[ttug]

Little rules to live by

26mph is just cruising in a criterium, using the 17, maybe the 16 at a decent cadence. i personally don't see the need for a 55 there( in a crit ), why would you need a 55 for a tt where you'll be going slower than you would be most of the time in a criterium? seems like you're making extra work for yourself installing the 55, re-adjusting the derailleur...you're certainly not spinning out the 53...

1) NOBODY "spins" a 55. As a bad, and I do mean BAD example Marty Nothstein used a 54. marty could spin a 54, but he also had over 25 National Jerseys, Olympic Gold, World Champion etc etc on the track. Unless you have a freakish gift, sorry the 55 ring is at best an ornament.

2)New equipment and riding event means failure.Go with what you know.

3)Ride the best for youi.A TT is a contest against the clock and you set goal. Try it out and you will get better. However, they also make a 56 tooth ring and you guessed it,nobody spins one of those either.

Good luck and ride sane and safe.

 

[ttug]

what watts what?

The courses that I do normally have some kind of hill and because of that I went with the larger ring, HUH!?? If you go uphill you have to go down hill and last year I had trouble generating power at cadences above 100 rpms, back issues and bad set up were the cause and I think I have them fixed for this season. So I was getting spun out going over like 32-33 mph DOWNHILL. I can't sustain that speed on the flats. I think I like the 54 the best cause it matches my torque curve, if there is such a thing, the best. The 53 requires a little to much spin for me. I do have a 56T in the garage.

It sucks but the best way to train and compare efforts that remove a lot of variable is to watts. Your watts at your Lactate Threshold will provide the INDICATOR of performance.

I haven't compared TT avg speeds with TTs but in TTs you can get away with using a larger chain ring as there is a lot less accelarating out of corners. I would guess my avg TT speed is higher than crits because of corners and the whims of the pack.

There are aolot of other variable besides watts. Terrain, heat,humidity, recovery rate etc etc etc

Otherwise, if watts was THE INDICATOR the TT scene would be dominated by trackies and last I checked, that aint so.

Any TT is really a question of time anddistance and what you can sustain in that total distance.If you shoot your nut in the first 10K attempting to sping some freakish gear (55x11), odds are and unless you are a Pancake flat course, you will lose Minutes recovering from hills that in reality could be sprinted in a rational gear choice that allows for a steady output.

 

[ttug]

thats what I just said

unless you're pros that nobody has ever heard of because you're training in complete seclusion, there is NO need for anything bigger than a 53 for a time trial. i'm sorry, but you cannot tell me in any way that you are "spun out" in a 53 at 32mph. if you have back problems that limit you to 90-100rpm how can you make enough power to sustain that speed anyway? downhills are one thing, but there is no way you can maintain that on the flats and not have a contract. admit it, the 55 is something you bought so you can look cool, right?

Yes, I would have to agree 100%.

Not a soul of average ability, or above average or for that matter great could spin a 55 tooth ring. It aint so.

Kind of like the folks who claim they averaged 40mph because their bike computer said so. Despite the fact that it took them 1 hour to go 18 miles..............Hey its new math and time travel wooo weee

 

[ttug]

come again please?????

Lets cut to the issue please? I could care less what a person chooses to ride in a TT or in their mothers driveway, its pointless at best.

However, gear ratios and cadence tend to work together woderfully in an event that is dictated by the ability to cover a certain distance in the shortest amount of time possible. We will call this a TT.

Gear ratios that allow greater efficiency while generating a higher sustained output tend to win the day in a TT. My opinion was that using a massive ratio as described, which even some of the best riders in the world have a hard time with, does not seem to gel in the context of this specific question. Sort of the equivalent of "hey I have to get me one of those"..... That was all.

If you think that the reply was meant to say "hey, you svck because you use a too big of a ring", then you might want to think about the need on your part to interpret some sort of dictation by me to other riders.

Go nuts. Get a custom ring and see if you can go 60x10?!?!?!?Hey the skies the limit.

 

[ttug]

ok dokey

would be helpful (if you have the legs to use it). It is a flat race with a half mile slightly downhill finish. Some of the pros use the 55/11 and are hitting 55+ MPH at the finish line.

Unless your trying for a 55 MPH TT the 55 does not make a lot of sense. (I wasn't fully on top of my 53/12 in the above Cat 4/5 race and I hit 45 MPH at the line)

You got it.

If you train real hard, and prepare really well, you will still drop dead from the exertion because very few folks in the world can push that kind of ratio. BUT, that does not mean anybody should not try it.

 

[ttug]

ok the good ship lollipop is in port

1)There are DIV1 riders who barely muster 27mph avg in the flats, sorry, but avid cyclists and club riders DONT DO THAT. So thats not a realistic pic here. Sorry

2)The rule of thumb that has at last been stated is that ugly watts per kg thing. Yeah, thats true, but sorry, spinning a 55+ratio is a)a fantasy and b)not done by club riders sorry.

