. There are always two time trials, and always one of them is after the mountains and just a few days before the end.

      --
      . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .
      may u!sh 2 sm!le at dz!z bad nn.!m!tat!ion
    19. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by steveha · · Score: 3, Informative

      About Jan Ullrich:

      Last year, Jan wanted to make up time on the last time trial, but the sloppy weather did him in. He slid out on a turn and thus lost 8-10 seconds; there was no way he could make up enough time to win. (One of the OLN commentators said that Lance slowed to 5 MPH on the part where Jan slid out, and his rear wheel still skidded a bit. Dangerous! All Lance had to do was ride very carefully and not crash, to secure the win... he already had a time advantage.)

      On flat road stages, there is no way for Lance to get a time advantage on Jan, or for Jan to get an advantage on Lance. If either of them gets in a breakaway, the peloton will reel them in immediately. They both know it. Jan didn't "do nothing" during the last few days; he did what he could, which wasn't enough to pull out the win.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    20. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by steveha · · Score: 2, Informative

      Lance's team came in a full minute ahead of the second-place team. Under the old rules, Lance and his guys would all have picked up over a minute of advantage compared to Jan Ullrich and his team. Under the new rules, the second-place team was scored as having come in exactly 20 seconds behind Lance's team, thus wiping out about 40 seconds of advantage for Lance and his guys.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    21. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not like he survived a nearly fatal brush with cancer and came back to win one of the hardest (if not the hardest) athletic competions 5 times or anything.

    22. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by steveha · · Score: 5, Informative

      Has Lance started trying yet? Um, yes.

      Lance and his guys have incredible focus on just one thing: Lance finishes the race with the fastest time. They have been doing an excellent job of tracking that goal.

      They don't waste energy trying to win stages needlessly, but when riding hard will give them an advantage, they do it (e.g. stage 3, they rode hard and fast to stay ahead of the crashes expected on the cobblestones). When Lance got the yellow jersey after stage 4, they let everyone know he wouldn't work to defend it because he didn't need it that early, and they let it go.

      Part of winning the Tour de France is simply enduring the abuse. If you burn yourself out on one stage, you may find yourself in trouble on the next stage. That's okay if all you care about is winning one stage, but Lance absolutely needs to avoid burning himself out. He needs to out-ride everyone, and part of that is not wasting energy. Use it when you need it, and when you don't need it, save it for later.

      On flat road stages, it's basically impossible for any of the GC contenders (Lance, Jan, Tyler, etc.) to gain any significant time advantage. The peloton is faster than any single bicyclist. Since the race is structured this year with a whole bunch of flat road stages up front, we have been watching Lance and his guys spend their time riding mostly defensively. That's okay.

      If you look at the race standings, Lance seems far from a win. But the guys ahead of him will lose big time in the mountains! And his real rivals, the guys he worries about (Jan, Tyler, etc.) are all behind him on time. Jan is almost a minute behind him.

      Lance's big chances to gain a time advantage are time trial stages and mountain stages. When he hits those stages, expect him to really pour on the effort. But it's just not true that he's slacking now.

      what the hell is the name of the thing that connects the crank arms?

      The bottom bracket, which has a shell containing some bearings and a spindle. If that doesn't answer your question, try googling for "bottom bracket parts" or some such.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    23. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by ror+omg+wtf · · Score: 0

      Whatever shall the Europeans do?

      Test him for steroids? That'll stop him.

    24. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by djtripp · · Score: 1

      Not if you have a new Dura-Ace or XTR crank, it's part of the drive side crank arm... OOooooo, it's sooo sweet. Ever hear someone pronounce Dura-Ace derachy (I think they thought it was Italian)

      --
      "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
    25. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by pimpbott · · Score: 1

      I have a bud who just picked up the new XT cranks which have the same concept as XTR and Dura Ace, but go for $225 on sale. Dang, they are frickin stiff as hell and still pretty light.

      The deal is that the bottom bracket spindle is greatly oversized, since they don't need to make room in the BB shell for the bearings. The bearings are outside the shell and also supersized.

      If you wanna see freaky stupid light bleeding edge technology, check this out:

      http://weightweenies.starbike.com/articles.php?I D= 21

      This dude built up a 9.19 pound bike without leaving major components off, like chainrings, or doing anything stupid like drilling out rims and tubing.

      The cycling federation has a minimum weight (or at least they used to) of 15 lbs. Last year's TDF, the Canondale team showed up with 11 lb bikes, and the Federation would not let them race until they strapped some weight on the bikes, which is totally silly. The point of the rule was to keep the racers from doing stupid stuff like drilling out their bikes and making them unsafe.

    26. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by eriko · · Score: 1

      Well, the part that connect the cranks is called the crank spindle. It rides on the bottom bracket bearings, one fixed, one adjustable. In the old days, these were cup races, with the other half of the race being on the spindle, with loose ball bearings. Nowadays, the bearings are in cartridges, and the only adjustment needed is for centering.

      The bottom bracket proper is the tube that the down tube, seat tube and chainstays connect to, and that the cranks revolve around. However, it has become common to also refer the bearing/spindle assembly that is installed into the bottom bracket as a bottom bracket, short for bottom bracket set -- similar to the bearings installed in the head tube, called the head set.

      And they're much easier to put in nowadays.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    27. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      actually it's very much possible to gain time (or lose time) on your contenders during the flat stages .. by way of crashes. Crashes in-stage (as opposed to final kilometre crashes) may create breaks in the Peloton. Those breaks can become minute upon minute on your General Classification time.
      One of the pre-race main contenders (Iban Mayo) is already out of the GC this way. The first week of the tour (or the giro, the vuelta) is just a big game of chess openings where you might fuck up and lose your race or crash and lose your race.

      Incidentally today (tuesday) is where the second part of the tour starts.. le Massif Central

    28. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by peterbye · · Score: 1

      >Test him for steroids? That'll stop him. Err no, Lance is already the most tested man on the planet.

    29. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, Lance doesn't have to start trying until the time trials and hill climbs. For the most part, the job of the whole Postal team right now is to keep Lance from getting injured so he is in good condition for the hill climbs.

      Since most of the guys know they don't have a chance to win, their best hope is to get a yellow jersey. So those guys are beating themselves silly to win individual stages, while the really good ones are just holding out until the going gets tough.

      aQazaQa

    30. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by steveha · · Score: 1

      It is not possible for Lance and his guys, by riding hard, to gain a significant advantage over other GC contenders on a flat road stage. It's also basically impossible for Lance to get a stage win on a flat road stage, because some random sprinter can out-accelerate him in the last 200 meters. (Those same guys who can out-accelerate Lance over a very short distance will lose many minutes in the mountains, which is why Lance doesn't worry about them.) Because of all this, Lance is not making any significant time against his GC contenders as the flat road stages continue.

      Yes, it is possible for a GC contender to lose time on a flat road stage, due to a crash. Thus my comment on all the GC guys riding defensively in the flat road stages.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    31. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by sad_ · · Score: 1
      eh, blah! even if he manages to win this one and get a six in a row. everybody knows the best cyclist to ever win the tour (5 times) is eddy merckx. (check out his bicycles at www.eddymerckx.be)

      though, i do admire lance, after all he is doing really great after recovering from cancer.

      --
      On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    32. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by 3terrabyte · · Score: 1
      I do understand the difference between 'doing nothing' and 'knowing you can do nothing'.

      The peleton is an amazing beast. However, I seem to remember a couple years ago, Lance winning the 2nd to last stage. I may have to go back and review, but it was more or less a flat stage that he was able to break away from.

      --

      Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?

    33. Re:Has Lance started trying yet? by steveha · · Score: 1

      Lance's big chances to gain a time advantage are time trial stages and mountain stages. When he hits those stages, expect him to really pour on the effort.

      Told you so. In each mountain stage and time trial stage, he made up time compared to his competition. He finished the Tour over six minutes ahead of the second-place rider.

      Six Tours won, the first time anyone has done that. In a row, too!

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  2. If they really wanted to go faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...they'd allow recumbent bikes.

    1. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How fast can they get up on those recumbent any ways? Last Sat(maybe it was Sun) they were crusing about 50KPH on the flats with no wind. (~30MPH)

    2. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by wk633 · · Score: 1

      Actually, they do (allow recumbants). This was hashed out many times on rec.bicycles years ago. The fact is, recumbants aren't well suited to either climbing or sprinting. The specific UCI rules (at least in the early 90s when I was reading this stuff on rec.bicycles) only restricted wheelbase length, which would omit some longer recumbants, but not all.

      Could be the rules changed when they decided that all hour record bikes after Mercx were not 'bikes', but even before that, pros weren't using recumbants.

    3. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It depends on whether you allow an aerodynamic shell around it. If you do, they've supposedly hit 78MPH:
      One of many pages. I'll try to Google for the non-shell types.

    4. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by wk633 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hour record for a fully faired recumbant is over 100kph, solo, on the flats. Granted, the operative word is 'fully faired'. That's a shell around a rider.

      The point is, bike racing is a lot more complicated than going faster than anyone else alone in a straight line on the flats. Sprints, climbinb, break aways, team strategy all play a roll.

    5. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they do (allow recumbants). This was hashed out many times on rec.bicycles years ago. The fact is, recumbants aren't well suited to either climbing or sprinting. The specific UCI rules (at least in the early 90s when I was reading this stuff on rec.bicycles) only restricted wheelbase length, which would omit some longer recumbants, but not all.

      Are you sure about this? According to this Lance Armstrong interview , he'd try one himself if they were legal.

      (Not a biker, just a Googler, so it may be mistaken)

    6. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Road racing is about taking all the shelter you can get and saving your energy for when it counts.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    7. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by avi33 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are plenty other regulations for international competitive cycling:
      -the entire bicycle must weigh at least 6.8 kg
      -the frame must be of the 'double diamond' design (this rules out recumbents)
      -no fairings
      -all competitors are encouraged to use performance enhancing drugs (and their masking agents), as long as the team manager's girlfriend's doctor's cousin carries them.

    8. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by wk633 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am sure that in the early 90s there was no specific rule banning recumbants, according to Les Earnest (a UCI official and also a prof at Stanford- you out there Les?) always said there was nothing to specificly rule out a recumbant. Now, there were major changes in response to advances to beat the hour record. I think the 'double diamond' part came in then. I would think a recumbant would be far superior for a TT, and Les's only speculation as to why they were not used then is that it position is different enough from an upright, that it uses a different muscle set.

      That is, at that level, one could train for one or the other, but not both.

      Sam Whittingham is a (former?) HPPVA world record holder is a pretty mean upright sprinter as well, but he's not world class as a roadie.

      I have to run, but google on 'les earnest rec.bicycles recumbant uci' might turn something up.

    9. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Another requirement is a rather odd beard and an overall geeky/nerd appearance.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    10. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by usrusr · · Score: 1

      from the obvious recumbent fan in that interview: "uphill a little bit slower, where as on the flats they might go about a third faster."

      you know how fast tour de france riders go downhill? ever seen footage from inside a team car trying to keep up with them, tires screaming around the corners? aerodynamics is not really the limiting factor when going down from l'alpe d'huez for example.

      and besides, with the ratio between the aerodynamic disadvantage of cycling in the lead or solo and power needed for mountains etc changed so much, it would be a very different sport. like you would not put more people in a soccer game to get more goals - ah wait, this is /. people don't know what that is anyway...

      --
      [i have an opinion and i am not afraid to use it]
    11. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by MushMouth · · Score: 1

      While a recumbant is really fast on straight flats, it is terrible with any sort of hills or technical terrain. Thus it would be one of those specialty bikes for certain time trials, or very flat road races. That would be terrible for the sport as it would once again make it such that one of the biggest components to winning is money. Clip on bars (which can be had for $50 are one thing), but basically requiring another bike is something entirely different. They have races for recumbants, if that is what you want to do then ride in those.

    12. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by bike_head · · Score: 2

      Except, the TdF never goes down L'alpe D'Huez only up, but I suspect you already knew that.

    13. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by usrusr · · Score: 1

      admittedly.. not.

      but when i think about it it truely makes some sense, since it is not "le col d'huez".

      must have been me just picking a random famous example, and the one-way mountains are automatically better knows because they always become a finish whenever they are included in the course.

      --
      [i have an opinion and i am not afraid to use it]
    14. Re:If they really wanted to go faster by AGMW · · Score: 1
      ... making the racers faster through better training, materials and aerodynamics.

      all competitors are encouraged to use performance enhancing drugs

      Yes, I noticed the topic header doesn't mention the massive amounts of "recreational pharmaceuticals" these fellas snork!

      Without the drugs, the Tour de France would just be another Sunday bike ride!

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
  3. Hmmm by OverlordQ · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sunglasses with MP3 playback built in? I'd hate to see what this guy comes up with.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    1. Re:Hmmm by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sunglasses with MP3 playback built in

      I hope Jan Ullrich's cousin Lars doesn't find out about this. He'll be PISSED.

    2. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Comment from parent site:

      "Dad, I'm sick of this song"
      "Ok, son, just use your terminal to telnet into the e450 and modify the rc script to exclude that song"
      "Can't we just get one of those dvd players like Jimmy has?"
      "No. Use the supercomputer. You need to learn solaris."

  4. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    "You have to be a one-nutted freak to win."

    I'm assuming that you probably have both... And I'll also assume that his one-nutted ass could also kick your ass.

  5. The ultimate in technology and bikes... by g00bd0g · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The HPV world speed championships!

    http://www.recumbents.com/whpsc2004.htm

    Too bad there's not enough interest to really get some money into the development of these things.

    Check out my website...

    1. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      And too bad they suck as far as hill climbing is concerned. Gee, and I seem to remember there are a few hills in Le Tour.

    2. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by g00bd0g · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not about hill-climbing dumb-ass. The top speed and hour records for faired HPV's are 81 mph and 52 miles in an hour respectively. Uprights are no competetion in these categories. Yes uprights are better for hill climbing. Your point? Should Top Fuel dragsters be used for F1 racing? No, every vehicle has it's place and closed minded bigots like you only serve to stifle innovation.

    3. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The HPV world speed championships!

      That sounds like the bar scene at my state college...

    4. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      And wasn't the story something about technology being used in the Tour de France?

      Or would you rather have every F-1 race being led off with the "dragsters are faster than F-1 cars" disclaimer?

      You, goob, are a dumbass. Why don't you sit (or lie down) on that dumbass of yours and pedal whatever you want...

    5. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by John+Whitley · · Score: 2, Interesting

      'bents can be fairly awesome in a number of regards. Not to mention that there are some fantastic recumbent touring bikes. 'bents have a wide spectrum of designs, all with a different balance of strengths and weaknesses than traditional diamond frame bikes. But the problem of "interest" is nonexistant. The problem is that the rather conservative international governing body of cycling (apologies, it's fallen out of my acronym cache -- UCI, maybe?) long ago prohibited the use of recumbents when the first low-racer caused a decidedly middle-grade rider to whomp the competition.

      As many sports governing bodies, they must walk the often rather arbitrary line between allowing new technologies and keeping the competition between the athletes instead of between athletes' gear.

      As an example of the reverse case, long-track ice skating allowed the introduction of the front-hinged "clap skates" in the 90's (versus older fixed-frame skates). These skates are much more efficient from a biomechanical standpoint. Enough so that every long-track record was broken and re-broken in short order as skaters embraced and trained to the new tecnology. There was some regulatory turmoil at their initial introduction, but only because the new skates weren't available to all skaters who wanted them.

      On one hand, as the sports technology has changed, it has become impossible to make meaningful comparisons between today's athletes and those athletes who set records years ago. On the other hand, technological advances have so radically altered athletic training that it's still impossible to "compare" modern athletes with those of yesteryear. How good would one of the great Olympians from the 1950's have been if they'd trained using modern techniques and tools?

    6. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by OECD · · Score: 1

      The top speed and hour records for faired HPV's are 81 mph and 52 miles in an hour respectively.

      What are the top speeds for faired uprights? Or, what are the top speeds for unfaired (fairless?) recumbients? Let's compare apples and apples, here.

      --
      One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
    7. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Uh, if you like to ride in places with hills, then it IS about the hills, "dumb-ass".

      It's not closed-minded bigotry to point out well founded limitations of a certain design. On the flats? You'll never beat a faired recumbent. On a hill? /I/ could bet a faired recumbent (and I haven't ridden a lot for seven years).

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    8. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Another good example would be the spread-toes position that the ski jumpers use nowadays. The skis are designed to generate a bunch o' lift to loft the skiier farther down the hill.

      Aerodynamic handlebars on time trial bikes were also a huge, huge, huge advantage. Just ask Laurent Fignon. : )

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    9. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by g00bd0g · · Score: 1

      The International Human Powered Vehicle Association maintain a list of records.
      http://www.ihpva.org/hpva/hpvarech.html
      Unfortunately they do not distinguish between faired or other types of HPVs. A quick look through the records indicates the every record set since the 70's has been on a recumbent of some sort. I'd love to compare apples to apples, but there are no upright specific records to compare to.

      Using a the simulator found here:
      http://www.recumbents.com/wisil/simul/HPV_S imul.as p
      and the examples given, 600 watts will get you to 33 mph on an upright and 38 mph on a lowracer. Both would be considered unfaired.

      Best test data I've found so far is here:
      http://www.m5-ligfietsen.com/main.php?sNewP age=Mea suring_power

    10. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by r7 · · Score: 1

      > they suck as far as hill climbing is concerned

      They're also impossible to ride in a cross-wind, and don't corner well, are difficult to get on and off of, are heavy, take up a lot more space than traditional bikes... HPVs are really only good for are setting records on straight, flat, stop-free, roads (or tracks).

    11. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by Willard+B.+Trophy · · Score: 1

      Faired HPVs maybe road-unfriendly, but I used to commute on an SWB recumbent, and it was just great. Fast, comfortable, nippy, insanely sharp cornering and with enough road-cred to intimidate articulated trucks --- I loved it.

    12. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by skywolf · · Score: 1
      Faired moultons have reached top speeds of around 51mph for short distances.

      http://www.alexmoulton.co.uk/frames.asp?id=reviews

      This page compares the speeds different bikes will travel assuming the same power input.

      http://www.m5-ligfietsen.com/main.php?sNewPage=Mea suring_power

      Of course, it's silly to compare faired recumbents with unfaired uprights but there are good reasons why it's difficult to compare uprights v. recumbents.

      Almost all world-class cyclists ride diamond-frames, because that's where the money and the competitions are. They can't simply compete on a recumbent for a day, because they use different muscles for each type of bike.

      Most recumbent records were set by part-timers - for example one recent world speed record was set by a female chef aged around 50.

    13. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by skywolf · · Score: 1
      I ride somewhere with lots of hills, and I've never yet had to push. I'm certainly slower going uphill than I was on an 'upright' but it's not really a big difference - I don't race and I ride a recumbent primarily because it's more fun and more comfortable than my old bike.

      Recumbents probably are slower uphill, but the jury's out as to whether they are slower overall. Unfaired recumbents have won several road races where both recumbents and upright bikes were allowed to compete with each other.

    14. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by StressedEd · · Score: 1

      I loved it.

      What happened to make you stop using it?

      --
      Be nice to people on the way up. You will meet them again on your way down!
    15. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by ipfwadm · · Score: 1

      I ride somewhere with lots of hills, and I've never yet had to push.

      Define "lots of hills". Length? Average grade? The hills that are covered in the Tour are not your average hill. We're talking mountains here. You know, like climbing 3000+ feet over a 10 mile climb. I've ridden up the highway on Whiteface Mt in New York, which is an 8 mile climb at an 8% grade. Coincidentally, it's almost exactly the same as L'Alpe D'Huez. I thought I'd ridden hills before. Haha. And the guys in the Tour sometimes have to make a climb like this two or three or four or five times in a stage, while covering 100+ miles to boot.

      I'm certainly slower going uphill than I was on an 'upright' but it's not really a big difference

      It may not be a big difference to you, but since the margin of victory in the Tour this year was 6 minutes over the course of 83 hours (and this was considered a blowout), every little bit is VERY important to the pros.

    16. Re:The ultimate in technology and bikes... by skywolf · · Score: 1
      Define "lots of hills". Length? Average grade?

      I live in the North of England, and very little of my riding time is on the flat. I don't know what the gradients are, but 8% doesn't seem a lot to me. There are no great mountains, but there are quite a lot of small but vicious hills. The biggest gradient I've climbed on a recumbent was 20% in Glasgow. It was quite a short hill (otherwise it really would have beaten me) but I got to the top.

      I don't think anyone would choose a recumbent to ride up the Alpe d'Huez, but I'm sure the TDF guys could if they wanted to. I'm not really interested in racing (I simply cycle to work and to the shops) but I don't think the recumbents would necessarily lose out overall.

      Check out:

      http://www.m5-ligfietsen.com/main.php?sNewPage=Mea suring_power

      An unfaired racing recumbent can hit 43kph on the flat, using the same amount of power required to cycle at 33kph on a racing bike.

      What proportion of the tour is spent going up hills that are so steep that a recumbent becomes 25% slower than a racing bike? I'll bet it's less than 50%

      Of course there are other factors: I'm not sure whether a recumbent rider can sustain a smaller or greater power output than a racing-bike rider. But even if the recumbent rider lost, his bum would hurt less at the end of the tour. I have ridden long distances in the past (max 160miles/day) and at the end of the day that's what counts for me!

