Bicycles!

[MrAtom]

How fast is everyone? I can comfortably hold 16mph on my hardtail when commuting with all my stuff, and keep getting faster the more I ride.

[Triple Jim]

I generally average 20 on my daily 1-hour ride on my road bike. 20 years ago I could average 21 mph. A couple MPH less on a mountain bike with knobbies. When I raced, the pack would do about 25. It's amazing what adrenaline and a group drafting each other can do for speed.

[rojoracing53]

that's a rather loaded question but on flat asphalt on my way out to the dirt I can average 21 on the mtb for the 30 mins it takes me to get there.

On the road bike on flat ground it's more like 25mph for rides less than 3hours by myself. If I'm in a group it's 25-26 but the terrain is never totally flat.

On the recumbent I averaged 22mph for 500 miles strait twice.

It's funny but if you go on the recumbent forums and start comparing average speeds with others you quickly realize everyone must be pro or their numbers are taken from the most ideal scenario possible because their claims are always so fast. Never take anyone's average speeds on a forum at face value I find many people do and start thinking their in turn are slower then they actually are.

[choneofakind]

MrAtom, a huge thing to remember is the speed that you can comfortably hold for part of your ride when you look down at your speedometer is usually NOT your average speed. If you're comparing average speeds, use a GPS or bike speedo, or at minimum a stopwatch and Google Maps. I think you'll be shocked how quickly that average speed drops with only one or two small changes in speed.

The other thing to remember is that a time is a huge influence on speed. Jim's reports and Rojo's ride data both confirm ballpark 20 mph averages for road bikes, but Jim says he rides 1 hour efforts (on what I assume is very flat topography) and Rojo is keeping that same speed for 6-10 hours at a time while climbing mountain passes.

Frankly, average speed is a terrible way to compare anything between riders. Just get out and enjoy riding your bicycle. If you want real comparisons, you need power data and then compare watts/kg vs time plotted out for each rider in question. But that's not really necessary for recreational riders.



Jim, do you track these rides on any medium that can be shared? Strava? Garmin Connect? MapMyRide? etc.?


EDIT: ninja'd by rojo. He didn't beat around the bush like I did. Typical

[rojoracing53]

Also comfortably can mean a whole different thing among riders. For someone like me who is always pushing my limits, comfortable is slightly uncomfortable. If I were to drop to a pace of total comfort then I'd feel like I was going nowhere and that in its self would be uncomfortable

["A"]

How fast is rarely my goal when I commute on bicycle.
Most of the time is just getting to my destination in one piece without getting hit or damaging the bike.
Rain, snow, ice, sleet.. logged up about 4-500 miles over the winter months.
In 2020, I will likely return to Maui, HI and climb up Haleakala again, it will be 10 yr anniversary from the last time.

[MrAtom]

I wasn't aware that this was such a touchy subject.

[Triple Jim]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

...but Jim says he rides 1 hour efforts (on what I assume is very flat topography)...

I realized later that I should have described the terrain. My rides in this area include some fairly level stretches and some moderately rolling hills. It's not "very flat" by any means.

[Apex]

I just drug down my FS mountain bike. Rear shock is toast. I get to rebuild that before I can ride it. Should be fun.

Mainly been riding my '83/'84 Trek 850 around. It is a slow bike, and I mean SLOW. I know I'm not a fast rider, but I can push through a lot of things. This bike makes me have a workout. lol

[choneofakind]

Originally Posted by Triple Jim

I realized later that I should have described the terrain. My rides in this area include some fairly level stretches and some moderately rolling hills. It's not "very flat" by any means.

How many feet of elevation gain on that 20 mile route? (trace a route on googlemaps, then use the Bicycle icon, it should give you feet of elevation gain, IIRC)

Western central Ohio is consistently an average of about 15' of gain per mile ridden. That's very flat.

[Triple Jim]

Ha, I have no idea. Yes, fifteen feet per mile is very flat. Maybe I'll put on my GPS watch and let it figure it out for me if I think of it sometime, but think "rolling hills".

