Triathletes

Originally posted by Kevin in MD You are mistaken. Lance Armstrong and his one hour power output of 500 watts would beat you and your 100 watts on any road bicycle ever made, including your 10 speed Schwinn from 1970. When climbing it is a matter of power to weight ratio. Steady watts divided by the weight of rider + bicycle. You weigh 150 same as Lance possibly. You ride thre 17 pound new bike He rides the 50 pound schwinn. For the sake of argument we'll be kind and say you can hold 200 watts for an hour. LA = 500 / (150+50) = 2.5 watts per pound. You = 200 / (150+17) = 1.2 watts per pound. He'd climb up a hill twice as fast as you would. On he flats it is power / aero profile. The aero profiles of road bikes have only gotten better by about 20%. Meaning he'd go MUCH MUCH more faster than you would on the flats. Good stuff. But I disagree with your conclusions: First Lance will perform comparitively better on a hill on my 10 speed than he would on a flat. The simple reason is that over coming gravity is the most significant counter force and that coeeficient will be the same for both of us. But on a flat, the increased friction due to an inferior bike is the most significant counter force and that would not be the same for both of us. If a rider could generate 375 watts to Lance's 500, and if Lance had to utilize 100 additional watts vs 25 for the given rider because of increased friction (assumed speed of 5 m/sec), and if the bikes were 8 Kilos vs 20 Kilos, I think you will find that the speed would be similar: LA (500-100)/ 90 K = 4.44 Rider (375-25) / 78 K = 4.48 Now could I generate 375 watts of continuous power? Ehh, probably not anymore. But that is not a level of an elite cyclist only a really good one, and that was kind of the point I was trying to get at! You CAN buy speed.

Originally posted by Kevin in MD You are mistaken. Lance Armstrong and his one hour power output of 500 watts would beat you and your 100 watts on any road bicycle ever made, including your 10 speed Schwinn from 1970. When climbing it is a matter of power to weight ratio. Steady watts divided by the weight of rider + bicycle. You weigh 150 same as Lance possibly. You ride thre 17 pound new bike He rides the 50 pound schwinn. For the sake of argument we'll be kind and say you can hold 200 watts for an hour. LA = 500 / (150+50) = 2.5 watts per pound. You = 200 / (150+17) = 1.2 watts per pound. He'd climb up a hill twice as fast as you would. On he flats it is power / aero profile. The aero profiles of road bikes have only gotten better by about 20%. Meaning he'd go MUCH MUCH more faster than you would on the flats. Good stuff. But I disagree with your conclusions: First Lance will perform comparitively better on a hill on my 10 speed than he would on a flat. The simple reason is that over coming gravity is the most significant counter force and that coeeficient will be the same for both of us. But on a flat, the increased friction due to an inferior bike is the most significant counter force and that would not be the same for both of us. If a rider could generate 375 watts to Lance's 500, and if Lance had to utilize 100 additional watts vs 25 for the given rider because of increased friction (assumed speed of 5 m/sec), and if the bikes were 8 Kilos vs 20 Kilos, I think you will find that the speed would be similar: LA (500-100)/ 90 K = 4.44 Rider (375-25) / 78 K = 4.48 Now could I generate 375 watts of continuous power? Ehh, probably not anymore. But that is not a level of an elite cyclist only a really good one, and that was kind of the point I was trying to get at! You CAN buy speed.