  6. Bio tech too! by darth_MALL · · Score: 3, Insightful
    1. Re:Bio tech too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "... I would rather have the title of cancer survivor than winner of the Tour, because of what it has done for me as a human being, a man, a husband, a son and a father"

      I guess that's why he divorced his wife! Probably should have left out the "wife" part :)

  7. Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by mlmitton · · Score: 5, Informative

    Tyler Hamilton has a website too. I don't know why his wasn't included along with Armstrong's and Ullrich's. Personally, Tyler is my pick for the winner of the TDF this year. Riding with a broken collarbone last year (finishing 4th, and winning a stage!), and riding with a broken shoulder blade in the Tour of Italy the year before (finishing 2nd!), he has more tenacity than even Lance. And this year, Tyler has the form. Watch out Lance!

    --
    "My girlfriend's got sodium laureth sulfate hair."
    1. Re:Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by FlashBac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I doubt Tyler will take it this year. Heras might kill them on the Mtn TT, and Ulrich might kill them on the "final" TT day, ie not the roll into Paris. These are the two crux days. It will probably revolve around these two days. Some are worried about the central Massiff, Lance et alia didnt prep there, Tyler did. But, Lances team can control this I feel.
      I would say essentially three guys will be in the running going into the final TT. And, I dont think Tyler is there, it will be Lance, Heras and Ullrich.
      Not to say Tyler hasnt got balls. He has plenty, but, its that last TT that will not be good for him, compared to say Ullrich, or Lance. :)

      --
      "Thats right buddy, the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away."
    2. Re:Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How could Tyler possibly win? We should start a pool on which body part he'll break this year. Put me down for knee.

      Michael

    3. Re:Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by avi33 · · Score: 1

      Tyler's a great rider, and surely a tough one, but I don't think that makes him more likely to take it this year.

      Ullrich has won it once (at 22), came in second five times, and has won twice as many one-day classics and tours (and more substantial ones, at that). A bit more of a champion's resume, if that counts for something.

    4. Re:Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I'm just happy that there are two incredibly tough Americans in the race. Call it flag-waving jingo-ism, but I'm thrilled any time a son of the United States is wearing yellow.

      Although a six-peat for Lance would be pretty staggering.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    5. Re:Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I want to like Tyler, as he's a fellow American, but the guys personality puts me off. Everytime they interview him he's whining about something, or talking shit about another rider. Get some class.

    6. Re:Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by carambola5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Tenacity... yes. More than Lance? I really doubt it.

      -Brain Surgery
      -Testicular Surgery
      -Lungs full of tumors
      -Grosjean catheter
      -One round of BEP chemotherapy
      -Three rounds of VIP chemotherapy

      And after all that, he wins 5 TDFs in a row. I think that qualifies as tenacity.

      --
      IWARS.
      People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
    7. Re:Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by Johan+Veenstra · · Score: 1

      This Friday, Saterday and next week wednesday will be the deciding stages. This friday and saterday stages end with a Category 1 climb (the kind of stages Lance always uses to attack). Not sure wether Lance is gonna 'need' the uphill TT next week.

    8. Re:Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Make that seven (7) US riders.. they're all strong. George Hincapie looks the best he's ever looked (big dark, tall, handsome spindly guy from NYC, teammate with Armstrong in US Postal).

      I'm not a USian, you as an USian cheering for an USian is totally okay (local affiliation is a must), the sad thing of the jingoism is ... you wouldnt care for the sport nor the americans in it if it hadn't got the celebrity that Armstrongs PR class has pumped up. In fact, I doubt you would know about the tour running right now if it wasn't for Lance. Without him there is no coverage and you don't go look for it either.

    9. Re:Tyler Hamilton's Homepage by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Boy, are you ever wrong.

      I fell in love with the sport in 1988. I was thrilled to see Stephen Roche's triple crown win. I was on the edge of my seat as LeMond beat Laurent Fignon using sheer grit and clever technology, the first of my countrymen to be taken seriously on the international scene. I hoped Andy Hampsten would step into his shoes. I watched Pedro Delgado and Miguel Indurain demolish all comers.

      I remember the Russians coming to the Tour in the mid-90's.

      And, yes, I'm delighted that the US field is strong. Hincapie is on great form, but it's hard to say whether he'll have the chops to win a Tour. Hamilton is obnoxious (not unlike Lance was before his bout with cancer) but he's got the goods to back up his talk.

      So you're welcome to your preconceptions, but I loved bicycle racing before it was cool.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  8. Spoilers by powerpuffgirls · · Score: 2, Funny

    They're not fast enough until you see spoilers fitted at the back of the bicycles!

    1. Re:Spoilers by Random+Web+Developer · · Score: 1

      going downhill at speeds of over sixty it might even help them.

      It would slow them down but maybe less people would end nearly falling off a cliff

      --
      Artists against online scams http://www.aa419.org/
    2. Re:Spoilers by Random+Web+Developer · · Score: 1

      kmh obviously...

      --
      Artists against online scams http://www.aa419.org/
    3. Re:Spoilers by oostevo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, not kmh (obviously). I've done over 70 (mph ... obviously) going down a hill. You actually don't need a spoiler for going those speeds - the faster you go on a bicycle, the more stable it gets, even to the point where it gets hard to turn at speeds of 60-70mph. Hey ... motorcycle racers don't use spoilers, and they can go twice as fast.

      --
      In soviet russia, You ask not what country do for you, but what you do for country!
      Oh wait...
    4. Re:Spoilers by strictnein · · Score: 1

      yeah, it's easy to hit 30-40 mph, and that's off-road on a mountain bike.

      Flat land it's easy to hit 30mph on a road bike. Before I broke some bones I used to keep a steady 20mph pace on flat dirt bike trails on my mountain bike.

    5. Re:Spoilers by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

      And stickers. Don't forget the stickers.

    6. Re:Spoilers by justMichael · · Score: 1

      Not to mention how well the "pucker factor" is at holding you onto the seat when that "slight bend" in the road turns out to be more of a curve at 55+ mph...

    7. Re:Spoilers by Enigma_Man · · Score: 0

      To accomplish what? Help slide the bikes as they corner? When a bike turns, it has to lean over. The purpose and function of a spoiler is to provide downforce. As the bike leans, the "down" force also leans. Imagine a fairly extreme lean angle of 45 degrees: half of that down force is pushing the bike to the outside of the turn, into a slide.

      Spoilers also serve to increase air drag, if that's what you were incorrectly thinking. An F1 car has much more drag than a Ford F-150 truck, but has so much more pounds of downforce (up in the tens of thousands of pounds of downforce for some race cars, whereas most commuter cars generate lift at speed).

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    8. Re:Spoilers by tenman · · Score: 1

      list your equipment. not every bike will hold together at ~70mph. down hill at 70 takes a special set of components. and there are only a handfull of forks that I can think of that would take that kind of beating. you would have to have gone down one of the longest steepest hills ever, or you've got one hell of a ring set. I can't wait to see you back up your claim with the specs of the bike you did it on. I call BS.

    9. Re:Spoilers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no mph, I actually have a framed speeding ticket for exceed 50 mph on a downhill.

    10. Re:Spoilers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And spinning 20" rims, chrome

    11. Re:Spoilers by djtripp · · Score: 1

      yeah, it's easy to hit 30-40Easy to hit, hard to sustain... Flat road on my MTB, I'm happy to keep it at 20. 25 on my roadster is nice, but sometimes my legs let me do 30 for 1/8 mile sprints(I'd like to some other slash dotters do that). Fastest for me is cruising down a hill at around 50, that was fast enough. I have the allergy contact dermatitis, I get a bad rash when my skins touches rapidly moving surfaces.

      --
      "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
    12. Re:Spoilers by Moofie · · Score: 1

      70 is not at all uncommon in the Tour de France. I've done over 60mph on my mountain bike on the hill on Highway 2222 in Austin between 620 and Loop 360. (I had high-pressure narrow road tires on the bike at the time). Hard sprint at the top of the hill, tuck in tight, and let gravity do the rest.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    13. Re:Spoilers by ottothecow · · Score: 1
      everyone on slashdot always seems to get this wrong. Spoilers break up airflow over the vehicle (they SPOIL the shape). They can take effect at very low speeds (well as far as fast cars go) and work by creating turbulence to fill the vacume created as the car accelerates through the air. They work, and they work on FWD RWD and AWD. Some people complain about the spoilers on the STi and the Evo because they feel flimsy. Spoilers dont push down and therefore dont need to support weight, they just need to be lightweight and capable of creating turbulence

      What you are thinking of is a wing. F1 cars use wings (same as an airplane but upsidown) to generate downforce. A motorized wing could be used to provide more downforce in corners and then let up to increase acceleration in the straights. The principle of a wing makes it pretty useless on FWD cars (unless its mounted on the hood...).

      Now its true that the ricers everyone loves to make fun of enjoy putting giant wings on their cars (and they often arent even functional as a wing, much less as a spoiler). A wing is a handling tool mostly. Unless you have problems with constantly spinning your wheels when going 70, the wing wont help (and will probobly hurt) your acceleration. A spoiler however will help the most in forward acceleration.

      A spoiler needs to be matched to the body of the car (no generic bolt on things). Maybe you have seen the popup spoilers on cars like the VW corrado or on some Porsches that pop up when they near highway speeds (or even the whale-tail spoiler of early 911s). These work, but they work because they are carefully matched to the car's geometry. Not the same for those giant wings that look like aluminum siding that you see bolted onto some kids trunk.

      --
      Bottles.
    14. Re:Spoilers by pimpbott · · Score: 1

      Spoilers are for street racer kiddies who wanna look cool or real racecars on tracks with tight turns. Spoilers actually slow you down, and often by quite a bit. They create drag and turn that drag into downforce. I know, you were kidding, and I know I'm sucking the fun out, but I always have to laugh when I see the local streetracer kids with a Honda Civic (and often automatic) with a fat whale tale spoiler on the back. I often wonder what happened when they first got their car up to freeway speeds, found out how much speed they lost, but didn't say anything because they didn't wanna seem uncool.

    15. Re:Spoilers by dukeisgod · · Score: 1

      Go ahead and call BS. I've hit 60 going down a decent drawbridge on an off-the shelf race bikes (low/mid end Cannondales)and I've talked to some semi-pro cyclists that have done 70+ down mountains in Europe. They have much nicer component sets, but there's little difference in the frames. The carbon fiber forks on their bike are no different than the ones on my bike.

    16. Re:Spoilers by dukeisgod · · Score: 1

      "...found out how much speed they lost..." That would imply that they had speed in the first place.

    17. Re:Spoilers by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's one of the reasons the cycling authorities are not too happy about riders who use Camelbacks - they suspect they do act as spoilers!

  9. Wind tunnels & race numbers by lothar97 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Lance et al have spent a lot of time in wind tunnels reducing drag (see Trek). I watched a bunch of the Lance Chronicles on OLN. One significant source of drag they discovered- the race numbers on their backs. All riders have their number attached to their jersey on their lower back, on both sides (as seen here). They found that the number caused significant drag, and they were quite unhappy that there was no way to design a sharkskin suit or the like to include the number. Technology taken down by paper!

    --

    1. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by Short+Circuit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wouldn't fitting the paper under a tight clear-plastic vest do the trick?

    2. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by mr.capaneus · · Score: 1

      Luckily, every competitor has to use numbers, so it is a zero sum game. Personally, I am much more interested in the athleticism than the gadgets.

    3. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by lothar97 · · Score: 1

      I don't recall the exact reason why they couldn't do that (stupid beers I drank while watching!), but I think it had to do with regulations- such as numbers cannot be covered up. Lance ran into problems a year or so back with a redesigned sprinting helmet. It was really aerodynamic, but the Tour organizers wouldn't allow it because it did not conform to the rules. The rules were slightly changed, and now he can wear a revolutionary design. I susepct the number thing will change as well.

      --

    4. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by brer_rabbit · · Score: 3, Informative
      Wouldn't fitting the paper under a tight clear-plastic vest do the trick?

      I'd have to assume, "if they could of, they would of." The Tour rules probably state the race number must be fixed to your back. Here's an excerpt from the Tour website:

      Article 2 - Riders' identification Riders must affix the number plates to the front of their bicycle frames and wear two riders' numbers (small format) exactly over their hips, one on the right and one on the left side.
    5. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'd have to assume, "if they could of, they would of."

      That's weird, I would have assumed that, "If they could have, they would have.".

      </grammar nazi> :)

    6. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by VoiceOfRaisin · · Score: 1

      "if they could of, they would of."

      I think you mean "could have" and "would have". The "of" sound is from the contractions could've and would've.

    7. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be so sure... the resistance due to the paper numbers is obviously a huge advantage to heavier riders. Every rider will experience a decrease in efficiency due to this drag, however that inefficiency corresponds to a lower percentage of power for a heavier rider.

    8. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by GeckoX · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Interestingly enough as well is the fact that there is a limit in the rules as to the minimum allowable weight of a bicycle. There are lighter bikes that have been proven to be faster that cannot be ridden in this race.

      Haven't been able to decide how I feel about this yet...actually I wish it was one way or the other:

      a) riders can use _any_ man powered 2 wheeled vehicle of whatever design they want...

      OR

      b) ALL riders ride the exact same bike.

      Either technology is a factor, or it isn't. I think it's the middle ground stance that annoys me.

      --
      No Comment.
    9. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by haystor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The fact that there is a minimum weight adds to the safety of the event.

      You really don't want them building bikes that just barely make it through the days race. But if they have an extra half pound or so to work with and they can do whatever they want, it can go into reinforcments that *might* but probably won't be necessary.

      --
      t
    10. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by tenman · · Score: 1

      it's amazing the lengths they go to, to reduce weight. Nike made Lance's jersy without seams so that it was (something like) 4 grams lighter. and that translated into 4 seconds per mile faster. over the course of a 100 miles, that more than 6.6sec/100miles. also, clothing must breath and remove sweat. even to the point that when they lean up vents open to allow air flow to the skin, but when they crouch, the vents close and make their body more airo. its crazy!

    11. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by djtripp · · Score: 1

      His farring hat he made famous last year was deamed illegal this year becuase it did not conform to UCI safety regulations. That helmet was freaking cool, and he did all the tunnel testing, owned the design, and still let his friend Ulrich wear it. I actually am glad that they are instituting safety regulations this year with helmets. It does show responsibilty of both the races and the announcers, and might trickle down to the end users. I am against helmet laws, but I am a helmet advocate (I would not be able to type now if it wasn't for my helmet, which was not requred when I was wearing it.) Who remembers Fabio Casartelli, a young Italian racer who died in a fatal crash on a steep descent in the 1995 Tour. No helmet. Lots of blood, it was freaking scary. It will be interesting if they will be requiring helmets in the mountain stages.

      --
      "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
    12. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by tupps · · Score: 1

      I remember Robert De Castala (Australian Marathon Runner) talking about what he did for Marathons, and he would stich his number onto his shirt with only 4 stiches in total to keep the weight down.

      Sometimes these things are a psychological bonus to the rider, because everything is lighter they know it is only themselves which will win or lose the race.

      --
      Go out and get sailing!
    13. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by r7 · · Score: 1

      >Who remembers Fabio Casartelli, a young Italian racer who died in a fatal crash on a steep descent in the 1995 Tour. No helmet.

      Americans have the most advertising-defined memories. Who remembers, for example, that a helmet would not have made a difference to Fabio, or that there has never been an injury in the 100 year history of the tour that helmets could have prevented.

      Ah but the ads, fear, uncertainty, doubt, and sales!, Now everyone must wear one no matter the conditions. I fear many more accidents as a result of the heat under a helmet which is considerable.

    14. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by r7 · · Score: 1

      > There are lighter bikes that have been proven to be faster that cannot be ridden in this race.

      This will likely change over time as light bikes become safer. As it stands the Bianchi EV4s and other bikes in that weight range will fail from cracked frames, broken axles, failed stems, and other seriously dangerous mechanicals, at an average of 7,500 miles!

    15. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by Moofie · · Score: 1

      MY cranium was saved by a Bell V1 Pro.

      I don't give a shit about the advertising. Buy MY kids will wear helmets because I believe they are safer than not.

      And as far as the heat under a helmet, I stay cooler with a properly designed helmet than I do bare-headed. That's why I like to wear one.

      I don't favor helmet rules for racers. Certainly at the pro level, these guys have been riding long enough to make the decision themselves. I also don't feel that helmet laws for ordinary citizens are appropriate (for bikes or motorcycles). But I do believe that if somebody hurts themselves, the State shouldn't pay a thin dime to put them back together if they can't be troubled to take care of themselves.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    16. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by ldspartan · · Score: 1

      (Blah blah, American bias, blah).

      Helmets are great, I ride a bike and a motorcycle and wear helmets on both. I'm all for people under 18 being forced to wear helmets by legislation - they're not citizens, feel free to force them to do things all they want.

      I also firmly disagree with helmet laws. If you're worried injuried motorcyclist will cost your state money and health care, then legislate against state-sponsored emergency health care. If someone wants to significantly increase the chance that they are going to die, that's up to them. This isn't like a seat belt law - there is some justification that the driver and passenger need to be held in their seat in an emergency so the driver can operate the vehicle - that actually effects others. If you're not wearing a helmet in an emergency on a motorcycle, it's not going to make a difference to anyone other than you and the guy who has to scrape your brain off the pavement.

      My life is mine. You have no right to protect me from myself.

    17. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by squaretorus · · Score: 1

      This is a dangerous line of thought to pursue. I have lost many many many friends through my habit of expressing this opinion at length about all competitive sports from cycling to F1 to Javelin.

      Imagine how cool the Javelin would be if it were a combination of throwing skills and design. It would be like scrapheap challenge :-D all sorts of little wings and shit.

      F1 with rules like "4 wheels, one driver, one engine" and maybe a "must fit in a box " would also be rather good fun. Ferrari kick ass at the moment because they have the best driver AND he knows how to manage his engineering team to give him the best motor. Multiply that by a MILLION and I think we'd have some entertaininng racing. If the driver wants to be safe he should build in safety - not be told which safety features to use. Stop treating F1 drivers like little poofs!

      SEEE - I'm off again!!! Grrrrrrr

    18. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers by djtripp · · Score: 1
      On July 18th, 1995, during stage 15 of the Tour de France in the Pyrenees from Saint Girons to Crête du Lys, Fabio Casartelli crashed and was tragically killed. On the descent of Col de Portet d'Aspet (with parts of 15%) Fabio Casartelli hit a low concrete wall with his head wearing no helmet. On his way to the hospital in the helicopter he died after 3 heart attacks.
      He wasn't dead on site. A helmet could have helped. We shall never know. And scare tactic ads piss me off too.
      --
      "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
  10. Queue the... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

    ..."At what point is it no longer the same sport?" complaints.

    1. Re:Queue the... by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cycling is not like Formula One, something I hesitate to call sport any more. Some of the new technology is well cool and anything that makes a bike lighter and stiffer is welcomed by racing cyclists but one fact remains, the cyclist still has to pedal the damn thing. In racing it boils down to legs, lungs and desire at the end of the day because there is no major technology diffentiator possible on a bike. Lance Armstrong on his postmans bike will always thrash his postman on the latest and greatest technology.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    2. Re:Queue the... by laigle · · Score: 1

      At least it's not as bad as "sports" like auto racing, in that the rider is still a determining factor. And tech like lightweight frames and wind tunnels is available to most serious national teams, so it's not too lopsided.

      Still, I'd be a lot more impressed with these sports if the rules required standard equipment. In the Olympics, you don't get to use your technical know how to create a lighter shot put so you can throw it further. Equipment standardization should be the first chapter of any rule book.

    3. Re:Queue the... by usrusr · · Score: 1

      that happened in olympic wind surfing...

      at least when i learned that (quite some years ago now...) and we were taught about the technology involved, everybody made jokes about the olympic standard rig, with which even the oldest beginner equipment in use at that time at nothing to do anymore, to those wind surfer guys the olympic version of their sports was more a museum than a competition.

      --
      [i have an opinion and i am not afraid to use it]
    4. Re:Queue the... by bmj · · Score: 1

      While there might be some truth to this in European racing, it's still about the physical effort involved. In fact, there's a movement afoot that is slowly creeping into mainstream riding -- fixed gear and singlespeed riding. There are plenty of folks who ride multi-day brevets/rallies on fixed gear bikes (think track bikes, or what Kevin Bacon rode in Quicksilver) and do just as well as folks on expensive, tweaked out road bikes. Also, despite the encroachment of technology, track bikes (competitive track bikes) have remained the same. Sure, you can spend thousands of dollars on a bike with one gear and no brakes, but that's probably because the frame is custom made for you.

      This event is a good example of the movement toward simplicity -- note the plethora of fixed gear bikes that completed the trek from San Francisco to Portland.

      --
      Whereof we cannot speak, thereof we must be silent. --Ludwig Wittgenstein
  11. Hah. by manseman · · Score: 3, Funny

    So, this proves that anyone using the latest cool tech stuff is just trying to make up for something missing in their pants. One day I'll throw out this type-writer and get a computer.