[choneofakind]

Lol, I've called a lot of things "rolling hills", from marginal 10' rollers to full on 400' valley climbs on hill repeat day...

trace your route out on googlemaps, use the bicycle icon, and then it should tell you distance, elevation gain, and elevation loss. it's usually decently close.

[Triple Jim]

I guess I'm really not very interested in the numbers. I know how hilly my ride is, and all I was trying to do is answer MrAtom's question.

But since you're interested (not sure why), according to a topo map, the first mile or so of my daily ride gains about 100'. Subsequent hills tend to be about 100', give or take, and are often between 1/2 a mile and a mile long. Depending on what route I take, the loop can be mostly hills like that, or maybe only 1/3 of the ride, with the remainder more flat.

[choneofakind]

Yeah man, that's why Rojo called it a loaded question. Google is full of great examples of just how much of a dick measuring contest speed turns into. Everyone automatically gives their fastest ideal scenario and tries to sound faster than they are. That's why I challenged Jim a little. 20 mph every day like clockwork? Hmmmm...

Exhibit A: http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_re...thread=5345420

[Triple Jim]

I've been riding in a serious way all my life, since I was about 14. I don't see why you're so upset about 20 mph. On very windy days I might average 19. One of my most ridden routes is 18.3 miles long. I time myself every day, and I normally do it in 55 minutes, which is 20 mph. I assume younger riders who ride more than I do can do much better. rojoracing53 is apparently one of them. Ten years ago when I was 50, I was doing that same route in about 52-53 minutes, so about 21 mph.

Hmmmm yourself, buddy.

[choneofakind]

Not upset or eeen ruffled in the slightest. Just questioning, as always. It never seems to come off right in writing, and I never seem to learn any better.


I'll be honest about my current biking situation... I'm lazy and coming off 4 months of non-riding by riding the trainer (which is the worst thing ever). And in the middle of my month between jobs with ****** weather in western OH, so I'm basically bored AF. Aka, too much time online.

[MrAtom]

Does anyone have recommendations for rear panniers for a bicycle? I currently have a rear rack that only attaches to the seatpost via a quick-release. Kinda like this but less chewy.



I used big 'ol zipties to keep a $10 plastic tub mounted to it, and e6000 to keep the moisture out when riding in the rain. It's worked nicely but hard luggage is seriously not the way to go, as it's finally started cracking.

I'm only using it to carry my lighter groceries (heavier stuff goes in backpack) as well as clothes/equipment for work.

If you have experience with a pannier system or brand that you absolutely love, I wanna hear about it.

[choneofakind]

Chewy?

My experience with enough brands of panniers to form an opinion of one over another is limited so I'll let others comment on that.

But generally, remember as you add weight to the back of the bike, the stability will also change. If you load up the rear and notice the bike feels squirrely, rearrange the load to keep the weight forward if possible. If you have a ton of weight on the back and not much on the front, you run the risk of the tail wagging the dog, as it were.

[MrAtom]

Yeah, ride quality is something I'm willing to sacrifice for the comfort of not having a backpack (unless I'm grocery shopping. Then I take all the cargo I can get and use both). But, my entire system is a compromise; the QR rear rack is good for taking it off as often as I can. Also, a mtb for commuting isn't a bad way to get around, but even a heavy touring bike would be quicker. The mtb is just more comfortable, fun, and durable so it's ideal for me. Plus, the routes I take and my city's infrastructure aren't entirely bike friendly.

I'm still planning on picking up a steel touring bike for distance riding, though. Beyond 15 miles, the mtb does start to suck.

[DannoXYZ]

To use panniers, you need vertical stays that stabilize rack and actually carry vertical load. The front attachment should only be there to prevent it rack from pivoting backards; shouldn't carry any actual load. You also need these racks to position panniers rearwards for thigh and heel clearance for pedaling.

Note how small front attachment is on these rack designed for panniers. The vertical stays also prevents the panniers from rocking laterally into your wheels.