3) For aloll those folks talking about spinning 120+ in a 54 or above ring, UNLESS ITS DOWNHILL, you are a liar. Yuh, I said it

4)I can can ride a sub hour 40K in a 52 big ring, fantasy stories of the 33+mph miracle or how I awed everybody with 55+ is not real








0

 

[ttug]

this was fun

27 mph translates to a 55:33 40k. That would have been only the 8th fastest time at this years state TT championships (all categories). Last year, on the same course with less wind it would have been good for only 14th place. There were no Division 1 (or any other pro) riders there. In fact three of the riders were over 40 and some of the others were Cat 3. You can look up the results for yourself at http://www.nmcycling.org/results/2004/results/RCTT.pdf and
http://www.nmcycling.org/results/2003/results/RecChal.txt

Yes, in a TT thats very real. Thats very good that you were able to use the internet and find that information. Again, in a TT. There was this foggy notion of actually training and trying the event for their first shot etc etc So their first shot puts them in the top 10 states finish cataegory and you find that realistic?

The winning time of 50:40 in the 40k is still just under 30 mph. I do recall seeing numbers exceeding 30mph in this thread?????? The issue is very simple again. A masters rider in their physical prime in the ages between 19 and 29 years cant break 30 mph in a 40K TT.The time is incredible, no doubt. BUT, NO you will not see the average of 32mph and NO in the flats in a training ride, NOT A TT the averahge club guy or gal is NOT going to hang in there solo at 27mph.

I assume you won states that year or possible some recent time ? Otherwise, team: "Talking out your a55" has an application waiting.

 

[ttug]

apples and oranges

I'm trying to stay on point here. Earlier you claimed 27 mph is a speed achievable on the flats only by Div. 1 riders. The exact quote was

I merely pointed out based on data at hand that there are any number of club riders who can surpass that. I have no idea what other point you're trying to make here.

The data you provided were times at a TT.The TT was a state level event with Masters riders. Doubtless some were average club riders. The majority barley maintained 23+ mph. You do recall the top 10 usually means thetop 10 out of the entire field. I do doubt there were 11 riders that day. You did not provide data on any number of club riders

Could you please provide the location of the regular guys and gals who train solo on the average ~27mph? Here on the earth, its very rare.

 

[ttug]

me speak good too

Except to disprove your contention that NO avid cyclist or club rider achieves 27 mph, it isn't necessary for me to show all avid cyclists or club riders reach that level, I only have to show 1 does. I think I've shown there are many who do. Where does training solo come into it? Do I have to quote your statement to you a third time?

When you quote my statement andnot what you think it is, great. You have yet to show that any of the riders results were those of the average you know that word right? club rider. Might be handy if there was a mutual definition for that term. Otherwise, we are talking past each other and its kind of pointless.

Besides: I am building a 88 tooth chain ring and need to "spin it out" right now

This will prepare me for the catapult of fame I crave as I exit the garage door....

 

[ttug]

52x14 is magic

Last summer at Junior Nationals a 16 year old did a 20k TT in 26.50.99 with a 99 inch gear (max gearing for juniors) which works out to a 52/14 or 45/12. This was not flat course and had a good headwind on the return leg.
.

Merckx set the hour record in a 52x14. BIG RATIOS ARE A WASTE unless you have HUGE TALENT TO PUSH THE HUGE RATIO its sort of cute to watch

 

[ttug]

long long ago

Spinners like lance or mashers like Jan. You're throwing your opinion around like it's a fact but I haven't heard anything that would suggest you have anything to back up your opinion. Are you really trying to relate a track ride 25 years ago to anything that's done now on the road. Before Merckx did that people thought 52 was huge.

Here's some pretty good numbers for you to crunch. When you're done you can tell me what's possible and impossiible for "club" riders and masters. BTW I think the winner of the 35+ race is like 42. I was 3rd in the 3s. Before you really freak out the course was not 40k it was 37k and rolling like everything around here. And another thing, you picked up on the 32 mph from me when I clearly stated, twice, that it's not an average but when I'm going DOWNHILL. It was pretty windy in 04. My 03 time was 51:26, conditions were better. Must be the thin air. ;-)
http://www.americancycling.org/results/2004/jun/state-TT.htm

The point of mentioning Merckx was to show that you do not need a huge gear to get a great time. While the tech and materials have certainly chnaged, I do recall the idea is still the same. Here is a distance, here is your time, here is the bike you ride real real fast to cover that distance in a hopefully smaller amount of time.

I know that its an old idea, but it does seem a bit obvious that the time goal is the point of the TT. Kind of fits huh? Even, all that time ago. weird huh?

as far as my opinion and fact, they are not the same. However, the fact is that Eddy had a record for years with that old bike of his.