    1. Re:Hah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, not that funny.

      For a man that has beaten testicular cancer, he sure has more cajones than the author of the comment.

    2. Re:Hah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something missing? Well he sure seems glad to meet the president of the UCI.

    3. Re:Hah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not funny, he has more balls than you do Paco.

  12. Wild e Coyote by alfal · · Score: 1

    No mention of the episode where Wild e Coyote strapped some ACME Rockets to a bicycle. But, I guess that would be considered cheating....

    1. Re:Wild e Coyote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ummm... it's not "Wild" it's Wile E. Coyote as in full of wiles. That one was like nails on the Super Genius chalkboard ...

    2. Re:Wild e Coyote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "Wile E. Coyote", numskull.

    3. Re:Wild e Coyote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "numbskull", dumbass.

  13. seats that don't kill legs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They need to come up with seats that are comfortable !

    1. Re:seats that don't kill legs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brook Saddle.

      Ride steel.
      Sit on leather.
      Wear wool.

    2. Re:seats that don't kill legs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Ride more. Your ass breaks in eventually.

    3. Re:seats that don't kill legs by djtripp · · Score: 1

      Terry Fly
      They are more comfortable, and allow you to have fun off the bike.

      --
      "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
    4. Re:seats that don't kill legs by neuro.slug · · Score: 1

      F'iz:ik makes excellent saddles. Both the Arione and Aliante are used by many teams in the peloton.

      -- n

    5. Re:seats that don't kill legs by jahalme · · Score: 1

      It's not the legs the seats kill...

      And that's why the (old!) bicycles issued to conscripts by the Finnish Army have gained the nickname "ball breaker".

    6. Re:seats that don't kill legs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too late. I've already got a crack in mine!

  14. It gets a little overboard too by slutdot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know we're talking about the TDF and those guys are on a different plane of existence here but there's something I've got to say about some non-pro cyclists out there.

    While I agree that the use of technology is important in cycling, there's only so much one can do without having to rely on natural talent and training. Spending $180 for a 13 cm piece of metal in order to save 50 grams, is a problem. I see it with the guys I ride with. They'll spend a shit load of cash on a Litespeed titanium bike or a Trek 5200 but will still mow down a pizza after a ride and not think about the fact that they can get over those hills a little faster if they weren't carrying a anchor on their gut.

    1. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I have seen guys on $99.00 HUFFY bikes outpace the "serious" guys riding with $7000-9000 worth of bike.

      The technology helps you ONLY if you are in peak performance. the guy that is in perfect shape WILL see a difference getting a lighter bike completely as well as getting low rolling resistance tires.

      most weekend riders that have the money to blow on "flashy" crud like that are far from being in perfect shape and therefore get put in their place by the poor local olympic hopeful riding a piece of absolute junk.

      and I grin wide as I see it happen as they pass me on my recumbent.

      Oh, and I'll chanllenge any of them to a 1000 mile ride.. let's see if their overpriced bike can take them as far as my recumbent can. I regularly get 2X the distance between stops than a regular bike rider get's.. and every second you are stopped I gain on you or increase my lead extremely fast.

    2. Re:It gets a little overboard too by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      But think of the psychological advantage! Seriously, I seem to remember that the number one thing that beat me in a race was nerves and lack of confidence. If you panic, it takes a lot of power away from your muscles.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    3. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Otter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The ones I always get a kick out of are the people riding $2000 alumininum, fully suspended, knobby-tired mountain bikes down the street. Guys, you realize a $200 steel road bike would be much faster, right?

    4. Re:It gets a little overboard too by shaka999 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Cycling is just like any other hobby. Its fun to have nice toys. I've yet to hear of a computer that runs faster because it has a window and a light inside...

      --
      One should not theorize before one has data. -Sherlock Holmes-
    5. Re:It gets a little overboard too by lakeland · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Everything you're saying is true, but if you lower your standards even more you will see the opposite effect. For example when I go out riding with my wife I use my (20 year old) touring bike while she uses her (new) mountain bike. Now, my bike was pretty flash when it was new, but things have changed in 20 years... And despite her being fitter than me, I have to constantly slow down not to leave her behind -- casual effort on the touring bike is the equivilant of fairly hard work on the MTB.

      Conclusion? At the top end the difference between a $500 bike and a $5000 bike may be swamped by the difference in rider ability, but at the bottom end the difference between a bike designed for on-road, and a bike designed for off-road swamps any difference in rider fitness.

    6. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just remember - roadies are forced to look down upon recumbents.

    7. Re:It gets a little overboard too by alanh · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's not a 13 cm piece of metal, that's a 13 cm piece of carbon fiber composite. It may not have any actual performace advantage, but carbon fiber is much sexier than metal. ;-)

      --
      - AlanH
    8. Re:It gets a little overboard too by hackstraw · · Score: 1

      Even though I do it too, it kills me how me and many slashdoters love technology, but frown upon those that buy/use it.

      By spending $180 on a 13cm piece of metal that saves 50 grams does things. First, if it really does save 50 grams and this part is 180 grams, then the "normal" weight is 230 grams, or 27% lighter. 27% is significant. Think of a road bike that goes from 30 pounds to almost 20.

      Also, the pizza eating gearhead is promoting (keeping a job for) some other materials geek, whereas the guy that keeps with the stock stem and quits eating pizza is 1) putting the material's geek job someplace like India and 2) putting the pizza delivery guy in a worse job than he's already got.

      Freaks like this are good (and I'm one of them).

    9. Re:It gets a little overboard too by MacBorg · · Score: 1

      i wasn't aware you could mow a pizza... does it grow like grass?

    10. Re:It gets a little overboard too by shaka999 · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, I don't see many recumbents going over the passes here in Colorado. For some reason I don't think your going to get much a lead in this terrain.

      That said, I just finished the "triple bypass" here. Its a 120 mile ride over three passes. There were many cool retro bikes being ridden but the most amazing rider was on a unicycle. I can't even imagine going 120 miles in the flats let along over Loveland pass..

      --
      One should not theorize before one has data. -Sherlock Holmes-
    11. Re:It gets a little overboard too by wwest4 · · Score: 1

      unless you throw some hills into the equation... then rider fitness starts to matter again :)

    12. Re:It gets a little overboard too by FlashBac · · Score: 1

      I have seen guys on $99.00 HUFFY bikes outpace the "serious" guys riding with $7000-9000 worth of bike.
      OK, I can let that slide.
      The technology helps you ONLY if you are in peak performance.
      No. Absolutely not. It helps everyone. You will only really notice it if you have experiance, but you do not need to be fit.
      most weekend riders that have the money to blow on "flashy" crud like that are far from being in perfect shape and therefore get put in their place by the poor local olympic hopeful riding a piece of absolute junk.
      Exactly. And its beautiful. I have killed those pretty boys on a MTB (with slicks). And, it feels good.
      A friend told me about an occaision when our club was out on a spin, and was pulling up some hill, the boys were swinging, and heaving with our nice bikes. And, this farmer, MOTORS past us all, Tweed coat, potatoes on the back carrier, and dissapears off down the road. .
      Looking for the cameras. And, put us back into our respective boxes.

      --
      "Thats right buddy, the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away."
    13. Re:It gets a little overboard too by raygundan · · Score: 1

      Nothing funnier than an inexperienced rider on a full-suspension bike standing up to stomp on the pedals.

      All that effort, and they just bounce around.

      Hell, just getting a pair of cheap rims with slicks would give those guys better street performance. But for some people, it's not about *actual* performance, it's about flash. Like those kids in civics with tri-level spoilers and coffee-can exhaust pipes. I suppose I shouldn't complain-- those folks are the ones who keep a steady supply of cheap, used high-end gear flowing into the hands of wiser shoppers.

    14. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "Guys, you realize a $200 steel road bike would be much faster, right?"

      Yes it would be -- but then again, most people riding $2000 aluminum fully suspended, knobby-tired mountain bikes down the street might want the versatility of taking it onto the trails or gosh, in the rain (where the other tires slip like a motherfucker at a fast stop) or feel they might need to jump a curb when some idiot motherfucker decided 3000 pounds of metal trumps your 20 pounds.

      I always get a kick out of the fact that some people don't know what the fuck they are talking about but feel they need to comment on how stupid everyone else is because it makes them feel superior!!!

      For the record, I ride a $200 aluminum mountain bike that was bought used, but had quite a few of those $2000 parts on it when it was new. I'm all for upgrades because I'll be there to take the old crap off their hands...

    15. Re:It gets a little overboard too by lalleglad · · Score: 2, Informative

      Being an enthusiast bicyclist myself, with an old steel framed (though reinforced by various other materials) bike from 10 years ago, I'd have to agree with the following line:

      "there's only so much one can do without having to rely on natural talent and training"

      However, as I am also maintaining the bike myself, I can appreciate the more expensive parts of more expensive bikes, as they are often easier to clean, adjust and all in all maintain, than cheaper parts.

      And if you ever try and climb the hill/mountain that is often referred to as Alpe d'Huez, you will appreciate lightweight equipment and well functioning gears.

      So, what I am trying to say is that a good bicycle is a piece of equipment that should function as an extended piece of your body, with the least trouble and as lightweight as possible.

      Expensive bikes are not purely lightweight, but a good combination of lightweight, stiffness/responsiveness and wellfunctioning of the whole equipment.

      But the most important pieces in a successful Tour de France rider is just like with a marathon runner, a determined mind, and compaartive to the marathon runner that 'only' runs about 42km once, the Tour de France rider cycles about 3500km for 3 weeks, so he really has to be really determined :-)

      Anyone getting through Tour de France within timelimits deserve respect!

    16. Re:It gets a little overboard too by oostevo · · Score: 1

      It actually does have a performance advantage. The advantages of replacement parts on bicycles don't necessarily have to be mass or aerodynamics. That product significantly improves the stiffness of your handlebars, which is unspeakably useful when putting massive amounts of torque on them during a sprint. Trust me.

      --
      In soviet russia, You ask not what country do for you, but what you do for country!
      Oh wait...
    17. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I totally agree.
      I've got a 3 year old $400(CDN) Peugeot mountain bike I bought just for casual riding at the time. This year I've gotten quite a bit more serious and have taken part in a number of cross-country relay races. Up until about a month ago, I was constantly looking at the 'other guys' $4000+ machines and trying to plan how and when I would upgrade.

      I finally realized how stupid that would be.
      a) most of the guys I ride with have expensive bikes.
      b) i never get smoked by them.
      c) their stuff breaks as much as mine does, but their parts are _way_ more expensive.
      d) haven't had _my_ bike stolen.
      e) I do it for FUN.
      f) I will NEVER be taking it to the top level and thus will NEVER be able to actually reap the minute benefits one can get from really expensive bikes.

      And unlike cars, where it's easy to argue that a bmw or mercedes is worth the money over a ford as they are more fun to drive, comfortable...blah blah whatever, I have NO problems with my bike and the expensive bikes I've ridden certainly don't feel special, and DEFFINATELY don't feel like they're worth more than 10x the price.

      Now maybe if I broke the bank on a new bike I wouldn't be the only one with money to buy the beer after a good ride ;)

      Actually, if you wan't to get into a good useless waste of money tech discussion with a hardcore mountain-biker, pull out the v-brake vs disc-brake topic. Oh, I used to fall fully on the 'can't wait to have the cash to buy a nice set of disc-brakes' crowd...but a good slap with common sense brought me around.

      Me: Gonna buy me a set of those real soon! (Disc Brakes)
      Bike Shop Owner: Really? Why?
      Me: Um, they're better...
      Bike Shop Owner: Really? Why?
      Me: Um, because they work better right?
      Bike Shop Owner: Let me ask you this then, what problems are, or have you, had with your v-brake system?
      Me: Um...
      Bike Shop Owner: And of those problems, which will be solved by a higher price tag, more weight, more parts and generally more complexity?
      Me: Since you put it like that, I guess I'm unsold thank you!

      And as an interesting aside, the shop owner's success in _not_ selling me something has resulted in some darned solid customer loyalty.

      --
      No Comment.
    18. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Ricochet · · Score: 1

      That $99 Huffy won't keep up with the crew I ride with (and we're not the fastest in our club). But then again I don't ride $7000+ bikes. And I'd like to take you up on that 1000 mile challenge (how about we shorten it to a single day double century :-). I hope you're a long distance cyclist (I am). I don't have flashy and I've had to resort to 36 spoke touring rims. The roads around here destroy racing wheels. BTW, if you're that fast I don't mind losing. :-)

    19. Re:It gets a little overboard too by wwest4 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      100% agree.

      I was doing a norba race and once I finished I chilled out on the trail to watch some of the other heats. I saw a guy on a very sweet, expensive and light-looking XC bike carry over a 6-inch log.

      In the same race I finished just ahead of a guy I see often on the circuit. He rides on an old rigid bike, and he was hammering through the bony sections anyway. I've broken a rigid bike (stem failed) on the same trail. If had any suspension at all he probably would have toasted me.

      The moral ends up being that gear helps, but honing your skills on crappy gear helps you appreciate the pricier stuff even more. When coming up, skill and fitness are paramount - everything else is secondary, and it makes a lot of sense to save your money early on to make sure you like the sport and to get a fitness and skill base going.

    20. Re:It gets a little overboard too by 3terrabyte · · Score: 1

      Why stop... hook up a cathedor and let it evaporate off your back!

      --

      Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?

    21. Re:It gets a little overboard too by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

      Recumbents have a problem with steep hills, the leaverage is all wrong. You have to press backwards against the seat to get the leaverage, rather than standing up over the pedals.

      Can be done, but a stadard position cycle works better in this case.

      Bents are great, a lot of people who can't ride a standard get to ride, so I love 'em.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    22. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      I personally love the ones who think their suspension is supposed to bounce up and down as far as possible, great fun to watch!

      --
      No Comment.
    23. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      There are 2 performance benefits to carbon fiber bike parts, the benefit you cite is not one of them.

      Carbon fiber is lighter and (can be) stronger, but it is NOT stiffer.

      The biggest trade-off with carbon-fiber bike parts is strength vs stiffness.

      Most people HATE carbon-fiber frames because they have a tendancy to flex, and thus there is some loss of power. This is more of a problem in mountain biking when you really need to keep as much energy up as possible when carving tight trails and the like.

      --
      No Comment.
    24. Re:It gets a little overboard too by dr+bacardi · · Score: 1

      You've never lived in a dorm, have you?

    25. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      I do cross-country relay racing, mostly 8 and 24 hour races.

      Guys do this shit solo.

      I can hold my own, but am not and never will be elite. I'm not in that solo class.

      They are the elite and a very large number of them ride rigid frame bikes, at least on the tail.

      There is no full suspension bike that can transform as much energy into forward-momentum as this is exactly what suspension does, absorbs energy.

      Thus, at the top of the field the fancy gadgets disappear...replaced with tried and true designs engineered to perfection.

      --
      No Comment.
    26. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Sam+Gibson · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have a $1000 Specialized FSR that I ride on the street sometimes. But that's because I'm a poor college student that can't afford another bike.

      It's all about perspective.

    27. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WhoTF rides a $7000-$9000 bike?? Even a nice carbon Trek 5200 with clipless pedals can be had for $2300. Best bike I ever had was a steel bottechia with campy athena, nice stiff frame - best bike for fast sprints I've ever had and that was still less $1000.

    28. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Sam+Gibson · · Score: 1

      Disc brakes are only really better in wet conditions. Otherwise now-a-days V-brakes are perfectly fine. I'm actually suprised that the shop owner wasn't trying to sell them to you though. Most shops around here use Disc Brakes as a huge selling point and mark-up accordingly.

    29. Re:It gets a little overboard too by FlashBac · · Score: 2, Informative

      Re Disk Brakes: By and large,Yup. The sad thing is, when peope want disks sooo bad, they get cable pull disks. And then realise they are actually worse than Vs in flat out braking.(Way less leverage near hub combined with the cables stretchyness)
      However, my bike came with Hydraulic disks, (last years bike, marked to same price as this years...sold) and they are pretty OK.
      The differance comes when you are braking from high speeds, hard, and you really really do not want to lock. With Hyd. disks, there is a large amount of modulation between braking hard, and locked. Somtimes Vs are tricky to get to that place. And I have seen a lot of people hurt that way.
      Also, disks are very nice in rain/mud.

      --
      "Thats right buddy, the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away."
    30. Re:It gets a little overboard too by slutdot · · Score: 1

      Very true. I recently paid a shitload of money for my bike because I just wanted a new bike (well, the fact that my wife said it was ok was a big factor as well). But my argument isn't about people buying what they want nor is it about style. It's about people who rely on technology so much that they forget the simple things such as looking at the engine instead of the machine. There are many people that believe they can buy their fitness by having the latest CF stem or frame.

      To paraphrase an earlier post, the easiest way to get a lighter bike is to drop the weight yourself It's amazing how much easier it is to climb a hill when you're lighter. I should know, I dropped about 20 lbs in the first year I started riding and it helped quite a bit.

    31. Re:It gets a little overboard too by wwest4 · · Score: 1

      I have been riding a hardtail XC for years, but I think a light dualie with lockout is in my future. There are plenty of stock dual-suspension bikes that are lighter than my hardtail - but I agree that on a 24 hour race, as long as there were no super-technical downhills, a hardtail would be more than sufficient. bumpy paths would favor a dualie, though, even in a long race, unless you really have a lot of upper-body endurance and are a super-efficient shock absorber yourself. it depends on what your strengths are, ultimately. if you're not a finesse rider and you're all legs, a dualie might be faster for you on sustained bumpy singletrack.

    32. Re:It gets a little overboard too by alanh · · Score: 1

      The material, in and of itself, matters less than what the engineers do with it. It simply being made of carbon doesn't necessarily make it stiffer or stronger or lighter or more durable than a steel, aluminum, or titanium equivalent part.

      --
      - AlanH
    33. Re:It gets a little overboard too by tenman · · Score: 1

      You can't take that shortcut in the grass and dirt with your road bike. If I have an extra $2000 burning a whole in my pocket, and I'm just a casual rider, I'm not going to buy a time trial bike. I'm going to get something that I think will meet all of my needs. Which may include a ride on the rocky shore of a stream followed by a nice, flat 20 mile bike path back to the house.

    34. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      Disk brakes are good for muddy mountain biking and other icky things where your side-pull brakes squeal, whine and generally don't work as well as they should.

      Rear suspension is another one of those weird items... it adds weight, and the geometry is such that the tension on your chain ever so slightly compresses your suspension... but if you're doing downhill mountain bike racing through a stony creek bed, that won't hurt you and you _might_ find it advantageous. Climbing hills, you may even find the suspension smooths out the dirt so you don't bounce on it and slip during a climb

      With bicycles, somewhere around the $500CDN full retail pricetag, you don't get much more bang for your buck. All the garbage components are generally stripped off the bike at that point and you've got the "low-end" good stuff... provided you don't have any gimick components... like rear-suspension, disk brakes, etc.

    35. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Rob+Parkhill · · Score: 1

      But not nearly as much fun... I mean, if suddenly I get the urge to session some street, maybe hit a stair gap or two, I want that full suspension bike under me.

      Plus after spending $2k on the alumininum, fully suspended, knobby-tired mountain bike, I don't have the cash for another bike just for road riding :-)

      It's not always about getting there fast...

      --
      "Tomorrow's forecast: a few sprinkles of genius with a chance of doom!" - Stewie Griffin
    36. Re:It gets a little overboard too by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1
      Me: Gonna buy me a set of those real soon! (Disc Brakes)
      Bike Shop Owner: Really? Why?
      Me: Um, they're better...
      Bike Shop Owner: Really? Why?
      Me: Um, because they work better right?
      Bike Shop Owner: Let me ask you this then, what problems are, or have you, had with your v-brake system?
      Me: Um...
      Bike Shop Owner: And of those problems, which will be solved by a higher price tag, more weight, more parts and generally more complexity?
      Me: Since you put it like that, I guess I'm unsold thank you!

      Discs are one of those rare parts on a mtb that actually does provide a better experience, and can save you money:

      1. In Mud. Discs can handle it, rim brakes can't. Not to mention the wear you are putting on your rims. The much more expensive part (your wheels) does not get worn out from braking, so this saves you money in the long run.
      2. In Ice/Snow. Discs work. Rim Brakes don't.
      3. Installing/Adjusting discs is much easier than dealing with V's. You set cable tension once. Then you just move the pads in as they wear.
      4. A slightly warped rim is not going to rub your brakes (yeah, warped discs are another story, but that occurance is much less likely)
      5. I've found that you can adjust the modulation of discs much more than you can with rim brakes.
      6. Tire clearance (this is another mud thing)

      Of course, nothing is perfect. For trialsin, and for weight savings, rim brakes are the way to go (rim brakes are very good at locking a wheel, discs are not). There is also a break-in penalty with discs (a new disc doesn't stop so good right away). And having such a small area for something to get wedged in makes me nervous on occasion (of course I felt the same way about how easy V's worked when I first got those...thought they'd engage if I brushed a tree wrong or something)

      For overall riding, I love my discs...but if I were a trials rider, I'd go back to rim brakes.

