Time Trial bikes in road cycling are stupid, change my mind - Page 5

mtechnica · #61 01-28-2022, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomato coupe

I don’t think the OP is interested in actual counter arguments, as is the case with most of the “change my mind” threads.

Let's go back and see your counter arguments....

Oh wait there aren't any.

Mark McM · #62 01-28-2022, 01:57 PM

What is this "TT bike" of which you speak? According to the UCI rules, there is no such thing - all the same rules on bike geometry and rider position apply to all bikes, with only 2 exceptions: In a time trial, you can use "non-standard" wheels (such as solid discs or tri-spokes); and that you can add an secondary handlebar with elbow rests. The primary handlebar (base bar) still has to meet the standard bicycle regulations. If the secondary handlebar and elbow rests were removed and standard wheels were used, a so-called "tt bike" could be legal for mass start road racing.

This also means that much of the "contorted" rider position is rider induced. Bikes used in TT's must still meet the minimum saddle set-back regulation*, so rider's can't set the position any more forward for TT's than they can for road races. If riders rotate their upper bodies very low in TT's, well they can do this in road races as well if they wanted to.

*The UCI saddle minimum setback regulation is rather restrictive - the tip of the saddle must be at least 5cm behind the BB. For many smaller riders, this puts them too far back even on a standard road bike.

ripvanrando · #63 01-28-2022, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mtechnica

That's an interesting point that I never thought of. Anyhow the recumbent comment was tongue in cheek lol, but it's interesting to think about what restrictions exist and why.

Some of the UCI geometry and setup limitations are counterproductive contributing to awkward heads down tendency. For instance, the angle of the bars. A tall rider could rider in a less heads down position if the bars could be a little higher and in some cases, have the same CdA.

tomato coupe · #64 01-28-2022, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mtechnica

Let's go back and see your counter arguments....

Oh wait there aren't any.

Read more, write less.

Yes yes great debate tactic, latch onto one thing they say, stretch the context or take it very literally, provide a counterpoint, then do a victory lap.

Clearly the point of having time trial bikes is a conspiracy by the UCI to benefit specific riders and nobody else.

mtechnica · #68 01-28-2022, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnniecakes

But are you required to ride a TT bike in a TT, or is it a riders choice? So if you can't handle a TT bike then don't ride one. You may still participate in the race albeit with a disadvantage

You have to ride one to win most of the time but yes nobody is literally forced to use them.

ripvanrando · #69 01-28-2022, 02:11 PM

Remove all geometry and distance restrictions on bikes for the TT except no fairings. 80 degree STA? Why not. 20 degree angle on aerobars? Why not.

mtechnica · #70 01-28-2022, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark McM

What is this "TT bike" of which you speak? According to the UCI rules, there is no such thing - all the same rules on bike geometry and rider position apply to all bikes, with only 2 exceptions: In a time trial, you can use "non-standard" wheels (such as solid discs or tri-spokes); and that you can add an secondary handlebar with elbow rests. The primary handlebar (base bar) still has to meet the standard bicycle regulations. If the secondary handlebar and elbow rests were removed and standard wheels were used, a so-called "tt bike" could be legal for mass start road racing.

This also means that much of the "contorted" rider position is rider induced. Bikes used in TT's must still meet the minimum saddle set-back regulation*, so rider's can't set the position any more forward for TT's than they can for road races. If riders rotate their upper bodies very low in TT's, well they can do this in road races as well if they wanted to.

*The UCI saddle minimum setback regulation is rather restrictive - the tip of the saddle must be at least 5cm behind the BB. For many smaller riders, this puts them too far back even on a standard road bike.

You ask what a TT bike is then proceed to describe specifically and exactly what it is. Well done sir.

Anyway if anything, the counter argument that I mentioned that says the riders will used a messed up position on a road bike may be a valid one, but all else being equal if they have non-disc wheels and regular handlebars they will still have better control over the bike.

I agree that the minimum setback rule is suspect and harms short riders.

reuben · #71 01-28-2022, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mtechnica

Here are my thoughts:

1.) People keep crashing them because they're dangerous. Plenty of examples. I know people crash regular bikes, but TT bikes in particular make it harder to look ahead and handle the bike.

2.) They add absolutely nothing to competition. ITT and TT stages would be just as exciting on normal bikes. Sure they might go slightly slower, but who cares if the playing field is level? Plenty of other sports have restrictions to keep speed in check for safety reasons.

3.) They needlessly add expense to the sport. Want to compete in a TT? You need a TT bike to do it. It's dumb and helps nobody.

Counter arguments:

1.) If you make people TT on a road bike they'll get into weird positions anyways.

a.) Response: ban these positions

2.) But going fast under your own power is cool, TT bikes already exist, what about track cycling?

b.) Response: Make outdoors TT its own discipline like cyclocross. There aren't cyclocross stages in the TDF, but it exists and people can do it if they want.

Your mind is clearly made up, and rigidly so, thus it would be a wasted effort to accept your challenge.

rice rocket · #72 01-28-2022, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mtechnica

Yes yes great debate tactic, latch onto one thing they say, stretch the context or take it very literally, provide a counterpoint, then do a victory lap.

Clearly the point of having time trial bikes is a conspiracy by the UCI to benefit specific riders and nobody else.

How about yours, deflect, deflect, deflect, and still claim nothing has changed when the bulk of your "thoughts" have already been debunked several times in this thread.

ripvanrando · #73 01-28-2022, 02:17 PM

Why do you think a TT position confers less control than a regular racing bike?

I do not accept that assertion.

It is the rider's decision to hold the aero position in dicey situations that is the culprit, a risk they take to win.

I probably have 10,000 miles riding on bars with aero wheels, I do not feel less control. On a windy, bumpy descent? Only a fool would stay on the bars.

prototoast · #74 01-28-2022, 02:30 PM

Though I have previously posted that I am skeptical of the claims that TT bikes increase danger in the peloton, I do want to add something else. As someone who has raced TTs on both TT bikes and road bikes, I personally enjoy it more on a TT bike. Yeah, there's probably a certain part that's all in my head--that I like knowing I'm going faster, and I like the hunt for equipment.

But there's also a piece that the actual experience is better on a TT bike. The TT bike helps lock me in to an aero position, and helps me keep it that way. It's much more comfortable to be in an optimally aerodynamic position on a TT bike for an hour than a road bike for an hour.

With that said, I don't like time trials on technical courses or on really windy days, but that takes us into the broader discussion of course selection and safety, not so much the bikes.

bigbill · #75 01-28-2022, 02:35 PM

Nothing of any substance to add, but reading this thread as it progressed has gotten me through several mindless Zoom calls. World class trolling. Bravo.