$200 per watt

[wallymann]

i fitted up an altus on my wife's circa-94 trek MTB...it actually works pretty nicely!

Originally Posted by deechee

[MattTuck]

If you plot the number of watts that bike companies save us on the y axis, and time on the x-axis, some time around 2030, bikes will make us fatter because they'll move on their own.

[saab2000]

Originally Posted by dgauthier

Now, hold on a second here . . .

First of all, please understand I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. But I've been reading this forum for years, and seen people not bat an eye at $400 bib shorts, $600 handlebars, $1000 cranks, $6000 wheels, and on and on and on. Likes2ridefar points out that Ceramicspeed products "spin like crazy", so they do work as claimed. So what makes you single out this particular product for ridicule? Why all the hate?

Because I think if there were something to actually be gained Shimano or Campagnolo or Sram would be doing it.

BTW, this isn't a new idea. Contador used larger pulleys a few years ago.

[54ny77]

Among other things!

Originally Posted by saab2000

Because I think if there were something to actually be gained Shimano or Campagnolo or Sram would be doing it.

BTW, this isn't a new idea. Contador used larger pulleys a few years ago.

[rockdude]

Obviously there are no competitive TT's here. every second/watt savings count.
In a world where the average price of a superbike is over well 10K, a guy can take his 10 year old cervelo p3 and add a few items like this and end up with a bike that is just as fast as a stock superbike. With all this said, its still about the engine and fit more that the bike.

[numbskull]

Originally Posted by dgauthier

Now, hold on a second here . . .

First of all, please understand I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. But I've been reading this forum for years, and seen people not bat an eye at $400 bib shorts, $600 handlebars, $1000 cranks, $6000 wheels, and on and on and on. Likes2ridefar points out that Ceramicspeed products "spin like crazy", so they do work as claimed. So what makes you single out this particular product for ridicule? Why all the hate?

This.

I'm not sure 3 watts is insignificant if you are a racer (although perhaps I am wrong on the physics)

Lets say you average 300 watts over an hour and that output gives you a speed of 30mph. A 3 watt gain is a 1% improvement so your speed increases to 30.3 mph. In one hour you will travel 1/3 of a mile farther than you would with your regular DR. Not insignificant, at least in a time trial setting. Add in a better chain and the gains add up. Furthermore this is not a one time benefit. It is there every time you ride the bike. Indeed, the less powerful you are the bigger the benefit. 3 watts is a 2% gain for a 150 watt average rider.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by dgauthier

Now, hold on a second here . . .

First of all, please understand I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. But I've been reading this forum for years, and seen people not bat an eye at $400 bib shorts, $600 handlebars, $1000 cranks, $6000 wheels, and on and on and on. Likes2ridefar points out that Ceramicspeed products "spin like crazy", so they do work as claimed. So what makes you single out this particular product for ridicule? Why all the hate?

My issue isn't with big pulleys but ceramic in bikes. Marketing 101.

Ceramic for high pressure, high speed, no electrical conductivity, nothing on a bike.

And I'm an equal opportunity offender, all makers of ceramic 'stuff', marketing, including Cult on Campagnolo. A way to differentiate SR from Record.

[fa63]

Originally Posted by numbskull

This.

I'm not sure 3 watts is insignificant if you are a racer (although perhaps I am wrong on the physics)

Lets say you average 300 watts over an hour and that output gives you a speed of 30mph. A 3 watt gain is a 1% improvement so your speed increases to 30.3 mph. In one hour you will travel 1/3 of a mile farther than you would with your regular DR. Not insignificant, at least in a time trial setting. Add in a better chain and the gains add up. Furthermore this is not a one time benefit. It is there every time you ride the bike. Indeed, the less powerful you are the bigger the benefit. 3 watts is a 2% gain for a 150 watt average rider.

Except a 1% improvement in Watts does not translate to a 1% improvement in speed. The change in speed from 3 Watts is negligible at best.

[JMacII]

Spending money on pulleys is silly. That money should be spent on custom paint.

It's a hobby. People like to tinker. Whatever. I don't judge.

[berserk87]

Originally Posted by fa63

Except a 1% improvement in Watts does not translate to a 1% improvement in speed. The change in speed from 3 Watts is negligible at best.

YES!

I thought that I was the only one seeing it this way. Thanks for making this point.

[CunegoFan]

Originally Posted by fa63

Except a 1% improvement in Watts does not translate to a 1% improvement in speed. The change in speed from 3 Watts is negligible at best.

Don't take the marketing claim at face value. Start with 3W, divide by at least two or three to get the real world results, and then calculate the speed improvement.

[fa63]

1/2 of negligible would still be negligible

[numbskull]

So what is the curve that relates watts to speed?

Obviously it is not linear because of increasing air resistance, but nor is it flat or else getting stronger would be a waste of time.

Also, what sort of watt improvement is necessary to be noticeable?

10 watts, 20 watts?

I don't have a power meter on a bike but when I work on a rowing machine a sustained 10 watt increase in output once I am near peak requires huge effort.

It also strikes me that when thought of as a continuous ongoing improvement the net benefit of a small increase in efficiency will compound over time spent during a ride.

$600 for huge ugly rollers seems stupid to me as well but I suspect the guys building them recognize there is a need and market for small incremental efficiency gains in time trial settings.

[cp43]

I found this with a quick google search:

http://www.americanroadcycling.org/a...WattsSpeed.htm

I haven't read it, but the I looked at the pictures

It will give you a reasonable idea of what that curve looks like.

Chris

Originally Posted by numbskull

So what is the curve that relates watts to speed?

Obviously it is not linear because of increasing air resistance, but nor is it flat or else getting stronger would be a waste of time.

Also, what sort of watt improvement is necessary to be noticeable?

10 watts, 20 watts?

I don't have a power meter on a bike but when I work on a rowing machine a sustained 10 watt increase in output once I am near peak requires huge effort.

It also strikes me that when thought of as a continuous ongoing improvement the net benefit of a small increase in efficiency will compound over time spent during a ride.

$600 for huge ugly rollers seems stupid to me as well but I suspect the guys building them recognize there is a need and market for small incremental efficiency gains in time trial settings.

[numbskull]

This site provides a calculator http://americanroadcycling.org/TheBo...-BulletListTxt

For a 140 lb man producing 300 watts adding another 3 watts increases calculated speed from 26.09 to 26.22 MPH.

I think that translates into about a 70 yard advantage over 1 hour.
Is that insignificant?
I would guess it depends on who is answering the question.

Interestingly, the weaker you are the bigger the benefit. A 160lb man producing 180 watts increases his speed by .16mph by going to 183 watts.

Hmmmmmm...........I wonder what the 7 watt chain costs.