      To go to discs, you'll obviously need new wheels, and a frame that is compatible, but that is a one time expense, that has been well worth it for me.

      So, if you are a general XC rider, I'd recommend upgrading to discs the next time you need to replace a wheel. Until then, if you aren't riding in a lot of muck, or in the winter, or prefer trials to riding fast, there is nothing wrong with rim brakes.

      Now, one of the great "innovations" that is annoying is 9 speed drivetrains. 8 was fine (and arguably 7 before that). At least SRAM gear doesn't ghost on it though. I'll never go back to shimano after losing all of my gearing at a race earlier this year.

    37. Re:It gets a little overboard too by jollespm · · Score: 1

      Disc brakes can also be better for riders like myself (heavier) that tend to bend wheels frequently. I nearly tacoed a wheel in a race and was able to finish respectably because I didn't have to disconnect my front brakes. Disc brakes are not without their own issues, I had to drop out of several races because it took Cannondale a year to find a pad composition that didn't get destroyed by Georgia mud/clay. I lost a brand new set of pads in 10 minutes once it started raining. Thankfully that issue has been resolved.

    38. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Have you gotten her some road-worthy tires?

      A decent mountain bike with some Specialized Fat Boys or Nimbuses makes an excellent touring bike. But with knobbies? *shudder*

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    39. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      did she have slicks on her bike? I'm surprised she didn't kick your ass if she did.

      Knobby tires on the road have two disadvantages-- they weigh 2-6 times more than a slick, and they have much higher rolling resistance.

      Of course another factor is that your tallest gear is probably much bigger than her tallest-- since it is a mountain bike after all.

    40. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the technology helps you regardless. It helps a lot more if you're in good shape.

      $99 Huffies weigh something like 40 pounds. They have dangerously bad braking (steel wire in a plastic coating for the levers, which flex, so you lose the braking power) and a lot of the weight is in the wheels, which makes acceleration very difficult.

      Even a 4-5 *hundred* dollar mountain bike will weigh less than 25 pounds nowadays and have real brakes and alloy rims.

      I have seen the look of amazement come over the face of an out-of-shape Huffy rider when she rode my bike for just a few minutes-- the technology advantage is very noticable.

      There is far more of a difference between a $500 mountain bike and a $99 huffy than there is between a $500 mountain bike (with road slicks) and a $5000 road bike.

    41. Re:It gets a little overboard too by tapin · · Score: 1
      You can't take that shortcut in the grass and dirt with your road bike.

      Sure you can. It's all about the handling skills.

      (Of course, having said that, it seems that "halfway-decent" -- that is, low-end to serious riders -- suspension bikes are cheaper than equivalent road bikes; in which case, yeah, ride your mountain bike twenty miles on asphalt)

    42. Re:It gets a little overboard too by FlashBac · · Score: 1

      I dont think you meant side-pull brakes, these are the guys that road bike used to use, one arm pivoting with another balanced with springs.
      I think you mean either Cantilever Brakes, or V Brakes. These guys are kind of close ish in method, the Vs being a sort of refactored inside out Canti. Two sort of "bar" things, pivoting on the forks. The Vs are generally lots better.
      Rear suspension, meh, forget it, get a nice light stiff frame, unless you are a downhiller. Even those boys and girls take a good hard tail over a mediocre full. Honestly, thats the only time you need/want full.

      --
      "Thats right buddy, the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away."
    43. Re:It gets a little overboard too by tapin · · Score: 1
      27% is significant.

      Er, but the point is that 27% of something that's less than 1% of the rider+bike weight isn't significant.

      Proper optimization always considers what will make the biggest difference first.

    44. Re:It gets a little overboard too by phliar · · Score: 1
      There's a certain price level where you get a quality bike, something that's not Wal-Mart crap. I don't know where it is now, probably around $400 or $500. But you know what, if spending $1000 instead of $500 makes you more likely to get out and ride, then do it. Buy the bike that will make you happy and make you ride more. Don't waste time sneering at the other guy because his bike is too cheap or too expensive

      I do in fact have one of those fancy expensive bikes, and I also have a regular beater bike. I do all my own maintenance so the beater only looks like shit, it's well maintained so it's fine to ride. The biggest difference between that bike that cost me $300 in '91 and the fancy bike with Columbus SLX tubing and the Campagnolo components? Yes, the expensive one is much nicer to ride -- the weight difference is perceptible. But most important: it's easy to work on or adjust the expensive bike, and it stays adjusted. The cheaper one is a bit of a pain to work on and it's a little finicky.

      The most fun bike is a track bike. Get rid of that heavy derailleur, freewheel and multiple chainrings and cogs. You can toss the rear brake too. That's the light bike that's fun to ride in the city!

      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    45. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah-- six was fine.

      I use six-speed XT thumbshifters, which fortunately came with an extra "click", so I can use a 7-speed free hub.

      Of course, I also use a road crankset and freehub on my mountain bike-- which drives the bikeshop crazy-- they tell me that it doesn't work-- and I tell them I have ridden thousands of miles that prove them wrong.

    46. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "WhoTF rides a $7000-$9000 bike??"

      Professional athletes-- and wannabes with money.

      http://www.litespeed.com/home.aspx

      I'm sure there are many others.

    47. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you get fat slicks, you should still be able to bunnyhop the curb...

      And... my experience is that knobbies perform worse than slicks on pavement in the rain... but maybe I'm riding different than you.

    48. Re:It gets a little overboard too by bikerguy99 · · Score: 1

      yep, same logic should be applied to proud owners of 3GH laptops and desktops who do no more than checking our email, browsing pr0n or light word-processing...

    49. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I'd love to get away from Shimano, but I ///hate/// Grip Shift. Hate hate hate hate hate it. I hate all the hoops I have to jump through to get it to work on my bike, I hate the ergonomics, I hate the design.

      Rapid Fire is heavier and more complicated, but I vastly prefer it. Unfortunately.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    50. Re:It gets a little overboard too by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 1

      I have a front suspension on my relatively new Boulder SE. Not because I wanted a suspension at all, but because you can't buy a new mountain bike that *doesn't* have a front suspension (a non-department store bike, that is). I wanted to get a reasonably light and capable bike, but I wasn't ready to spend >$500 for a road bike and I wanted the flexibility to go off-road.

      I actually never stand up on my bike except to coast down hills (it's fun), but if you see me riding in a situation where shocks are unnecessary or detrimental, just know that it's not about flash.

    51. Re:It gets a little overboard too by djtripp · · Score: 1

      Disks are getting better, just like V-Brakes got better. V's are nice for all around use. But Discs are nice in snowy ice conditions, muddy areas, and long fast descents. I have V's on 1 bike and a front disk on the other. I can tune my V's in a second. I hate bleeding my Hayes.

      --
      "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
    52. Re:It gets a little overboard too by leon.gandalf · · Score: 1

      Well don't forget the other persons who shops there who listens to no advice and buys all the new expensive crap.

    53. Re:It gets a little overboard too by lakeland · · Score: 1

      She's still using the tyres that came with it. I suggested slicks to her, but she was worried about punctures -- she uses it to get to work and if she got a puncture she would be late.

    54. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Moofie · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth, the narrow tires will actually be less prone to punctures than the fat tires.

      Many mtb slicks are available with Kevlar belts. I recommend not using the inverted tread tires (with the really thick rubber and the deep grooves) because you can pick up road debris and it'll saw through the belt.

      Also, be certain that the tires are inflated to at least their rated pressure. I'm a big fan of Continental tires, and they've got some decent MTB slicks.

      Good luck. : )

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    55. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Pasc · · Score: 1

      Poor college student... $1000 bicycle. Haa ha ha! Thats funny!

    56. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not because I wanted a suspension at all, but because you can't buy a new mountain bike that *doesn't* have a front suspension (a non-department store bike, that is).

      Sure you can, the front fork is just another replaceable part and they still make non-suspension forks. Shop around. The local bike shops around here sell anything from rigids to hard-tails to full-suspension.

      However, after being a rigid-frame rider for a few years, my next bike will be a hard-tail. There are a few trails around here that are around 50% rock.

    57. Re:It gets a little overboard too by ahoehn · · Score: 1

      Mostly, everything you said is a load of crap. I'm sure your old peugeot works well for whatever you're using it, but to say that newer, and more expensive bikes won't make a difference to the average rider is a lode of crap. The most obvious difference is in the shifting components of each bike - the difference between Shimano's Sonora (entry level affordable) and Dura-Ace (high end very expensive) components is remarkable. Anyone could hop on a bike and ride around the block, shifting gears, and instantly notice a difference.
      That said, I went with the Sonoras, because that was what I could afford - but to say that I wouldn't enjoy or benifit from having a better shet of shifters is rediculous.

      Now to the issue of Disc-Brakes vs. v-brakes on mountain bikes. Disc brakes stop better than v-brakes, period. Especially in wet conditions. On steep downhills in the rain, v-brakes become almost useless, whereas Disc-brakes will still work perfectly. For many riders, especially more techincal, (read "better"), freeride and downhill riders, the added expense, complexity and weight of disc brakes is far outweighed by the ability to stop their bikes more rapidly and more consistantly.

      And to the bike shop owner who convinced you not to buy something from his shop - he's clearly a figment of your imagination.

      --
      Mod my comments down. It'll be fun.
    58. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      True, hydraulic disc brakes perform better, but are also more complicated, intruducing even more points of failure. I've seen quite a few failures of hydraulic systems, not pretty.

      It comes down to weighing all of the issues and choosing, or learning through experience, what one likes.

      Personally, I like things that I can fix on the trail with very few tools, are light, and simple.
      Thus my choice is probably always going to be v-brakes.

      --
      No Comment.
    59. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1
      Disk brakes are good for muddy mountain biking and other icky things where your side-pull brakes squeal, whine and generally don't work as well as they should.


      That can be true, depending on the amount of mud. I've got a LOT of mud where I am and I've seen jammed calipers, spilled hydraulic fluid and bent rotors too many times. It's actually quite difficult to really mess up v-brakes in my experience, nothing pulling a hunk of mud or a couple of sticks out of doesn't usually solve.

      Rear suspension is another one of those weird items... it adds weight, and the geometry is such that the tension on your chain ever so slightly compresses your suspension... but if you're doing downhill mountain bike racing through a stony creek bed, that won't hurt you and you _might_ find it advantageous. Climbing hills, you may even find the suspension smooths out the dirt so you don't bounce on it and slip during a climb


      I have used them, and in some situations they can, feel more comfortable I guess, but over all I've always really really noticed the loss of power over a good hardtail. And you really HAVE to pay the big bucks for a full suspension, or you're riding a 30+ pound bike.

      With bicycles, somewhere around the $500CDN full retail pricetag, you don't get much more bang for your buck. All the garbage components are generally stripped off the bike at that point and you've got the "low-end" good stuff... provided you don't have any gimick components... like rear-suspension, disk brakes, etc.


      Yeah, I bought it for the frame really, it rocks. Nice and light and very solid. I've upgraded to much better rims, drivetrain and derailers, so it's worth a fair bit more now, but no where near what I'd be paying for a good full suspension these days.
      --
      No Comment.
    60. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1
      Now, one of the great "innovations" that is annoying is 9 speed drivetrains. 8 was fine (and arguably 7 before that). At least SRAM gear doesn't ghost on it though. I'll never go back to shimano after losing all of my gearing at a race earlier this year.


      Oh do I hear that! All of my stock drivetrain, mid range shimano, gone, blown to crap, always at the worst time. (I can fix a chain on the trail in a minute or so, only from experience under pressure, really wish I didn't need that skill ;)
      I replaced it all with race face/sram setup, no more problems!
      --
      No Comment.
    61. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      FYI, SRAM has a new toggle-switch shifter for their 1:1 ratio shifting systems. I hate, really really hate with a passion, grip shifters. but sram makes a mean derailer and the new system looks slick!

      --
      No Comment.
    62. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Gotta love the bike shops.
      I get the same thing for something as simple as using presta valve tires on my xc bike, they think I'm on crack.

      --
      No Comment.
    63. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Moofie · · Score: 1

      That makes me very, very joyful. Thanks for the heads up!

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    64. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I have thought of a lockout soft tail, but it'd have to be a light bike to compensate, and there's the expense. I probably will some day though. I've been quite interested in systems like the i-Drive from GT. I haven't ridden one yet, but the newer model ones have simplified quite significantly and are supposed to do a very good job at reducing loss of power through the shocks.

      --
      No Comment.
    65. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Noose+For+A+Neck · · Score: 1

      Sure you can. Didn't you watch Lance in the Tour last year? At 50 mph, no less.

      --

      Software piracy is victimless theft.

    66. Re:It gets a little overboard too by wwest4 · · Score: 1

      If you get a chance, try the Giant NRS series too. The frame geometry had a more familiar feel to me, and they are pretty light. Go to the bigger MTB or adventure races, there are sometimes demos on actual trails, and way more bikes to look at than at your LBS.

    67. Re:It gets a little overboard too by c00kiemonster · · Score: 1

      I agree with most of what you say ,but there are componenets that make a huge differance . Clipless pedals , shimano SPD's in my case but a non cleated bike rider has zero chance of o/t me. Cleats make a huge differance especially up hills. Disk brakes are fantastic if they are hydralic ( far better modulation ) and you use them for the purpose they are theee for , downhill , off road mud and snow, then they are great , always stop , less damage on your rims ( why its very important to check for forein matter under your brake pads if you have Vee's as rim damage will follow.) What disc's are silly for is normal day to day riding ,they are heavier and more complex ie more expenisve to maintain . If you are purchasing an average bike , runabout , commuter youwould be crazy to get disc's because at that price point you are not getting quaility

    68. Re:It gets a little overboard too by eriko · · Score: 1

      You've never served food to a racing cyclist, have you? Do *not* get between a Tdf racer and his morning vat of pasta.

      But, yeah -- you've got a real point. My defintion of poser. I'm a large guy. I ride a steel framed touring bike -- fairly heavy, built to haul lots and lots of gear.

      If you weigh half what I do, and are riding a bike that costs twice what I paid -- and I pass you, you are a poser. I pass you on a climb, you just suck.

      It's scary how many posers there are.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    69. Re:It gets a little overboard too by antiMStroll · · Score: 1

      In my hard core road days I would never have spent that much on a stem, but don't discount the subtlies of small parts. Of all those I tried, only one saddle (Squadra) and one seatpost (American Classic) let me set up the critical pedal-saddle-bar relationship in a way that kept me and Mr. Johnson pain free hour after hour. If a serious rider told me a carbon fiber stem reduces high frequency bar vibrations and keeps their hands from falling asleep on 200 mile rides, I would be inclined to take them at their word.

    70. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't care for rapid fire trigger shifters, and I also can't stand the grip shift throttle style shifters. That's why I still have a pair of Deore thumb shifters set on friction mode. They have lasted since '92 so far and still going. I also have a like-new set of XT thumb shifters in my tool box. The simplicity of thumb shifters is a beautiful thing.

      Also, I'm off the parent post with this, but I also ride a custom hardtail frame from Nevil Cycles (no longer in business). The frame is built from AerMet 100 tubing. If you like cool stuff, google that once and check out the applications- I particularly like the fact that it's used for tailhooks on carrier based aircraft. I've had it for about 10 years now and I've maybe put 8,000-10,000 miles on it or so all across the US. The custom geometry was enough for me to justify spending about $1,000 on the frame alone. The seat tube is only 15 inches long, but the top tube is 24! My body is shaped that way (I'm about 5'10 with a 28" inseam) so the frame fits like a proverbial glove. I need to get it blueprinted so that I can have another frame made by a local frame builder when the time comes.

      ride on.

    71. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're right, I meant the common ones with the tigs welded onto the frame. The side-pull you still see on some road bikes, but they were silly on mountain bikes.

    72. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      I have used them, and in some situations they can, feel more comfortable I guess, but over all I've always really really noticed the loss of power over a good hardtail. And you really HAVE to pay the big bucks for a full suspension, or you're riding a 30+ pound bike.

      I have never done any real riding with a soft-tail, not that I consider myself a good mountain biker, but you know when you get on a super-steep, loose rocky slope? the kind where you're in first gear and you're leaning so far forward, but you still feel like you're going to flip over backwards? The kind where you couldn't possibly start riding if you stopped? Well, it's really tough to pedal the crank without jerking the bike, but if you can reduce the amount you jerk the bike, you reduce the chances of slipping and falling. I'd love to try a soft-tail for something like that.

    73. Re:It gets a little overboard too by FlashBac · · Score: 1

      Damn you Dr Evil.
      How come you get modded karma and I do all the pedantic hord thinkin with the technikil experteze and all. And and.. and, you even said tigs, when you clearly meant bosses. Like, they might have been TIG welded on, but... mother of god, they are called bosses.
      Oh god. I just get so angry. I mean...nnnnngg WHY GOD, but WHHYYYYY?
      I WANT MORE KARMA TOO GOD.
      I need to find someone to hit now.

      --
      "Thats right buddy, the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away."
    74. Re:It gets a little overboard too by MacBorg · · Score: 1

      Give me six weeks and i will be

    75. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1

      My computer may or may not run faster because of my mods. That isn't the point.

      My modded heatsink keeps the proc cooler. I took off the 60mm fan and replaced it with an 80mm model. The fact that it has LEDs now is just for show. However, keeping the CPU cool is its primary purpose.

      My 2 other fans blowing on my hard drives don't make my access times faster, but keeping those things cool extends the MTBF. I see so many people just add another drive in the same cage with the first. Just knowing that the center of those drives is burning up hurts me. But, in my case, everything stays cool.

      My clear case may not make my box any faster, but it sure is convenient when it comes to troubleshooting. Let me see, is anything loose? Nope. Took five seconds to see that. Once a month, I clean my case inside and out. I'm sure my components are a lot happier not covered with dust like 90% of home PCs.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    76. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Ba3r · · Score: 1

      heh, i used to agree with you.. i have a nice al hardtail XC ride (and a heavy hardtail freeride rig!).. but last summer i rode a friend's fullsuspension XC rig... I used to think full suspension was ony for serious freeriding and downhilling ,but holy jesus this xc bike was amazing . The loss of power due to the rear suspension was almost imperceptible, and the difference when cruising down singletrack. however I will agree with you that if somebody is not planning to spend 1000 bucks on a bike, they should stick to getting the best hardtail possible. But its like with front suspension.. in the beginning everyone pshaw'd it, but as it got better, lighter, and more tuned, it became indispensible.

    77. Re:It gets a little overboard too by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Technical uphill is where a soft-tail does indeed have great benefit. Since I'm an XC rider though, I have to balance across all types of terrain and in my personal experience overall the hardtail wins still. Though there are some nice, albeit expensive, full suspension systems out there I would like to try in the future that may sway me eventually ;)

      --
      No Comment.
    78. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I know several people who just won't be without thumbshifters. I've dronk the kool-aid though, and I like RapidFire all the way. Although somebody has pointed out to me that SRAM has some trigger shifters now that look pretty nifty. I want to try them out.

      I remember reading about that AerMet tubing. It's about as close to Unobtainium as I've ever seen...nifty stuff. : )

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    79. Re:It gets a little overboard too by FlashBac · · Score: 1

      Fair enough...I'll buy that.
      I'm not really a proper MTBer, (although my MTB cost about a grand :) aahh, boys and their bikes...) but em, yeah, I have seen some pretty shit hot downhillers in Europe using good hard tails, then I come to the US, and see every fat bloke on the streets round NY/NJ with a crap full sus. bike, squishing all over the shop, costing money that probably could have bought a half decent hard tail.
      With knobbly tyres.
      With no air in them.
      And enough food to get them through the apocalypse.
      But, you are right, time improves these things beyond recognition.
      BTW have you noticed that light (less than 125cc) Moto-Cross bikes, are turning into MTBs with engines? Or is it the other way around? Sooner or later the parts will be interchangeable !!

      --
      "Thats right buddy, the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away."
    80. Re:It gets a little overboard too by raygundan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it sucks that there isn't much of a "cheap road bike" market anymore. The casual riders all buy mountain bikes, so that's where all the $300 bikes are. Road bikes start at like $700, and it's hard to find one that's low-end.

      Front suspension is not *nearly* as awful on a road-ridden mountain bike as full suspension. And knowing how to ride it will prevent you from bouncing in the first place, which it sounds like you know how to do.

      I didn't mean to tear into anybody who buys a mountain bike for mixed-use riding like you, but rather VERY inexperienced folks who drop $1000 or more on a bike designed for downhill riding in rocky terrain and use it to pogo-stick around their neighborhood.

      That said, you might look around-- I know my local bike shop still has bikes from 2002 and 2003 in stock without suspension in the $300 ballpark. Personally, I'd keep the fork. I have a low-end suspension fork on my cheapo mountain bike, which I use when I bike-commute. I spend a lot of time on really ragged and potholed roads, along with the occasional "hop into the ditch" to avoid unaware drivers. I love my road bike, but I won't subject it to my daily commute.

    81. Re:It gets a little overboard too by Phaedra · · Score: 1

      It's not always about getting there fast...