I like Ibera PakRak panniers. They're waterproof and have multiple compartments. I like to keep stuff like tools and maps in some of pockets full-time.

[CaliGrrl]

Definitely get a rack like in the pictures. The panniers/bags that husband and I use are made by Arkel. I put everything in it for college, husband put his laptop in his, and once I get back on my bicycle I will once again be bringing home groceries in mine.

https://www.arkel-od.com/

[MrAtom]

I eventually settled on a tough steel wire basket that I'm confident will survive a spill. Combined with a waterproof drawstring bag, it'll be more than enough to carry my veggies from the store and my work clothes to work. My bike actually has the eyelets for a proper pannier system, so I'll have to upgrade it eventually :-P thanks for the insight.

[choneofakind]

I've been riding here! The hills are kicking my butt because I've been off for so long and am lacking the fitness I ended last season with.

[choneofakind]

Some amazing riding here. I've climbed over 10,000' both of the last two weeks, even though my mileage is lower than I want. I'll be back to my normal strength and cardio fitness by August or so

I'm also working on a gravel bike. Should be sweet. Hopefully Ultegra. Hydraulic brakes, mech shifting. 650Bx48 tires. I have a buddy building me some carbon wheels. Frame is a Fuji Jari 1.1. Carbon cockpit. And I'll be trying out the new FSA SLK Modular adventure cranks with 30/46 teeth, paired with an 11-34 cassette. I've been thinking about this one a long time. But with the move to the mountains with so many forest service roads, this is the right time to make it happen. Some crazy descents and climbs here and the big grippy tires and disks and low gearing are really going to be great.

[MrAtom]

What do you guys make of ceramic bearings? When I used to skateboard, the idea was that anything regarding an ABEC rating was total bullshit, as the precision that an ABEC rating indicates will become null as the bearings get smacked around.

Obviously, sealed bearings perform better than unsealed in cycling, but is there any benefit in ceramic? It sounds like snake oil to me.

[choneofakind]

Lots of things use ceramic bearings. They do work for their intended purpose and it's not snake oil. They do roll with reduced frictional losses when compared to their metal counterparts, all else equal.

For a recreational cyclist... I'm not sure the benefit outweighs the cost. Sure they roll forever and if you have a few extra dollars, by all means go for it!!! But I wouldn't go out of my way to get excited by it. I've run quality ABEC or Enduro angular contact bearings in everything and had good success so far.

With ABEC ratings and damaging races with use, you're right, sort of. But in sealed bearing applications like wheels and bottom brackets, I don't think that the looseness is quite as readily apparent as it is in skateboarding. Skateboard wheels get obviously loose and chatter as they wear. Bike wheels and cranks spin much slower than skateboard wheels (and don't seem to take the shock loading of slamming landings like that) and are typically sealed and packed with grease, which helps dampen that chatter out a lot. I've only ever ruined hub bearings in one hub because I had the preload cap down too tight for a lot of miles. And even then... they're easy enough to replace that I'm not worried if I have to replace them after 5,000 miles vs 8,000 miles, or whatever it actually ends up being.

[DannoXYZ]

The faster you go, the less rolling-resistance (bearings+tyres) contributes to total drag. That's because rolling resistance increases linearly with speed, while wind-resistance (aero drag) goes up to square power with speed and power required to overcome that drag goes up by cube power of speed.,

For example, going from 10 to 30mph triples rolling resistance (3). Aero-drag increases by 3^2=9 and to overcome it, you need to generate 3^3=3*3*3=27 times the power. So you need to generate 3+27= 30-times more power with only a fraction of that needed to over come bearing drag.



Shear friction of lube in bearings makes bigger difference than bearing material. On my velodrome bike, I use only hypoid gear-oil instead of grease. That brings friction down to ceramic bearing levels and is good for about +1mph at 43mph.

[Triple Jim]

Ceramic bearings make the last 0.001% of the improvement. Losing one pound of body weight makes much more difference. Ceramics are great for high budget pro teams, not for the reduced friction, but for the psychological boost.

