#16
|
|||
|
|||
Intriguing...what capabilities would the ideal pedal system have?
Quote:
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The current system with steel on steel (cleat and pedal retention clamp) is one source of friction, and as previously mentioned, the shoe tread contact on the pedal body during foot rotation is another source of friction. The tread contact also provides the main source of shoe stability on the pedal. How about creating a system where the pedal body rotates on the axle rather than having the cleat rotate within the retention clamp, a la Mavic 646? This would separate the rotational friction from the stability variable. The shoe tread and pedal body would rotate together rather than against one another. I understand that many will argue that the current SPD system is more than adequate, and feel that there is not enough friction in the system to warrant a redesign. I have spent a day's long ride in my MTB shoes, and repeated the same ride while using my road shoes, and the difference in joint comfort when comparing the function of the respective systems is profound. The road system with a large platform that is devoid of rotational friction allows me to pedal in comfort for a longer duration. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
MAVIC 646 pedal rotated on two axes, both pitch (like all pedals) and yaw (float)? Sounds interesting, but can't find a video demonstrating the yaw DOF.
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
I don't recall lateral float on the 646, but a lot of dust has settled since those were in circulation.
|
|
|