      Yes it is. :-)

    82. Re:It gets a little overboard too by SlashSim · · Score: 1

      Heh,
      I recently rode my road bike (700x23 slick tires) down a forest trail pulling a trailer with my and my two companion's camping gear for about a kilometer on a recent tour.
      There wasn't anything more technical than a few roots and some sharp turns but it handled it like a champ. I love my steel frame.

      Mine is a traditional road bike, but you should check out this thing called cyclocross.

      --
      If the only tool you have is a hammer, you'd better start looking for a carpentry job.
    83. Re:It gets a little overboard too by SlashSim · · Score: 1

      I just about have the urination while riding thing down pat.

      --
      If the only tool you have is a hammer, you'd better start looking for a carpentry job.
  15. Technology makes the Tour de France bearable by stinkyfingers · · Score: 1

    What if all the competitors used some sort of internal combustion conveyance and tried to make it across the desert? Now, that sounds like something I could get behind.

    1. Re:Technology makes the Tour de France bearable by KUHurdler · · Score: 1

      YOu mean like
      Pork & Beans?

      --
      Fix Your Own TV - RiddledTV.com Avoid the Landfill
    2. Re:Technology makes the Tour de France bearable by whoda · · Score: 1

      Or maybe the Paris-Dakar Rally.

      :)

  16. Recently scoped out new bikes by m.dillon · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Ok, I'm an old-timer now I guess. My current roadbike is the one I bought in highschool in the 80's. I recently decided I needed a new derailer so I brought it in to a shop.

    Of course, with a bike that old, they would have had to replace, well, just about everything in order to put in a new derailer. In fact it would be only slightly more to simply buy a new bycycle!

    So I started looking at bikes. I could get a nice road bike for $800 (US) that was far superior to my existing bike. Then I started looking at the carbon composite bikes, like the Roubaix series. I really didn't think I'd feel the difference until I test-rode one.

    Holy S*it! If the $800 bike was an order of magnitude better then my existing one, the Roubaix Comp (at $2600) was an order of magnitude better then the $800 bike. All carbon-composite construction, vibration dampening... the works. Unbelievably light, I could lift the whole bike with my pinky pretty much! Smooth ride, ultra smooth shifting, huge gearing range. The technology is really amazing.

    -Matt

    1. Re:Recently scoped out new bikes by bfields · · Score: 1
      Ok, I'm an old-timer now I guess. My current roadbike is the one I bought in highschool in the 80's. I recently decided I needed a new derailer so I brought it in to a shop. Of course, with a bike that old, they would have had to replace, well, just about everything in order to put in a new derailer.

      Of course?? I'm no expert, but I've never had trouble finding derailers for bikes from the 80's. I thought they were pretty standard. I'd shop around a little more if I were you....

      --Bruce Fields

    2. Re:Recently scoped out new bikes by Moofie · · Score: 1

      If you want to keep indexed shifting, sure you'd have to replace everything.

      Me, I'm looking forward to stripping my trusty Trek 560 to bare metal and building it up with a new gruppo. Campagnolo's mid-range gruppos are really, really good and pretty reasonably priced. That will be a fun project...

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    3. Re:Recently scoped out new bikes by rsadelle · · Score: 1

      With its decided lack of closure, this is a deeply unsatisfying story. What did you end up buying?

    4. Re:Recently scoped out new bikes by ftzdomino · · Score: 1

      I upgraded from an early 80's Fuji to a Marin Mill Valley last fall. After riding nearly 1000 miles on it, I'm still loving it. It's so much ligher and faster, and with its standard wheel size I can put kevlar weave tires on it, which keeps me from getting flats every 2 weeks or so due to all the broken glass on the streets. While it's not as light as carbon fiber, I won't be horribly upset if it gets stolen and I don't have to worry about the frame snapping when it's 5F outside...

    5. Re:Recently scoped out new bikes by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 1

      Anyone will notice a huge difference going from a $100 walmart bike to an $800 bike (mainly reduced weight with better sturdiness)... but going from an $800 bike to a $2600 bike probably wouldn't benefit you much unless you're a professional or something...

    6. Re:Recently scoped out new bikes by BalSeraph · · Score: 1

      You don't need new technology. I have a 1970's racer made by Harry Quinn here in the UK. Reynolds 501 frame means I can lift it with my little finger also. Out on the road I've never had a smoother ride on *any* other bike, regardless of the year of manufacture. That's not to say the Roubaix Comp isn't good (I don't know of it, but it better be at that price :D), but I know my racer didn't cost $2600, even account for price difference. Techology can be good, but it's not everything. Oh, and you don't need a big gear range. My family own a bike shop, so I've had a go on lots of stuff, but in standard use, I've never used more than about 6. My racer has 12, and I think I still haven't used them all yet.

      --
      Avoid employing unlucky people... Throw away half the CVs.
  17. Mp3 Sunglasses by gphinch · · Score: 5, Funny

    So 35 songs for 22 days...how many times can you really listen to 'Eye of the Tiger'?

    --
    in bed.
    1. Re:Mp3 Sunglasses by Crinos · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nah, it's a 2.5 hour loop of "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can..."

      --
      The Sacred Chao says, "MU".
    2. Re:Mp3 Sunglasses by SnowWolf2003 · · Score: 1

      Which raises an interesting question. Could this be classified as a stimulant used to enhance performance?

    3. Re:Mp3 Sunglasses by 3terrabyte · · Score: 1

      Sherryl Crow would replace that song while he slept with one of her own.

      --

      Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?

    4. Re:Mp3 Sunglasses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On "the Lance Chronicles", Lance Armstrong said that one thing he couldn't live without was his iPod. That and Peet's Coffee.

      Maybe the iPod is simply too heavy to race with - and in fact, I somehow doubt that Lance races with any MP3 player in his ears. After all, he needs to listen to his team mates and the guys in the vehicles and even to the sounds being produced by his own bike and his competitors behind him.

      It just looks like some manufacturer managed to get Lance to bless another gadget - which is great! But I'd bet $1 that he got them for free, and that he might have even received some money to wear them around.

    5. Re:Mp3 Sunglasses by Moofie · · Score: 5, Funny

      LANCE!
      LANCE LANCE LANCE!
      LANCE LANCE LANCE!
      LANCE LANCE LAAAAAANCE!

      The rest of this post is non-capitalized filler to get past the lameness filter. The reason I used caps is because you can't do the guitar riff from Eye of the Tiger without yelling. It's un-American.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    6. Re:Mp3 Sunglasses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      LANCE LANCE LAAAAAANCE!

      If Lance was listening to "Eye of the Tiger", and I was his teammate, I wouldn't be above shouting that to get his attention.

    7. Re:Mp3 Sunglasses by curunir · · Score: 1

      You could probably fit a couple of Sheryl Crow albums on there...that might be just the motivation he needs.

      --
      "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
    8. Re:Mp3 Sunglasses by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1

      My guess would be a loop of a cadence count to keep him on time. While any good cycling computer already tells you this, it's sometimes easier if you find music with a beat equal to the cadence you want to spin at.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
  18. Numbers by bsd4me · · Score: 1

    I used to race (badly). The fact that numbers are a source of drag is pretty much common knowledge. I can't remember how the pros attach their numbers in big races, but for most USCF events, they are pinned on, and are pretty much sails on windy days.

    --

    (S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))

    1. Re:Numbers by bamf · · Score: 1

      I can't remember how the pros attach their numbers in big races

      They tend to be self-adhesive. You can see this when someone retires and they have their numbers removed from their jersey.

    2. Re:Numbers by oostevo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Pins are for USCF racers only. International UCI races use stick-on numbers that are really big stickers (so they aren't really that drag-inducing). The only time UCI racers use pins is when they want to reuse numbers (sometimes they want to take a number or two home from the Tour for memory's sake).

      --
      In soviet russia, You ask not what country do for you, but what you do for country!
      Oh wait...
  19. Let's see.. so far... by Mz6 · · Score: 1
    We've had stories on:

    F1 Racing Technologies
    Tour de France Technologies, particularly Lance Armstrong

    To be expected:

    NASCAR Technologies
    Soap-box Derby Technologies

    --
    Hmmm.
    1. Re:Let's see.. so far... by victor_the_cleaner · · Score: 1
      Don't forget:

      Monster Truck Tech
      Low-Rider Tech
      Lark Tech

      you could go on and on

    2. Re:Let's see.. so far... by cens0r · · Score: 1
      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    3. Re:Let's see.. so far... by michael_cain · · Score: 1

      When's the next America's Cup? Those guys spend insane sums on technology and testing...

    4. Re:Let's see.. so far... by cens0r · · Score: 1
      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    5. Re:Let's see.. so far... by Johan+Veenstra · · Score: 1

      There is nothing high-tech about NASCAR, carburetted engines are a thing from the past.

  20. They're missing the obvious by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

    They're spending countless thousands on newfangled gadgets, while victory could be assured by adding nothing more than a $50 used lawn mower engine to their bikes.

  21. Er, one missing by RobertTaylor · · Score: 0, Troll

    "....making the racers faster through better training, materials and aerodynamics"

    and drugs.

    1. Re:Er, one missing by wwest4 · · Score: 1

      Lisa: [showing off a tomato the size of a beach ball] I've grown a
      futuristic tomato by fertilizing it with anabolic steroids.
      Bart: The kind that help our Olympic athletes reach new peaks of
      excellence?
      Lisa: The very same.

  22. Plasters? by Skiron · · Score: 3, Funny

    Still hurts when 50 'nodes' of the pelaton decide to crash all at the same time, in a cascade, rather like nodes on a M$ network. I wonder what this stuff was designed on...

    As an aside, these guys are the best athletes in any event the world over.

    1. Re:Plasters? by oostevo · · Score: 1

      What are these things designed on? Probably some of the worst-maintained paved roads in all of Europe. Seriously, when it rains, some of the European roads the Tour goes through are literally more slippery than ice. And their bumps will rattle your eyeballs out.

      --
      In soviet russia, You ask not what country do for you, but what you do for country!
      Oh wait...
    2. Re:Plasters? by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

      Not to knock the insane amount of pain and willpower in the tour, but a friend posted this to my lists the other day:

      Subject: TDF vs. GDR
      Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 17:38:49 -0400

      TOUR FACT SHEET
      2107 miles
      23 days total: 1 prologue, 20 stages and 2 rest days
      11 flat stages
      6 mountain stages
      3 individual time trials
      1 team time trial
      21 nine-rider teams
      $3,687,619.22 total prize money
      $491,648.51 to the winner (winning team)

      Great Divide Race Fact Sheet:

      2450 miles.
      200,000 feet of climbing.
      7 competitors.
      Drafting not allowed.
      No team cars.
      No mechanics.
      No post-stage massages.
      No nutritionists preparing perfectly balanced meals.
      No scheduled sleep in altitude tents.
      Last, but not least - No pavement.

      Mike Curiak won in 16 days and 57 minutes, after making several wrong turns and riding for over 2500 miles. He averaged 158 miles a day. He rode through snow, two days of downpours, opressive heat, mosquito attacks and 40 mph headwinds. And he did it almost entirely alone. I'd like to see anyone on the Tour match his feat.

    3. Re:Plasters? by pellaeon · · Score: 1

      200000 feet of climbing? That's like 40 miles or so, right? Or, just about the same as one of the heavier mountain stages in the Tour...

      By the way, the Tour was like that in the beginning, only it was about twice as long then. There's a famous story about one cyclist having to forge himself a replacement part for his broken bike. I'm too lazy to google, though.

      --
      -- /bin/coffee missing. universe halted.
    4. Re:Plasters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In any event? Rrreeaalllyyyy...when are they going to start boxing, playing NFL football, NBA basketball, NHL Hockey, ...

      Next time, THINK before you make stupid generalized exaggerations.

    5. Re:Plasters? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I'd imagine that's 200,000 vertical feet. Which is a lot of climbing.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    6. Re:Plasters? by phliar · · Score: 1
      ...I'd like to see anyone on the Tour match his feat.
      So why doesn't this Mike Curiak enter the TdF?

      The fact is that the Tour de France and Great Divide Race are completely different events, and being an expert at one doesn't say anything about how you'd do at the other.

      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
  23. Is there a rule? by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't know if they have a rule against strapping on an Acme(TM) rocket to the bike. If noone has tried it before, they may not have a rule against it. Or if someone tried it before, they fared was well as Wild E. Coyote, so it didn't effect the outcome for the people who finished -- without going into a brick wall or off of the cliff.

    1. Re:Is there a rule? by oostevo · · Score: 1

      There is actually a rule. I can't quite send my 200-page rulebook over the internet, though. Sorry.

      --
      In soviet russia, You ask not what country do for you, but what you do for country!
      Oh wait...
  24. Unmentionned Tech by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

    Lest we forget:

    www.fossilfool.com/down-low-glow.htm

    'course, you can just take any two cold cathode kits, cut the molex pin and splice a 9V battery connector, a 8xAA battery holder from Radio Shack, and a seat-bag to get a similar look for your bicycle.

    With one pack of 8 NiMH 1800mA AAs powering two CCs, I get over 4.5 hours of neon light.

  25. Sunglass mp3 player. by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 1

    This is probably not the safest bicycling accessory in existence. Trust me, when you're riding anywhere near traffic, being able to hear cars coming up from behind you is a good thing. Perhaps that's why they're not for sale just yet?

    1. Re:Sunglass mp3 player. by Dav3K · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Funny thing about the Tour de France though...automobile traffic is SO not an issue.

    2. Re:Sunglass mp3 player. by Joe+Sixpacks · · Score: 1

      yes, that would explain the lack of portable music players.

      --

      Joe Sixpacks, defender of the common man.

    3. Re:Sunglass mp3 player. by MacBorg · · Score: 1

      Well, at least where I live (MA, USA) any headphones on and powered when riding or driving are totally illegal... be ready to eat a ticket if you want to rattle your eardrums.

    4. Re:Sunglass mp3 player. by oostevo · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the guy who had his team car drive into him in Stage 1.

      --
      In soviet russia, You ask not what country do for you, but what you do for country!
      Oh wait...
    5. Re:Sunglass mp3 player. by wwest4 · · Score: 1

      I agree, I don't want Some Dumbass cyclist wearing MP3 glasses to pull out in front of me and ruin my week.

    6. Re:Sunglass mp3 player. by Quasar1999 · · Score: 1

      I ride with an iPod in traffic, and believe it or not, no matter how friggin loud I have my music cranked (hell sometimes I wonder if it's sweat or my ears are bleeding...), I have never, ever been approached from behind by a car without hearing it... no ear-bud headphones can block out the ambient noise well enough... so it's a non-issue...

      --

      ---
      Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
    7. Re:Sunglass mp3 player. by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 1

      Funny thing about the Tour de France though...automobile traffic is SO not an issue.

      Yes, and thus riders on the Tour de France have those sunglasses. For the rest of us, traffic is an issue, and thus we don't have those sunglasses.

      Sorry to basically repeat exactly what I said in my first post, but apparently some of the moderators didn't read it the first time.

  26. Not just tech... by MosesJones · · Score: 0, Troll


    Cycling also has a "proud" history of "bio-tech" and using the very latest in chemical enhancements. And even on the legal side of the fence the training exercises and regimes are defined down to the last millimetre and measured even more precisely.

    I used to like cycling, and the last day of the Tour is still fantastic. But the passion has been replaced by automaton.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:Not just tech... by Dielectric · · Score: 1

      Are you serious? Every professional sport, and lots of higher-echelon amateur competitors, count things down to the gram and the millimeter. I still see massive amounts of passion at every turn and every finish line. It just takes discipline and planning to get there first, along with a heaping helping on talent and determination. On an F-1 car, nothing goes unmeasured or left to chance, and it's the same with a rider in the Tour.

      As far as chemical enhancements go, that's of course rampant but it's part of the game. All of racing is full of cheats and enhancments outside of the rule book. Some get caught, some don't.

      Michael Schumacher still gets excited on a podium, and professional cyclists still suffer through 23 days of racing to get to Paris. It's in their faces at the top of the Alpe D'Huez. That's not automation, man, that's passion.

    2. Re:Not just tech... by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Dude, did you see it when Lance blew Jan Ullrich off the mountain last year? When Lance looked back over his shoulder, stared into Ullrich's eyes, and then took off like he'd found a V8 between his legs?

      If that's not sport, if that's not passion, I don't know what is. It doesn't get more human than that.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    3. Re:Not just tech... by joel_archer · · Score: 1

      Its like a NASCAR season, 21 races in 23 days, speed climing, and sprinting all differant races, but on bicycles. 188 bicycles, with the best riders in the world. Rain, wind, potholes, and fans in the road. And the guy that dominates 5 years straight in "Le Tour de Fance" is a Texas cancer survivor who was dropped by his then French cycling team when he first was diagnosed.

      Five Sport Illustrated covers (including Sportman of the Year) in a country that is barely conscious of the sport. Armstrong defines human spirit, courage and strength. It is entirely possible we are seeing the "Golden Age of Cycling". Like the NBA without Michael Jordan, it won't be the same without Armstrong.

      LiveSTRONG, GO POSTAL !!!!!!!!!

      US Postal
      The Cyclysm
      Wear Yellow

  27. MP3 by herrvinny · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From the Sunglasses/MP3 Player link:

    We have a little addendum to our Tech from the Tour de France feature from a couple of weeks ago: this special pair of Oakley sunglasses with a built-in MP3 player that Lance Armstrong was spotted wearing. No idea whether they're planning to ever sell these or not, but a little bit of research reveals that the sunglasses only have enough room on them for 35 songs, which makes us think that they probably have somewhere around 128MB of storage somwhere in there.


    True, but that doesn't mean Lance plays only 35 songs for the entire Tour. Does anyone know if the Tour rules prohibit changing electronic media and so forth? He could play a new set of 35 songs every day. At least that would be interesting trivia, what songs did Armstrong listen to every day of the Tour..

    1. Re:MP3 by wk633 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see the sunglasses as being a better replacement to the current radio ear-bud.

      What I'd like to know more about is what kind of technology is in place to protect those radio conversations. You'd have to bet that Saiz, Godefroot and Riis would love to listen in on Bruyneel and Armstrong. (directors sportif for Heras, Ullrich, Hamilton and Armstrong)

    2. Re:MP3 by ptomblin · · Score: 3, Informative

      He doesn't wear it in the race. Riding in a peleton takes every bit of concentration, and you have to be able to hear, feel, see and practically smell the other riders around you if you're going to avoid the crashes and not miss the breakaways. I've seen him training with an iPod, so maybe he's using this for training and warm-up rides.

      --
      The next Cmdr Taco duplicate will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
    3. Re:MP3 by funwithBSD · · Score: 4, Funny

      35 songs is enough for the entire Cheryl Crow collection.

      That's all he needs.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  28. Not unique to cycling by Dav3K · · Score: 1

    You could say the same thing about golf. But to say that you have to be in top condition to get any gain from these products is not true. It IS easier to ride a lighter bike, no matter how fit you are. Sure, your buddies could forego the pizza and shed pounds from the middle, and yeah, it would be easier to climb the next hill....or they can spend the cash and have an easier ride without the hassles of giving up pizza. This is a trend you see everywhere.

    1. Re:Not unique to cycling by bfields · · Score: 1
      But to say that you have to be in top condition to get any gain from these products is not true.

      More correct would be that no sane person can justify spending $1000's for a improvements that are at best going to help by a few seconds over many miles, unless they're doing time trials and have someone else paying for them....

      they can spend the cash and have an easier ride without the hassles of giving up pizza.

      I suspect that, compared to having the bike adjusted and maintained well, any improvements towards an "easier ride" due to high-end components are likely to be lost in the noise....

      --Bruce Fields

    2. Re:Not unique to cycling by HeyLaughingBoy · · Score: 1
      no sane person can justify spending $1000's for a improvements that are at best going to help by a few seconds

      Sure they can. You can justify whatever you want to buy with the words "I can afford it." Now, it may be a waste of money in all aspects other than the satisfaction of the desire for the product, but that's irrelevant.
      That said, my bicycle (Fisher Joshua X0) is 6 years old because it's still all the bike I need (IOW, my fat ass is the limiting factor; not the bike) and I'm not a gadget freak, but I accept that other people are.

      To throw a bit of flamebait out there: it's like SUVs. Many, many Slashdotters hate the things for being "inefficient" while completely ignoring the fact that the owners bought them not for efficiency, but simply because they wanted one.
    3. Re:Not unique to cycling by tenman · · Score: 1

      please explain "lost in the noise". you mean the the noise of ultegra vs. durace? anyone can benefit from that kind of upgrade. and the ultegra is going to be a lot less noisy.

    4. Re:Not unique to cycling by bfields · · Score: 1
      You can justify whatever you want to buy with the words "I can afford it." Now, it may be a waste of money in all aspects other than the satisfaction of the desire for the product, but that's irrelevant.

      If you go to the store, buy yourself a tinfoil hate, and tell us that it's to keep the aliens from reading your thoughts, fine, I won't stop you. But the "I can afford it" argument won't make you immune from being made fun of on Slashdot.

      Noone's proposing denying anyone's sacred right to buy stupid shiny stuff, but most of are going to translate "well it makes me feel good and I can afford it" into "I've been brainwashed by advertisers".