[DannoXYZ]

Well, 10-watts in a 1000-watt sprint is actually 1%, but yeah, miniscule amounts. Here's an article from someone who actually sells and makes money on ceramic bearings.

https://www.kogel.cc/blogs/kbba/cera...ramic-bearings

[Triple Jim]

Originally Posted by DannoXYZ

Well, 10-watts in a 1000-watt sprint is actually 1%, but yeah, miniscule amounts.

My estimate is closer. I said 0.001%, so in a 1,000 watt sprint, that's 1/100 of a watt, and I was being generous. Tests by independent testers show only a small fraction of what the tests by ceramic bearing sellers show. As I said, lose one pound and it'll make a much bigger difference.

["A"]

I have a ceramic bearings bottom bracket since 2008 or so.. It's one of those item that you put on your bike and fuhgeddaboutit; never needs maintenance, even though I ride that bike all season, through winter salt, mud, rain, etc... Over ten years and I have yet to take it apart to inspect whether it needs cleaning.
I can't tell whether ceramic has less friction that other bottom bracket material, but I like the zero maintenance over ten years of usage.
If you have a bike that you plan on keeping for long time, it might be worthwhile to invest in ceramic stuff just to save you some maintenance time on the bike.

[MrAtom]

I plan on keeping both of my bikes for a long time. How exactly does ceramic need less cleaning? I'd assume crud would get in there just the same.

["A"]

Depending on the location of your ceramic bearing application; rear derailleur pulleys or bottom bracket area is most likely the dirtiest place on my bike.. hubs not nearly as dirty.

[DannoXYZ]

Low-maintenance has everything to do with seals. Shimano's labyrinths seals are good.

Issue with a lot of ceramic bearings is they remove seals or have them not contact as tightly. In an effort to make them spin easier by hand and feel "faster". Problem is... this allows dirt in so ceramic bearing needs to be serviced and replaced more often.

The hybrid design with steel races doesn't make this any better.

[DannoXYZ]

Ceramic bearings are really suited for different environment:

- high-RPMS, 10000rpms+
- high heat, 500F+
- low load

That's where they really outshine traditional steel countreparts. Such as for use in a turbocharger!

[choneofakind]

This was my morning!

[choneofakind]

and another scenic picture I couldn't ride by without stopping for a little enjoyment. I still can't believe I live here.

Somewhere heading north on NC 215 where it starts getting steep up.


And to answer your previous question, @MrAtom, how fast am I? Slow. I'm not used to sustained climbs like this and my endurance strength is suffering because of it. My ride today was 45.8 miles, 4,665 feet of gain, and it took me just under 3 hours to complete, giving me an average speed of 15.9 mph and an estimated power output (this can be all over the place, but it seems to be more accurate on longer hills than on flat windy land) of 148W. If it had been dry, that average might have been about 0.1 mph faster due to descending confidence level, but oh well. I want to build up my power and endurance and get this into the mid 17 mph average speed.

[CaliGrrl]

Gorgeous!

[Apex]

Good news! The HiFi rear shock has been rebuilt!

I even took it for a test ride too. It is like butter! So much faster than my '84 Trek, and SMOOTHER. I forgot how good of a bike it is. Not super light, but you ride and you just want to keep riding.

I may need to change my tire setup. Right now I'm running an aggressive tread up front. I know it doesn't roll great with it, and I can roll faster with a hardpack XC tread. Actually, that may be my best bet.....to roll faster on the road...and trails. Most of the stuff I ride is hardpack, so it would make sense. I may have a spare Kenda laying around here somewhere too.

[MrAtom]

Has anyone here seen a cassette or freewheel fail or break? I always hear fixed gear riders say they like fixed because of the mechanical simplicity. I like fixies, but that point has always seemed like complete bull to me. The only time I've ever seen a drivetrain fail on a bicycle was from a big impact, neglect to service (fixies require the same service that a singlespeed would; cassettes are maintenance-free!), or poor quality parts. And none of these were the cassette.