      --Bruce Fields

    5. Re:Not unique to cycling by HeyLaughingBoy · · Score: 1
      Noone's proposing denying anyone's sacred right to buy stupid shiny stuff
      Your UID's low enough that I can't ask if you're new here, but that's exactly the impression I get from a lot of posts (not in this thread, but the similarity was close enough remind me of it) when extravagant "non computer-related" purchases are mentioned.

      /. understands spending lots of money on CPU/video/memory/games quite well, but conveniently forgets that to a different demographic it translates into "stupid shiny stuff."
    6. Re:Not unique to cycling by bfields · · Score: 1
      Your UID's low enough that I can't ask if you're new here,

      Frightening....

      but that's exactly the impression I get from a lot of posts (not in this thread, but the similarity was close enough remind me of it) when extravagant "non computer-related" purchases are mentioned.

      /. understands spending lots of money on CPU/video/memory/games quite well, but conveniently forgets that to a different demographic it translates into "stupid shiny stuff."

      It's not the spending so much as the price/performance ratio. I think you'll see many slashdotters take a view of people that plunk down $500 the very latest pentium extreme and then skimp on memory, as they would of people willing to spend $500 on a bike part of dubious value when they'd be better off lubricating their chain.

      When we see a lot of people overspend on the flashy heavily-advertised stuff, surely a little eye-rolling is not out of order?

      --Bruce Fields

  29. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "And I'll also assume that his one-nutted ass could also kick your ass." in Bicycling yes he could, in a 'who has the most nuts' contest, he could not. Everything else is unknown.

  30. Let's just make one thing perfectly clear... by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 1

    I'm not on a first-name basis with "Lance".

    --
    "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
    1. Re:Let's just make one thing perfectly clear... by pklinken · · Score: 1

      Your username suggests otherwise though *ducks*

    2. Re:Let's just make one thing perfectly clear... by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 1

      If you'd read more Niven, you'd know where my username came from.

      --
      "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
  31. How to get a lighter bike... by raygundan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Q: What's the cheapest way to shave 500g off your bike weight?

    A: Lose 500g.

    1. Re:How to get a lighter bike... by sckeener · · Score: 1

      Q: What's the cheapest way to shave 500g off your bike weight?

      A: Lose 500g.


      Additional eat fewer of the Powerbars:

      FUEL: PowerBar, $1.79
      To help replace the 110,000 calories (31 pounds!) Armstrong will burn during the race, he will nosh on some 105 PowerBars and 210 PowerGels. Yum.

      --
      "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
    2. Re:How to get a lighter bike... by GeckoX · · Score: 2, Informative

      Funny, sure, but I'm going to guess that raygundan is a biker of some sort and didn't post this as a joke as this is the truth. This should be modded insightful for making a piece of common-sense more common!

      Lets put it into real world terms:
      I am a cross-country mountain biker, and this season alone my weight has fluctuated anywhere from 170-185 pounds. (185 at the beginning of the season for sure, 170 after my last 24hr relay race, but regularly bouncing between 170 and 180)

      And lets say I want to buy a new set of front-suspension forks.

      My options are a 5 pound set for $150 and a 4 pound set for $1000 and I've got a big race coming up.

      What's my best choice?
      The extra $850, or eating a couple less steaks between now and the race?

      And please remember, this only even remotely matters if you are at a level where a single pound, which is likely going to be somewhere around one half of a percent of the total weight, is actually going to make a difference.

      Hint: That's not you or me. That'd be Lance and a handful of others out there.

      --
      No Comment.
    3. Re:How to get a lighter bike... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Q: What's the cheapest way to shave 500g off your bike weight?

      Pee and poop before you ride.

    4. Re:How to get a lighter bike... by Ryan+C. · · Score: 1

      I'm a XC racer in about the same yo-yo range and I've heard this argument many times in many forms and I've never understood the logic of it.

      If you save 1 lb off your bike, now instead of yo-yoing from 170-185, you're effectively yo-yoing from 169-184. Less is more.

      So you say, why not just lose an extra pound of flab? Fine. Do that too. Why does a lighter fork make you eat those steaks? (hmmm, maybe a lighter fork would let you shovel food in faster ;-)

      No matter how much you train, that bike weight is still going to help that much more.

      For mountain biking, the bike is also semi-unsprung weight on your arms and legs, so it counts for a bit more than bulk mass. If I could take 5 pounds of my bike by putting 6 on my body I'd do it in a lactic threashold heartbeat, which by the way is why camelbacks are so great.

      Happy riding,

      Ryan C.

      --
      -Ryan C.
    5. Re:How to get a lighter bike... by MooseByte · · Score: 1

      "Q: What's the cheapest way to shave 500g off your bike weight?
      A: Lose 500g."

      Which for a lot of people can be done in one sitting via a bowl of bran cereal, a few prunes, and several strong cups of coffee. ;-)

    6. Re:How to get a lighter bike... by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong, you're right too.

      I was really making 2 points, one from the point of view of an amateur and one from the point of view of a pro.

      For the pro, training includes weight conditioning, so a pro will NOT be fluctuating within 15 pounds on race day, they rather will have a target weight which they will be damned close to on race day. If they need that 1 pound, it'll come off the rider. Now, you're right here as well that the pro rider will also already have the super light forks so best of both.

      For myself however, it really doesn't make enough difference to warrant spending a grand to loose a pound.

      I also, at least for mountain biking, like a bit of weight on my machine...within reason. My bike's gotta feel solid. However, I don't concider 30lbs to be within reason. That'd be another reason why I ride a hardtail and v-brakes. 22 lbs and solid, wouldn't change a thing unless I was pro, which I am not and will not be.

      --
      No Comment.
    7. Re:How to get a lighter bike... by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1

      That $850 et probably has better seals and more rigerous testing to ensure quality.

      Do you want a set of Shimano Kraptastic Gripshifters, or some nice Diore (sp?) components?

      Money buys less (weight) and more (quality).

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    8. Re:How to get a lighter bike... by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Yes, it does. I was just trying to show that the answer is not always spend more. The correct decision in any case is determined by a number of factors. Given a tight budget and the fact that I am an amateur, I'd be silly to just spend the most on everything to end up with a sub 20lb bike, though it would certainly be nice.

      Personally, in regards to my forks, I actually quite like my RST 381 shocks. Very solid, fully serviceable, quite simple. I would have to spend a LOT more money to get something better (quality) and lighter. My personal decision in this case is that it's not worth the money for me at this point. Doesn't mean it's not right for anyone else though.

      BTW, Diore does not by any means guarantee quality, I've had some kraptastic diore components in my day.

      --
      No Comment.
  32. Slashdot bias towards bicycles by GillBates0 · · Score: 4, Funny
    When you think of a bicycle, you most likely think of 2 tires, a chain, some gearing of some sort, and other assorted mechanical bits.

    I would like to request that Slashdot drop it's discrimination/bias against unicyclists and tricyclists of the world. The poster assumes that everybody will think of two-wheeled "bicycles" when they think about cycles. This is not the case. I would also like to request all Girls to stop being biased against unicycle and tricycle riders. We are every bit as good as the so called "bicycle" riders.

    Please join the fight against even-wheeled cycle fanatics.

    Thank you.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
    1. Re:Slashdot bias towards bicycles by christopherfinke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, the poster makes no assumptions about cycles in general; only bicycles, which, by definition, have two wheels. Nice try, but you have to pay attention to the details to get the +5 Funny.

    2. Re:Slashdot bias towards bicycles by Kurrurrin · · Score: 1

      When you think of a bicycle

      Bicycle being the key word there.

      --
      -Doug
    3. Re:Slashdot bias towards bicycles by wwest4 · · Score: 1

      Especially poigniant since unicycles and tricycles are an order of magnitude geekier than bicycles.

      Speaking of big-O - are you a one-wheeler? If so, what are you riding these days? I've been messing around on a trials uni recently... trying to mount picnic tables without violating local decency laws.

    4. Re:Slashdot bias towards bicycles by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1

      Bicycle. Say it agian...BI-cycle. Now, I'm not as good in latin as I think I am, but trying to call a unicycle or tricycle a bicycle could get you killed in some circles.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
  33. Practice, not technology by thomasa · · Score: 1

    I remember many years ago I used to have a 40 LB
    Schwinn bicycle that I used to ride a lot. I put
    toe clips on it but that was all. I used to ride
    with other riders who had 20 to 25 LB bicycles that
    were all Campy and expensive. I could keep up
    with them as I was a stronger rider. It is not all Tech.
    Tech might give you the edge if you are all equal but
    if you do not practice and ride a lot it is not worth it.

  34. Standard Equipment by bsd4me · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I seriously doubt that standard equipment will make it into the UCI rules. Mainly, there are too many variables for proper bike fit. Something minor, like pedal style, can make a big positive or negative impact on a rider. Other things, like leg to torso to arm proportions, make geometry standardization totally unfair.

    --

    (S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))

    1. Re:Standard Equipment by michael_cain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed. Even the casual rider will notice a large difference over the course of several kilometers between two essentially identical bikes, one properly fitted and the other not. The current rules do "standardize" enough -- double triangle geometry, minimum weight -- to avoid the worst of the America's Cup fiascos. The kinds of changes that are being made in wheels and such these days seem to be second- or third-order effects: as another poster pointed out, wind tunnel tests show that one of the largest sources of drag in the current bike/rider configuration is the paper rider identification numbers each rider must wear.

  35. Possible Playlist by john_smith_45678 · · Score: 3, Funny

    If the cyclists are listening to mp3's, maybe their playlists look something like this:

    10. "The Cougar Fight Song": Nothing is quite as stirring as hearing the band break into "Rise and Shout" at the beginning of a sporting event.

    9. "Olé": No, this is not the Ricky Martin World Cup song. It's the chant soccer fans around the world have been singing far longer that consists of just that one word: "Olé, olé, olé, olé... olé, olé."

    8. "SportsCenter Theme": Every true sports fanatic now recognizes the familiar intro to a full hour of the best of the day's sports action. Most of us watch it two or three times a day.

    7. "Chariots of Fire" - Vangelis: This classic theme music has defined track songs for over twenty years. The Olympic team training on the beach idealizes the essences of pushing yourself to the limit.

    6. "The Hey Song": Who can resist the compelling, "duh-dun duh-dun duh-dun duh-dun duh-dun-dun . . . HEY!" during a game? We all know it . . . and we all yell just as loud when it's played.

    5. "Eye of the Tiger" - Survivor: The most compelling sports stories come from the underdogs, the little guys (see March Madness and every sports movie ever made). This song epitomizes fighting against the odds.

    4. "Take Me Out to the Ball Game": Any list on sports songs must include this classic. It conjures up images of lazy afternoons at the ballpark, of the seventh inning stretch, and of preserving the tradition and history of sports.

    3. "You All Ready For This?": Sports action must be on tap whenever you hear this familiar opening music. It gets the blood boiling and the vocal cords limber for the excitement to follow.

    2. "We Are the Champions" - Queen: Athletic competition means winners and losers, and no song better embodies that than this one. In extolling the journey, it honors the effort it takes to get to the top.

    1. "We Will Rock You" - Queen: Stomp, stomp, clap. Stomp, stomp, clap. Everyone steps up to the challenge when the greatest sports song of all time is played. It's played at every level in every sport, making it easily #1.

    Honorable Mention: "Sweet Georgia Brown" (Harlem Globetrotters theme), "Charge!", "Hey, Baby", "Jump Around."

    1. Re:Possible Playlist by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Whatever it is, the songs all had better have the same beat - preferably around 110-120bpm, depending upon where the cyclist feels most comfortable in cadence. My sweet spot is around 105-110 usually.

      I usually don't listen to music on the bike because a) it's REALLY unsafe to road ride without both ears on the road and b) more often than not it's a distraction and c) I can't hear it for the wind whooshing through my ears and d) cops are always giving people riding with headphones a hard time due to the fact that it also happens to be illegal in my state...

      Oh well :)

    2. Re:Possible Playlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you forgot one very important song..

      Work It by Daft Punk..
      no one can resist the temptatious call to exhaust the self!

    3. Re:Possible Playlist by cxvx · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't Kraftwerk's Tour De France Soundtrack be much more appropiate?

      --
      If only I could come up with a good sig ...
    4. Re:Possible Playlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kraftwerk: Tour de France - 70 mins' worth of celebration of the event, its competitors, coverage, technology (there's even a song called 'electro-cardiogram'), and whooshy pedal noises too.

    5. Re:Possible Playlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      0. "Big Balls" - AC/DC. Well it is a classic right? right?

      Uhm.
      Yeah ok, maybe it's slighty unappropriate.

    6. Re:Possible Playlist by 09za+ · · Score: 1

      Kraftwerk: Tour de France
      do you remember...

      Breakin'
      When Turbo was poppin' with the broom!

  36. Come on Armstrong! by bobblebob · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You can do it -make it 6

    1. Re:Come on Armstrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks dude!

  37. I am an expert. by Corf · · Score: 1

    ...I work in distribution for a regional bicycle parts wholesaler in the Southeast. If it was last available on a bike OEM at any point before 1999 or 2000, chances are it hasn't been in production since, and god help you if you go to a shop that hasn't been open as long as your bike is old. Best that a bike wrench can do is substitute something new that may or may not work, and will certainly not look original. Planned obselescence is almost as bad as the hardware/software industries, if not worse. It sucks.

    On the other hand, the new stuff really is as good as the grandparent post suggests, compared to the old stuff. Go ride a bike. It ain't what it was even ten years ago.

    --
    The pain was excruciating and the scarring is likely permanent, but that just means it's working.
    1. Re:I am an expert. by Ricochet · · Score: 1

      I have a Trek 1100 (circa 1992) and a Mongoose TI RX100 (1998). I've upgraded both bikes from 7spd to 8spd to 9 spd. The parts are upward compatible (I could have gone downward too). The bike technology is mostly been replace with much better performing equipment. Today's stuff is great but I won't use top of the line equipment mainly because it's for racing and doesn't survive well on the open roads.

    2. Re:I am an expert. by bfields · · Score: 1
      ...I work in distribution for a regional bicycle parts wholesaler in the Southeast. If it was last available on a bike OEM at any point before 1999 or 2000, chances are it hasn't been in production since, and god help you if you go to a shop that hasn't been open as long as your bike is old. Best that a bike wrench can do is substitute something new that may or may not work, and will certainly not look original. Planned obselescence is almost as bad as the hardware/software industries, if not worse. It sucks.

      Huh. I guess the only bikes I've done this with have been generic old 80's 10-speeds, and I haven't had trouble finding a replacement. Did the higher-end bikes from that era have less standard components?

      On the other hand, the new stuff really is as good as the grandparent post suggests, compared to the old stuff. Go ride a bike. It ain't what it was even ten years ago.

      Yeah, I'm on a 2-year old bike now. Though really for my purposes (getting to work and back), it's not that huge a difference.

      --bruce Fields

    3. Re:I am an expert. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Indexed shifting changed everything when it appeared around 1986 or so.

      With friction shifters, you can use any derailleur you want. With indexed shifters, you have to buy all of a kind. (I think Modolo and Mavic make some shifters that work with Shimano and Campy 6 or 7 or 8 speed drivetrains, but those were the exception, not the rule)

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    4. Re:I am an expert. by bfields · · Score: 1
      Indexed shifting changed everything when it appeared around 1986 or so.

      Oh, right.

      I have an overpowering urge to say index shifting is for wimps and was a big mistake.... But I have to admit when I got my new bike the other year that it really is rather nice.

      Though some changes still seem unnecessary. How many people really get any noticeable benefit from that eigth or ninth sprocket on the rear?

      --Bruce Fields

    5. Re:I am an expert. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I love indexed shifting. I've used both, and I think indexing is just way, way better. I also really like the STI/Ergopower shift-brake levers. OK, they're heavy and complicated, but they are just so darn CONVENIENT. I'm looking forward to retrofitting them on my bike.

      Noticeable benefit? Maybe, maybe not. But it's more or less a zero-cost option, so why not? I mean, you pay more for the 10 speed gear, but 8 or 9 is de rigeur nowadays.

      My current road bike has 6 cogs on a FREEWHEEL, for cryin' out loud! My MTB has 7 on a freehub. I like the freehub lots, lots, lots more.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    6. Re:I am an expert. by bfields · · Score: 1
      I love indexed shifting. I've used both, and I think indexing is just way, way better. I also really like the STI/Ergopower shift-brake levers. OK, they're heavy and complicated, but they are just so darn CONVENIENT.

      Yeah, somehow the times when I want to shift are also the same times when I want to turn, brake, signal, and shout at the guy about to cut me off, all at once.... So it's nice to have all the controls right under my fingers and not have to pay any attention to them.

      Noticeable benefit? Maybe, maybe not. But it's more or less a zero-cost option, so why not? I mean, you pay more for the 10 speed gear, but 8 or 9 is de rigeur nowadays.

      Well, I just worry that we'll all end up paying for it in maintenance costs down the road somewhere.... And it seems a bit more finicky to keep it adjusted right. But so far it hasn't actually required any maintenance beyond basic adjustments.

      --Bruce Fields

    7. Re:I am an expert. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I maintain my own bike, so I don't really care. : )

      The maintenance for an 8 speed system should be no different from a 6. If your shop is charging you by the cog, find a different shop.

      Now, "this year's" cog setup (ten speed this year, maybe 11 next year? Who knows?) the chains are a little more expensive, but as soon as Sachs Huret starts making chains for them the price becomes reasonable.

      I love Sachs chains. Freakin' bulletproof.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    8. Re:I am an expert. by bfields · · Score: 1
      The maintenance for an 8 speed system should be no different from a 6. If your shop is charging you by the cog, find a different shop.

      Based on the start of the thread (about the difficulty of finding parts for a bike from the 80's), I was worrying more about parts availability a few more years down the road. But I haven't had to pay attention to that kind of thing, so maybe it's not bad as other posters suggest.

      I've also been told those integrated brake/shifter things can be a pain to service. I certainly wouldn't have any idea what to do with them if they broke, whereas the shifters on the old 10-speed Peugot looked like something I might have a hope of figuring out....

      --Bruce Fields

    9. Re:I am an expert. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      True enough. I don't know if it's true of the ten speed gear, but the nine speed Shimano derailleurs would (I think) work on seven-speed indexed shifting systems. Campagnolo has a little bit better backwards compatibility. So I think it's less of an issue than some people fear.

      And re: servicing Rapid Fire shifters? Fuhgeddaboutit. I made the mistake of taking one apart once. BAD idea. Too bad they're so darn handy.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  38. Wrong wrong wrong, by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

    Lances has only one thing on it: Cheryl Crow.

    Cuz that is who is warming the bed after the race.

    --
    Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    1. Re:Wrong wrong wrong, by john_smith_45678 · · Score: 1

      That might not be such a good idea:

      http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/sherylcrow/crashand burn.html

      But I guess we know who's strong enough to be her man.
      http://www.lyricsdepot.com/sheryl_crow/strong-enou gh.html

  39. Re:Hah? by FelixCat · · Score: 1

    is just trying to make up for something missing in their pants

    Is this a reference to his testicular cancer?

  40. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers -- easy fix by woodsrunner · · Score: 1

    Taping them down with clear packing tape works great and as far as I know is legal. Time trialist have been doing this since the seventies.. just like eliptical chainrings, it will come back, again..

  41. Or, if you work in the inner city.... by Corf · · Score: 1

    ...I've heard it called "bottom bricket," "bottom basket," "gearbox," and any number of other things. Every time one of these paragons of proper English pronouncia- err, customers left the store, everyone in the repair department would bust out laughing for a good long time.
    "My gearbox is broke." "My gears is stripped." ahh, I miss DC.

    --
    The pain was excruciating and the scarring is likely permanent, but that just means it's working.
    1. Re:Or, if you work in the inner city.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So these people give you money because you have knowledge they don't, and then you laugh at them? If they knew about bikes they wouldn't be paying you.

    2. Re:Or, if you work in the inner city.... by Corf · · Score: 1
      --
      The pain was excruciating and the scarring is likely permanent, but that just means it's working.
  42. Trek 5200 by GPLDAN · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I recently biught a Trek 5200. I could have easily gone with a Trek 2300 or smaller, because I am no power rider. I ride about 10-20 miles in the morning. Every other day. That's it. Many of you could destroy probably cream me on a $99 Huffy.

    But the bike is a joy to ride. I owned a crappy Schwinn most of my road bike riding days and so I splurged a bit and got some Sidi shoes and this bike. I enjoy riding it, esp. going up hills.

    Maybe I overspent, but I enjoy the bike. The OLCV Carbon is damn light. And if I enjoy riding, I'll ride more. I had my fill of heavy steel bikes, this really is a whole different league. I've read a few responses that mock people for spending too much on the bike. Most of those people have a iPod and a $500 video card just to play counterstrike.

    1. Re:Trek 5200 by MooseByte · · Score: 1

      "Many of you could destroy probably cream me on a $99 Huffy. But the bike is a joy to ride."

      Hey, you could afford it, you appreciate and enjoy it, and you realize it was a splurge. More power to ya! May it lure you into longer and more frequent rides.

      And if you ever want to sell, please look me up. :-)

    2. Re:Trek 5200 by anti-NAT · · Score: 1

      Two further ways of justifying your purchase.

      (1) Aluminium suffers from "sag" in the sense that aluminium has no natural "spring" in it, unlike steel. An aluminium frame, during use, is always slowly warping out of shape. Steel doesn't have that problem, obviously it is a lot heavier though. Carbon fibre doesn't have that problem, although, as you know, it is quite a lot more expenseive.

      Because of this, one of the cycling books I've got (The Lance Armstrong Training Guide or something like that), says that an aluminium frame will only last 5 years, where as a carbon fibre frame will last 10. Obviously it depends on use, admittedly I'm not sure if that time frame involves a Lance Armstrong training schedule.

      So, if your 5200 didn't cost twice as much as a 2300, there are economic reasons to get carbon fibre.

      and

      (2) An expensive bike is far cheaper to get than an expensive car - your whole bike probably cost the equivalent of just a replacement door for a middle of the line BMW or Mercedes Benz. Of course, a door of a car isn't much use without the rest of the car.

      Now, if only I could find the money to buy a 5200 (or a 2300 at the moment, I wouldn't care that much).

      --
      The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
  43. some good posts by BlackShirt · · Score: 1

    If the cyclists are listening to mp3's, maybe their playlists look something like this

    johnsmith

    I've got a 3 year old $400(CDN) Peugeot mountain bike I bought just for casual riding at the time. This year I've gotten quite a bit more serious and have taken part in a number of cross-country relay races. Up until about a month ago, I was constantly looking at the 'other guys' $4000+ machines and trying to plan how and when I would upgrade.

    geckox

    1. Re:some good posts by 09za+ · · Score: 1

      some day you're skill might exceed the abilities of the machine.
      Then you will need to buy something you won't break. I never wanted to spend 5000 buks on a DH bike, but always having a broken $2000 bike was even more painful. Wait to buy one until you can't stand riding what you have.

  44. Re:Bio tech too! -- and good drugs!!! by f.money · · Score: 5, Informative

    Must...control...fist...of...death! OH my god, you're an idiot.

    Considering that the main drug of choice for cyclists (EPO) still has no reliable test that can't be beat by a quick I.V. to water down the blood supply.
    Nope, they do have a test for EPO now; granted you can still get beneficial effects and test clean, but a "quick IV" won't beat it. They also test hematocrit levels - if they're too high, you're suspended (this is actually not a positive test, since no drugs are detected, but you can't race for "health reasons"). This goes to the heart of how EPO helps performance.

    Instead he went from being a sprinter who was a middle of the road time trialist and basically poor climber into a virtuoso. I don't buy it for a minute.
    Is this why he was Junior National Time Trial champion? Is this why he road away from the field at World's (1993, and also as a junior (he didn't win as a junior, but he put the hurt on people)). Lance was never a sprinter - he was much more of a rolleur until he was able to reshape his body after chemotherapy (by losing the upper body mass from his triathalon days). THEN he became a good climber.

    Check out the book LA Confidential:
    Which is the subject of multiple lawsuits by Lance against the author. Also, Walsh (the author) even admits he doesn't prove anything. He merely "implies" that Lance used drugs; I'm guessing Walsh's defence in court will be along these lines.

    People like you make me angry. Lance has been the most tested athlete over the last few years and has NEVER tested positive. The French judiciary had a mutli YEAR investigation into his alleged drug taking - the case was thrown out when they couldn't uncover ANY evidence that he had used performance enhancing substances. That investigation even subpeonaed his medical records, btw, so they had full access to all available information.

    Go away.

    jon

  45. Technology taken down by sloth! by ajrs · · Score: 1

    why not get the numbers printed on cloth and sew them on? or air brush with a template? or iron on? or fabric markers? or those big fancy embrodary machnies? Or get 1000 shirts with numbers made and pick the right one. no way indeed.

    1. Re:Technology taken down by sloth! by ianturton · · Score: 1
      why not get the numbers printed on cloth and sew them on? or air brush with a template? or iron on? or fabric markers? or those big fancy embrodary machnies? Or get 1000 shirts with numbers made and pick the right one. no way indeed.

      Because when a rider retires they have to hand the numbers into the race officials. This prevents them riding in the car and then rejoining the peleton while no ones watching.

      Ian

  46. Dimishing returns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Going from a 20 yr old beater to a new $800 road bike is a huge change. Going from the $800 bike to a $2600 bike is not as great.

    Think Pinto -> Camry -> Lexus

  47. Re:Bio tech too! -- and good drugs!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish I hadn't just used up my mod points. Thank you for talking sense.

  48. Re:You're living in the past by pellaeon · · Score: 1

    I heard his collarbone wasn't broken, only had a hairline fracture or something. Having had a broken collarbone myself, I think I can safely say that you can't ride a bike that way (not unless you're drugged into insensibility, anyway).

    --
    -- /bin/coffee missing. universe halted.
  49. rampant doping by SuperBanana · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Look at Lance's amazing biochemistry!

    One does wonder what other sorts of biochemistry are going on with riders(I've always thought it was kind of ironic that Lance was sponsored by a major pharmaceutical, and yes, I am deeply suspicious that Lance's chemo and related drugs somehow altered his body to make him much stronger; I don't think he would be stupid enough to be doping himself), seeing as how doping is rampant in virtually all other sports- and the message to little kids has been nothing of zero tolerance but instead "I'm a good guy, I couldn't have been doing drugs, even though my trainer was caught twice before doping his runners and I failed a drug test" etc etc.

    Then there's the baseball players, who were TOLD AHEAD OF TIME they'd be tested. When they were tested- ONE QUARTER of them failed! Unbelievable! That's like telling everyone the answer to a one question quiz, and then having 25% fail!

    I forget which bike race it was, but police did a raid on the rider's barracks one night, and it was like a scene from animal house- they had riders leaping out of windows in their underwear, hiding in the bushes, running off, etc. They found dozens upon dozens of drug vials, needles, pills, you name it. It was absolutely pathetic.

    1. Re:rampant doping by djtripp · · Score: 1
      --
      "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
    2. Re:rampant doping by superdan2k · · Score: 1

      I am deeply suspicious that Lance's chemo and related drugs somehow altered his body to make him much stronger

      You do understand that chemo is effective and has all the nasty side-effects, because it's POISONOUS, right? I'm sorry but chemo/recovery drugs are not going to do anything helpful for the biochemistry of a bike racer.

      The incident you refer to is from 1998 (a year before Armstrong returned), which was a horrible year and was the incident that sparked the crackdown on doping in cycling. The fact of the matter is, Armstrong is the most tested athlete in the history of sports and unlike baseball players, he gets NO advanced warning that there's going to be a test. If Lance were doping, he'd have been caught by now.

      --
      blog |
    3. Re:rampant doping by quantaman · · Score: 1


      The incident you refer to is from 1998 (a year before Armstrong returned), which was a horrible year and was the incident that sparked the crackdown on doping in cycling. The fact of the matter is, Armstrong is the most tested athlete in the history of sports and unlike baseball players, he gets NO advanced warning that there's going to be a test. If Lance were doping, he'd have been caught by now.


      While I know enough about Lance (or any pro athlete) to know if he's doping, I do know cycling is known for getting the fancy drugs first, before they can develop tests. If the dope can't be detected it doesn't matter how many tests you take, you're going to come back clean.

      As to your previous comment,

      You do understand that chemo is effective and has all the nasty side-effects, because it's POISONOUS, right? I'm sorry but chemo/recovery drugs are not going to do anything helpful for the biochemistry of a bike racer.

      Although that is true, ironically if Lance didn't get cancer he wouldn't be nearly as successful a rider (he was good but not of the level to compete for a tour win if I recall). Before he got cancer he had a fairly well built upper body (probably not anything exceptional but more than is common for a pro rider), upper body mass is not much of a benefit in cycling, especially on the hills. When he got cancer he lost a ton of body mass, both upper and lower, when he recovered he was able to rebuild the lower body but leave the upper body thin, this gave him the edge he needed to start dominating the tour (which is heavily biased to hill climbers) that and the immense amount of work to build the leg muscles back again of course.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    4. Re:rampant doping by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      I am deeply suspicious that Lance's chemo and related drugs somehow altered his body to make him much stronger;


      Why would you even suggest this as a possibility? Do you have any evidence whatsoever to suggest this is even possible, or is this just pure and utter bullshit speculation on your part?

      --
      AccountKiller
    5. Re:rampant doping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to forget that Tour organizers have, ever since 1999, set investigators on all teams who participate. iow, from the time they enter the country through the entire race, everything is checked, from baggage to buses to trash.

      A lot of this viewers don't hear about; there is more beyond rigid drug test failngs. Suspicion is enough to be asked publicly to leave; in this tour, 2 cyclists were asked to leave this past weekend on suspicion due to association--no drug test, nothing, just circumstantial evidence. Most of the tour people that abuse during the event are detected.

      Fact is, you cannot take drugs during the tour. You'll be nailed; there are already a handful of riders who were thrown out, at least one for EPO, another for a heroin derivative. 2 more were asked to leave due to non-drug test suspicions. Maybe you can abuse during training, but then we are really getting into a guessing game and outside the bounds of regulating the event itself.

    6. Re:rampant doping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The police raid you are speaking of was during the 1999 Tour de France. There was one team in particular that was just utterly abusing outright (needles in the trash, drugs in the team van, etc.). This incident was the cause of the cancellation of the Tour for that year, revised drug rules, harder tests, lower barriers to be asked or required to leave, as well as police escorts into all the teams.

      You can rightly say that you can be suspicious of any sporting event. You can be a cynic or a believer. But if you are going to point and compare, there is ONE sport that wants to kill the abuse of performance enhancers, and it's cycling and in particular the Tour. Not the Olympics. Not professional sport leagues in the US. Not international soccer. Bicycling.

      As to Lance's story, his cancer had spread. He underwent several surgeries, I believe two in his brain (and I think one in his abdomen but I'm not sure about that one). No surgery is minor, but this wasn't a standard testicular tumor that was found through early detection. His was quite advanced and he has circular scars to show it.

    7. Re:rampant doping by mtfbwy · · Score: 1

      >

      Boy, are you a moron.

    8. Re:rampant doping by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      I can't believe people still believe Armstrong hasn't been doping.
      Going to the moon on a bicycle ? come on.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    9. Re:rampant doping by perly-king-69 · · Score: 1

      The fact of the matter is, Armstrong is the most tested athlete in the history of sports and unlike baseball players, he gets NO advanced warning that there's going to be a test. If Lance were doping, he'd have been caught by now.

      Heard of masking agents?

      Two days before Le Tour started, the British rider David Millar admitted to using EPO. This guy is one of the leading Time Trialists in the peloton and has won many races and was a favourite to win the prologue. He never, ever tested positive for drugs though.

      There is a disconnect between the testing and what is being tested for. If Lance were doping, he probably wouldn't have been caught by now.

      --

      --
      This sig is inoffensive.

    10. Re:rampant doping by superdan2k · · Score: 1

      Masking agents work great for anabolics -- steroids -- but not for things like EPO. Interestingly enough, even though there is a test for EPO, having a hematocrit over 50 will still result in a disqualification and suspension.

      --
      blog |
    11. Re:rampant doping by perly-king-69 · · Score: 1
      Agreed, haemocrit over 50 usually results in disqualification. Some riders do have unusually high levels and training at altitude can also have a similar effect although 50% is still a very high figure.

      However this doesn't answer the Millar case. Cyclists like him are regularly taking drugs and are not being detected, despite being regularly tested. Most riders caught are found in posession of needles or drugs or have been informed upon. If Gaumond hadn't have blown the whistle on Cofidis, Millar could have won the prologue, maybe have worn yellow for a couple of days and passed every test.

      --

      --
      This sig is inoffensive.

  50. Bring back BIO-PACE Chainrings! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Need I say more?

    1. Re:Bring back BIO-PACE Chainrings! by NetNinja · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bio-Pace failed because a large number of riders developed knee problems.

    2. Re:Bring back BIO-PACE Chainrings! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm think about that every time I have to kneel, stoop or drive a manual trans actually..

    3. Re:Bring back BIO-PACE Chainrings! by wk633 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bio-pace was a huge success. It helped Shimano kill Suntour. That and the Kobe earthquake.

      Bio-pace sucked, but it was marketing genius. Everyone had to have it on their bike. Kinda like IE...

    4. Re:Bring back BIO-PACE Chainrings! by RedShoeRider · · Score: 1
      For those of you who don't understand the comment, it's actually funny to the riders on here.

      BioPace is referring to a specific type of chainring (the front 2 or 3 gears on the bicycle) that was popularized by Shimano back in the late 80's/early 90's.

      The concept was pretty simple: use egg-shaped gears. The idea behind it was to minimize the amount of time that your legs spend at the "dead spots" in the pedal stroke, namely when you foot is at the very top of the stroke and the very bottom. So the "egg" had its points at 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock, whith the longest sections being in the middle.

      Shimano didn't invent this idea, it's been kicking around in various forms for 50+ years. And it always fails for the same reason: it does not work. The resulting pedal stroke is choppy, wasting energy, and (over time) people had a habit of developing knee and hip problems because of the unevenness. Interesingly, they only put these BioPace rings on the lower-end component sets; their top-of-the-line stuff kept with the regular round chainrings.

      BioPace is oft used as a punchline to a bad-equipment joke (much as we use M$ as a punchline for bad software engineering).

      --

      Chris Knight is my hero.

    5. Re:Bring back BIO-PACE Chainrings! by haruchai · · Score: 1

      I remember when Bio-Pace was big news. I think it turned out that it worked well for sprinters but that it didn't make any difference ( or may have hindered performance ) for the long-distance riders.

      I'm not surprised that it may have caused physical problems for athletes. We're not machines and attempts to squeeze out "inefficiencies" never seems to work.

      For many years, swimming coaches tried - and sometimes succeeded - to break the "S" curve from
      the stroke of some freestyle swimmers. But, a number of athletes who stuck with it kept winning races.
      It was later discovered that the stroke - where the hand moves inward towards the upper chest before sweeping outward at the abdomen - was more efficient that pulling straight back from the entry point because of the flow of water around the body.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
  51. Or maybe he just has (metaphorical) balls... by MooseByte · · Score: 5, Informative

    "As a close follower of cycling, I have always doubted his cancer story and just assumed he made it up to cover his tracks and maybe make some publicity for one of his suppliers."

    I now crown you Supreme Grand Poobah of the Tinfoil Hat Society. And that says a lot given what we read on Slashdot.

    Dude, you're assuming the guy FAKED cancer? Because he recovered better/faster than you did? And you don't like it?

    "I had similar surgery to Lance (had my left testicle removed)and there was no way I was getting back on a bike for over 9 months."

    Well thank you for setting the limit of the human experience for us. Really, it's comforting to know you're the pinnacle of human endurance, pain tolerance and tissue healing.

    I had similar surgery (hours of slicing and dicing, lots of fun recovering, I assure you) and was back on my bike in 7 WEEKS. And none of my riding friends were pointing at me and saying I must have faked it. I ride a lot, not huge amounts, but 100-125 miles/week typically. My body was used to it. And that's a mere pittance compared to any Tour rider's training schedule.

    By your reasoning I must have faked my surgery. Or maybe there are people in this world who just deal with it. Hamilton rode most of the 2003 Tour with freakin' broken collarbone. He must've been faking it too.

    "Instead he went from being a sprinter who was a middle of the road time trialist and basically poor climber into a virtuoso. I don't buy it for a minute."

    I see. Or maybe it was because he:

    Was already a damn good racer before.

    Dropped a few dozen pounds during cancer treatment and kept it off (this greatly affects climbing efficiency - 10 lbs of extra mass is a LOT of weight to drag over several mountain passes each day)

    Modified his training to use higher cadences (== less time above lactic threshold) to greatly improve his climbing efficiency.

    The pain of cancer treatment recalibrated his sense of pain, suffering and misery.

    Started actually scouting and RIDING key upcoming Tour stages during training.

    Damn sad day when those who've never come close to attaining feel compelled to snipe at those who do.

    1. Re:Or maybe he just has (metaphorical) balls... by djtripp · · Score: 1

      Thank you Moose, I couldn't say more, so I won't.

      --
      "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
    2. Re:Or maybe he just has (metaphorical) balls... by MooseByte · · Score: 1

      Likewise to you. Glad I wasn't the only one to step forward.

      On to the Pyrenees! Tyler's got to have something big planned for Stage 13 - nobody sets up a nationwide charity broadcast of a stage without planning to rip things apart. :-)

    3. Re:Or maybe he just has (metaphorical) balls... by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

      The pain of cancer treatment recalibrated his sense of pain, suffering and misery.

      That was one of my first thoughts when I read the story. Mental toughness is one of the most important aspects of cycling. ESPECIALLY in a race like Tour de France.

    4. Re:Or maybe he just has (metaphorical) balls... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In some previous post I can't seem to find, someone wrote:
      "I had similar surgery to Lance (had my left testicle removed)and there was no way I was getting back on a bike for over 9 months."

      If done properly it shouldn't take long, as they go in from above (bikini line level as the doctor said) and hook the offending article out. This is to avoid contamination of the leg's lymphatic system. The abnominal lymph is already connected, and in most cases of further spread thats the way it goes. (Some are unlucky and get the original tumour on a blood vessel, which makes a really efficient way of getting it around the body without this slow lymph system )-:

      It doesn't take long to recover from the surgery alone. I had one removed and a sample biopsy taken of the other, and the biopsy took longer to heal. That said, I was (perhaps foolishly) cycling to the hospital for sperm banking before chemotherapy, must be within a couple of months of the surgery, with no problems at all.

      Different people recover at different rates. I was never super-fit, and perhaps too much chocolate post chemo means I'm still heavier than I was before, but I did a 100 mile charity ride within 12 months of finishing treatment. I had 4 cycles BEP (standard), 4 cycles TIP (new version of what Lance had) and radiotherapy to the remaining testis which that biopsy had shown to be starting to develop cancer.

      I admit the charity ride was a little over the top, and I perhaps suffered a little for it for a while. I've met some people who had just the basic BEP treatment and even after two years have just not tried to recover, are just starting back at work, and are still feeling ill.

      I think recovery does depend on the person. Someone who wants to get better and get back to fitness quickly can do it (as long as they don't overdo it too quickly, and Lance would have known experts in that field). Lance had 3 years to recover. I've only had 2 so far. I'd have no hope against Lance in a race, but perhaps if I'd have kept on training ...

  52. big difference between $300 and $500 though by wsanders · · Score: 1

    I got sneered at when I actually insisted on weighing the mtn bikes I was shopping for. I carried my own scale in and eventually found a sub-$400 28-lb bike that's held up pretty well. I think the big price/quality breaks happen at about $500 and about $1500 - for $500 you get lightweight alloy wheels which are far stronger and lighter than the cheapo ones, for example. My mtn bike does not have a suspension - cheapo mtn bike suspensions can add several pounds.

    My road bike is a cheapo 20-yr old Fuji and weighs about 24 lb.

    I'll start worrying about shaving ounces off when I get my body fat down into the single digits. Like THAT's gonna happen anytime soon....

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  53. How about Lance's frame! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's amazing is that Lance's frame came from a bike shop instead of being custom built. I can walk into my local Trek retailler tomorrow and buy the same frame Lance uses for only ~$3K. I guess U.S Postal Service had a budget cut back and made him go to a bike shop and pick out his bike.

    1. Re:How about Lance's frame! by wk633 · · Score: 1

      I used to race an old steel frame with downtube friction 7-speed. Everyone else was on Titanium/Carbon/Aluminum STI shifters, min 3K outlay. Give me my terrain (a short steep hill finish) and I'd still cream them.

      The technology is great, and makes a difference, sure, but it's the engine that counts most. Any tour rider will cream any of us, no matter what kind of bike we're each riding (within reason, I can beat Lance if he's on a tricycle...)

    2. Re:How about Lance's frame! by davidmcn · · Score: 1

      Actually, Lance most likely use's 4 different frames. 1 made specifically for the individual time trials, 2 for normal stage riding (most likely the one you can pick up at the local bike shop) and one built specifically for the mountain stages. This is according to OLN's pre-race coverage that aired on 7/11.

      --
      Memories become legend, Legend fades to myth, and even myth is forgotten by the time that age comes again.-Robert Jordan
  54. This gets posted every year by NetNinja · · Score: 1

    Yes we know the ammount of technology increases every year.

    Just like computers get faster every year.

    I used to be a semi serious rider until they figured out how to increase the price of bicycles from entry level of $400.00 to $1100.00 and add on equipment that is way out of the stratosphere in terms of price.

    You need a full fledge sponsorship in order to participate and enjoy the sport.

  55. Re:Bio tech too! -- and good drugs!!! by djtripp · · Score: 1

    Did you actually read the book, or did you just hear about it.
    If you are a reader, i would reccomend It's Not About the Bike.
    True, some people with that cancer die, people with worse cancer live, and all people without cancer die eventually.
    To quote Lance, "This is my body. And I can do whatever I want to it. I can push it. Study it. Tweak it. Listen to it. Everybody wants to know what I'm on. What am I on? I'm on my bike busting my ass six hours a day. What are you on?"

    --
    "This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
  56. Don't know about 70mph stock, but not impossible? by MooseByte · · Score: 1

    "you would have to have gone down one of the longest steepest hills ever, or you've got one hell of a ring set."

    FWIW, I've hit 57+mph (verified by my support vehicle - the navigator said I actually broke 60mph) and while it was my personal fastest, it's not something that raises eyebrows in racing circles. This was a stock off-the-shelf racing bike, down a steep mountainside on a good smooth highway.

    Had it not been 2am I'd have even gone faster, but I was already taking a risk given the poor lighting involved. No pedalling, just a good tight tuck and racing tires at 120psi.

    So 70 mph may not be entirely out of the ballpark.

    And yes, it was FREAKIN' FUN! *8-)

  57. Lance uses iPod too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, Lance Armstrong is an iPod user.

    1. Re:Lance uses iPod too! by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      If I had several multi-million dollar advertising contracts, I'd drop $400 on a digital player, too.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  58. Reminds me of a guy by Gregoyle · · Score: 1

    Who rode around the University of New Hampshire campus on a unicycle all the time.

    He wore a t-shirt that said, "Unicycling is not a crime."

    That guy was awesome.

    --

    "He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."

  59. Re:Bio tech too! -- and good drugs!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    superb book! I had the same cancer and the same treatment and i cycle. Anyone who says Lance faked it or took drugs to improve his performance knows jack shit and should go through the same treatment just to see how they would fare. The man is without a doubt the best cyclist the world has ever seen, and all drug free.

  60. Re:You're living in the past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have broken my collar bone and was on my bike the next day. It didn't start hurting enough to keep me off the bike for a week until the swelling got really bad. I presume Tyler had MUCH more medical traetment than I and they were able to keep the swelling down.

    Tyler is tough as nails, but not super human. What he did was totally believable and possible.

  61. Heavy Thump by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Those Oakley Thump MP3 sunglasses are pretty sleek, though I'd prefer a different color/pattern for my own dome. Where can I get the lenses upgraded to stereo VGA? And a 216Mbps wireless PAN? I'll carry the batteries in a trailer behind the bike.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  62. It's still about the riders by steveha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The technology is neat, but the technology can't actually win the race. It's still about the riders.

    Lance has a cool bike, but all the Tour de France riders have good bikes. There is a limit to how much benefit you can get with a better bike, and all the tour guys have bikes that are close to this limit.

    The slowest of the Tour riders, on a bad day, could ride me into the ground on a 20-year-old piece-of-junk bike, even if I were on my good bike. Sure I could climb Alpe d'Huez, but it would take me at least a couple of hours, and the Tour guys race up it in 40 minutes or so, as just part of a 5 or 6 hour day of racing!

    The most important tech to Lance is the tech he uses in training. He trains and trains. They measure his power output in Watts, how many Calories he burns, how much wind drag he has on his time trial bike. It's his training that will win the race, his training and good tactics (both his and his team director, Johan Bruyneel).

    P.S. The Tour rules have a lower limit on how much a bike can weigh. I think this is a good idea. There is a point at which "light" becomes "stupid light"; where the too-light components aren't strong enough and things start to break. The minimum weight will keep the bikes from getting into a stupid-light arms race.

    The Tour rules also now require helmets, and the helmets have to actually be able to protect the riders' heads. Last year riders wore lightweight helmets for the time trial stages, and the lightweight helmets were basically just streamlined shells that wouldn't protect them at all in a crash. This year even the time trial helmets are required to meet crash safety standards. I'm in favor of the idea.

    steveha

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    1. Re:It's still about the riders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The technology is neat, but the technology can't actually win the race. It's still about the riders.

      This point is well taken, but to be perfectly accurate technology literally has won this race in the not too distant past. In 1989 Greg Lemond debuted aerodynamic "clip-on" bars in Tour de France time trials. On the final individual time trial stage into Paris, Lemond overcame Laurent Fignon by a mere 8 seconds to win the race. Had Fignon not stubbornly refused to use the new aero-bars he surely would have finished at least 8 seconds faster than he did. Needless to say, these aerodynamic bars have been standard equipment ever since.

      To be sure, Lemond rode an extremely fast time, clocking what is still the fastest average speed for an ITT stage in the TdF. So it still is mostly "about the rider", but when it comes down to a small differences -- and many small differences add up over three weeks of racing -- anything that results in a few extra watts of output, a few less calories consumed, etc., may make all the difference in the world.

    2. Re:It's still about the riders by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Ahhh but like most rules, there are easy ways around them. I don't know if you saw the little snippet on OLN about bike technology, but they showed a closeup of one of the team bikes from, CSC I believe, and it had little brass weights glued to the frame - just to make it heavy enough to ride. None of the component durability issues are addressed... the bike was still stupid-light, but they got around the rules...

      At the Wachovia USPro, I saw a vendor that had an ELEVEN pound bike. Everything was carbon right down to the rims. THAT is stupid light, and I wouldn't DARE ride it. Imagine having to strap a beowulf cluster of 100g weights to that thing to get it up to weight :)

    3. Re:It's still about the riders by steveha · · Score: 1

      technology literally has won this race in the not too distant past.

      Well, the point I was trying to make is that the bike didn't ride itself, Greg LeMond had to do his part too.

      The point you are making is that technology can give a rider an edge, and that edge could make the difference between a win and a lose. I'd have to agree that, without the aero bars, Greg LeMond couldn't have pulled out that win.

      But all the tech can do is give you an edge. There is no hardware that can assure a win.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    4. Re:It's still about the riders by KjetilK · · Score: 1
      While this is true even Lance Armstrong would probably be completely parked on a bad bike.

      OK, I don't know much about bicycling, but I know for sure that this is the case in cross-country skiing, which is also a extreme endurance sport. Nations that throw extreme amounts of money on equipment and support teams will beat a just as good athlete without the support team any day. Norway have research groups where Ph.D.s are awarded for research into friction of snow against skis. Top skiers have like 50 different pairs, where each is given special preparation towards a race. Those athletes that go along with like 10 pairs doesn't stand much of a chance.

      Funnily, you'd think that alpine skiing would have as much to gain from this research too, but they are actually lagging far behind.

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
    5. Re:It's still about the riders by steveha · · Score: 1

      even Lance Armstrong would probably be completely parked on a bad bike.

      Yes, if the equipment is bad enough, it can be enough of a disadvantage to drag down even Lance.

      My point is that all the riders have decent bikes, and the difference the bike makes isn't incredibly huge.

      Lance is doing most of his riding on a bike you could own. Trek will sell you the same bike Lance uses for around $7000. If you get a Trek 5200, you will have a bike almost as nice for well under $3000.

      Lance grabs every legal advantage he can. But you could probably put him on a Trek 5200 and he would still win the Tour. Put him on a 40 pound mountain bike and yes, he would lose, but that wasn't my point.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  63. Still the matter of the handlebars, though by Noose+For+A+Neck · · Score: 1

    I ride a Trek mountain bike with touring tires and straight bars and find my hands going numb during and after long rides - it just isn't easy to use that many different positions with your hands on straight bars.

    --

    Software piracy is victimless theft.

    1. Re:Still the matter of the handlebars, though by Moofie · · Score: 1

      That's why I have a pair of full-finger gloves and some nice long bar-ends. I can move my hands around a lot, and get the efficiency of high pressure narrow tires.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  64. Don't forget the coverage tech by Guernica+Bill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm actually most impressed by the technology involved in the television coverage. First, you've got about about 20 cameras on bicycles, showing images at race level (almost what the cyclists see themselves). They send the pictures to helicopters overhead, which in turn send the images to satellites. Let's also not forget the cameras on the helicopters themselves, and the beautiful display of flying and camera ability that brings gorgeous and rock-steady shots of 170 bicyclists zipping through fields of sunflowers.

    Add to that GPS transmitters on every bike, which brings instant results at the end of the race to the 100th of a second, and (this year on OLN) up-to-the-second time gaps among the groups on the road (this'll really shine when they hit the mountains).

    All this, plus entertaining commentary, live worldwide.

    1. Re:Don't forget the coverage tech by Guernica+Bill · · Score: 1

      Oops, meant cameras on "motorcycles," not "bicycles." Brain-finger interface not functional.

    2. Re:Don't forget the coverage tech by F1_Fan · · Score: 1
      Add to that GPS transmitters on every bike, which brings instant results at the end of the race to the 100th of a second, and (this year on OLN) up-to-the-second time gaps among the groups on the road (this'll really shine when they hit the mountains).
      http://www.amb-it.com/

      They aren't GPS transmitters. They're transponder that are closer to RFID tags than GPS.

      IMO, they're stupidly mounted on the chainstay. Have you noticed the number of intermediate sprints that are reported wrong and need to be corrected? I suspect it's situations where one rider's ft. wheel crosses the line and then he sits up. Mr. 2nd Place's transponder unit then crosses the sensor first.
    3. Re:Don't forget the coverage tech by F1_Fan · · Score: 1

      Ah... I see the OP's comment about time gaps... I suspect *those* GPS units are mounted on the motos that stick with each group.

    4. Re:Don't forget the coverage tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are mounted a set distance from the front of t he bike, so they should always give the correct timing.

      They arn't really intended for the sprint results though, only to get the correct timegaps between groups of riders.

    5. Re:Don't forget the coverage tech by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
      I'm right with you there.

      I've just returned from France where in the daytime you get something like 3 hours coverage every day.

      The camera work is really excellent. Whoever produces it has a real eye for the beauty of the french countryside.

  65. GO POSTAL !!!! by joel_archer · · Score: 2, Interesting
  66. Re:Wind tunnels & race numbers -- easy fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some back to haunt you. Funny how a technology called Bio-Pace now holds a negative connotation with bobbing bikes.

  67. How to beat a drug test by woodsrunner · · Score: 1, Troll

    Sorry, but the lawsuits against LA Confidential are being thrown out of court.
    Not that that proves anything either, but if you actually read the link, there is an exerpt from the book that details Lance's not passing a UCI drug test until the lawyers stepped in.

    Cyclists don't test positive mostly because they do their steroids in the off season and they know how to cheat, or they have lawyers who do. Lance's long term relationship with Ferrari shows he has the ways and means to cheat.

    And yes you can beat the EPO test with an IV. Here is an exerpt from a website appropriately called:

    http://www.how-to-pass-a-drug-test.net/2004/drug-d etection-time-urine.htm

    since you don't like to check out links, here is the meat of it:
    Another team, Kelme of Spain, already has been prohibited from this year's Tour because of the charges leveled by Manzano, one of its former riders. In a five-part series in the Spanish newspaper AS (for which he was paid), Manzano described how team doctors pressured him to take banned drugs; how he collapsed and nearly died during last year's Tour after taking an unknown substance; and how it's like "an open bar" for cyclists to receive growth hormones and EPO.
    Kelme officials and the Spanish cycling federation have denied Manzano's claims, much as Cofidis officials have with Gaumont's accusations.
    Manzano even detailed how riders evade detection on the blood test that measures hematocrit levels, the proportion of blood consisting of red blood cells. When testing officials show up, Manzano said, team doctors first send down riders with low levels. That gives the other riders time to dilute their blood -- with blood plasma or saline solution, for example -- and lower their hematocrit level.
    These blood tests are more common than the EPO test (which requires a urine sample) because they cost less. They can indicate high suspicion, though not absolute proof, of doping.
    Most talk of drug use in cycling centers on EPO, because of the way it helps on those taxing rides up the mountain. EPO is a hormone produced naturally by the kidneys, but its recombinant form can increase the number of oxygen-carrying red blood cells and therefore boost endurance.
    Still, even the EPO test has loopholes: It can reach back and detect the drug for only three or four days, according to Olivier Rabin, science director at the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). But an athlete could reap benefits for as long as two weeks, Rabin and other experts said.
    There is thus a lengthy period when users enjoy athletic advantage without risking detection. Rabin suspects some cyclists take a high dose of EPO and stop at least three days before the race begins, a strategy mirrored in other sports and a prime illustration of how the cheaters stay one step ahead of the testers.
    Cycling union officials acknowledged the need to increase unannounced tests in the weeks preceding a major race. Most testing now occurs during the events; at the Tour de France, for instance, the stage winner, three leaders and three or four randomly chosen riders are tested each day.
    Doping experts such as University of Texas professor John Hoberman still criticize the cycling union for being more interested in public relations than the athletes' health.

    sorry I am not as much of a Lance fan as you apparantly are and I am not as sure as you are that the French courts received all of his records. There is just too much money involved and the people involved are professional cheaters who are cheating an institution that condones cheating. If it hadn't been for that little mishap with the customs agents, no one would be aware of the level of doping that goes on in races like the tour. Even a cynic like myself was shocked to learn they were shooting heroin, coke a and steroids!

    That said, I think the doping part is cool. Those guys are insanely dedicated to what they do. I hate getting shots at the the doctors. Injecting myself with greasy

    1. Re:How to beat a drug test by salesgeek · · Score: 1

      Let's assume for a minute that cycling doesn't have the 50 year history of doing everything within and outside the rules for maximum performance. Lance is a champion. Let's say that today's peloton is dirty. And so is Lance. He's still a champion.

      After one or two more tour victories, no ammount of French press will be able to deny the obvious - Lance is the greatest of our time. Is he as great as Anqtiel and Merckx? Possibly - but because Armstrong does not ride the rest of the professional circuit, we can never really make that measure.

      --
      -- $G
    2. Re:How to beat a drug test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your own link even states there is no way to beat an EPO test. The dilution they are talking about is dealing with a cheaper, earlier test that, if you fail, causes the EPO (a urine) test.

      A hemotocrit test, yes, but even that has some procedural changes that were changed such as checking density per cell, something that cannot be simply diluted. Volume will not change levels on a cell by cell basis.

      The tour does both random tests as well as select tests of those doing well top of the field. You don't "send down" your non-abusing cyclists. It's not your choice or the team's. When you are done with the race, you get shepherded to an RV and you piss in a cup or get blood drawn openly.

      The one time Armstrong did not pass a test was because he had an extremely low level of cortisol in his blood, negligible if you will. They let it go because he had a rash and was taking a skin ointment (or so he and they said). That, in my mind, is understandable because drugs can be absorbed through the skin regularly.

      If he was masking, he wouldn't have allowed even this slipup.

    3. Re:How to beat a drug test by Rower · · Score: 1

      While I wonder if Lance is clean or not, I have read that his heart is naturally larger than normal (cant remember how much but it makes a difference) also that his muscles generate only 25% as much lactic acid as normal in anerobic work.
      Outside magazine has had several articles on his training. Lance spins at 120 or so rpm where the average (tour de france?) cyclist spins at 90 or so.
      I'm to the point that I wonder if anyone is clean any more, notice how Marion Jones and Tim Montgomery ran at the olympic trials 100 meters?

      --
      Hooo Son! This'uns a Hawg!
    4. Re:How to beat a drug test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You gotta love it when the Trolls go trolling.... The obvious signs is when they have no clue what they're talking about, and end up talking out their ass....

      If you have proof, show it, if not, then shut your pie hole.

      Innocent until proven guilty only holds to mass murderers in your eyes huh? Protect their rights you would say... but Lance, who never did anything but beat the other guys, is mocked and ridiculed.

      Time for you to get your priorities straight.

    5. Re:How to beat a drug test by ld_hrothgar · · Score: 0

      You said:

      Cyclists don't test positive mostly because they do their steroids in the off season and they know how to cheat, or they have lawyers who do.


      Except they are tested even during the off season! UCI rules mandate random YEAR ROUND drug tests. Lance is also tested far more than he should be for "random" tests.

  68. 404 - rim not found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh boy, if only they knew what 404 ment, they would never name a rim 404.

    808 is ok tho.

    1. Re:404 - rim not found by RedShoeRider · · Score: 1
      *snicker*

      Am I the only one who thought that was pretty damn clever? :-)

      --

      Chris Knight is my hero.

  69. Kraftwerk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's the original Tour de France technology, yo. We be kickin' it in da crib listening to some of this hip shiznit, "Tour de France Soundtracks." Phat!

    1. Re:Kraftwerk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      L'enfer du Nord: Paris - Roubaix
      La Cote d'Azur et Saint Tropez
      Les Alpes et les Pyrennees
      Derniere etape Champs-Elysees
      Galibier et Tourmalet
      En danseuse jusqu'au sommet
      Pedaler en grand braquet
      Sprint final a l'arrivee
      Crevaison sur les paves
      Le velo vite repare
      Le peloton est regroupe
      Camarades et amitie

  70. Nah, Tyler broke it for real by pimpbott · · Score: 1

    He broke it clean in two. He had broken the same collarbone a year or two earlier, and it mended with a bit of a thin spot. When he broke it on TDF last year (in the first stange, IIRC) it broke the bone clean in two, and not splintered down the bone, which is really nasty. That said, the UCF still does not allow pain drugs apart from Tylonol or Advil or 'light' drugs like that. I read Tyler was in so much pain, he had to have all of his molars capped because he ground his teeth down to nothing while bearing so much pain for so long. That dude is seriously scary tough.

    1. Re:Nah, Tyler broke it for real by pellaeon · · Score: 1

      No kidding? Well, that impresses me no end :) That break I suffered was excrutiatingly painful and I could hardly even sit for days.

      --
      -- /bin/coffee missing. universe halted.
  71. What NOT to use by wk633 · · Score: 1

    I'd like to know what tires Phonak was using in the TTT.

    9 riders * 64.5 km / 5 flats = 116.1 km per flat.

    No thanks!

    1. Re:What NOT to use by neuro.slug · · Score: 1

      Continental 19mm track tires. Not the best choice for a paved TTT.

      -- n

  72. Re:High-tech, but trikes aren't allowed to compete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Herpes racers? Ew.

  73. Thank you! by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

    "could of" and "would of". ARGH! Big pet peeves.

    --

    Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  74. Look at these bikes! by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 1

    Passoni has leading edge technology bikes.

    All frames are custom made out of titanium and/or carbon fiber. These guys actually bend titanium sheets themselves to make the pipes for the frames.

    I actually own one of their racing bikes.

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
  75. Re:Bio tech too! -- and good drugs!!! by baldcamel · · Score: 1

    First up I am a massive Tour cycling fan, but the whole doping issue is a big problem in the sport.

    And we are seeing a lot of cases now of people never failing a drugs test, but being implicated in doping offences. David Millar, the GB Rider, has just been booted from the Tour and Athens for admitting to using EPO. And he hadn't failed a test.

    Personally, I believe that Armstrong is clean, he is a great rider with a very powerful team. Or at least I have a lot more confidence about him being clean than I do about other US atheletes / sportspeople.

  76. Live Biometric Readouts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I don't know if anybody has mentioned this yet, but there is a website that displays live biometric data readings during each stage.

    They hook up ergometers to 2 or 3 riders' bikes, which monitors their power, speed, pedal cadence, and heart rate. The data is then transmitted via GPRS and displayed on the website.

    It's interesting to watch to get an idea of how fast a rider travels, how much power he generates, his heart rate, and pedal cadence during the course of the stage.

  77. "Greg LeMond can beat you on a Huffy" by awtbfb · · Score: 1

    Back when I was racing and a mechanic we used to say this to people who bought expensive bikes but didn't train hard.

  78. The tracking site by unixgeezer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm not sure if this was mentioned in all of the posts about the TDF; but, there is a site run by my company's European division that has a real-time tracking of the cyclists. From what I remember reading, it uses RFID technology to aid the scoring.

  79. Lance has always been strong... by Sun+Tzu · · Score: 1

    At 23 he won the world championship road race. Later, he won the first (only?) million dollar bicycle race prize (actually, three races... The sponsor decided that the chances of a single rider winning all three was infintesimal, heh). They didn't count on Lance's iron will. He wasn't as skilled or as well trained as today, and he was far younger than the prime age for a Tour de France racer. Lance was also the first American to ever win a European Classic. He won two. He also won (at least once) the Tour du Pont, an intermediate length stage race. Those lasted about 10 days, if I recall, and included some serious mountains.

    Again, this was all well before his prime and before his cancer. There were some who considered him an undisciplined hothead back then, yet his talent and will showed through. Lance doesn't need doping to win, especially since his coaching has improved and he's reached his prime racing years.

    Go Lance!

  80. Weight shift and center of gravity by kingLatency · · Score: 1

    While I agree with your overall point, that people should focus more on their own weight and less on the weight of their bike, I think there's more to it, particularly given your fork weight example. In mountain biking especially, the ability to shift one's weight over one's bike is essential (as you surely know). So, having a fork that weighs one pound less will not only shave weight off your bike/body meld, but also make your front that much easier to lift and make your front that much lighter when you lean back. This is less important in road riding, but still relevant.

    Think about downhill rigs. Part of the reason that these bikes can have a Marzocchi Monster T that weights 10lbs is because that weight matches well with the rest of a bike, which probably has very high guage, not-butted tubing, not to mention rear suspension, hydraulic disc brakes and chainguides. (That's the reason they can be so heavy. The reason they are is that they have to be to be strong!)

    You probably know this already, but the rest of /. might not.

    --
    "I've got to stop masturbating! It makes me too lazy! Stop it, Albert. Stop it." -- Albert Einstein