Path: ...!news.roellig-ltd.de!open-news-network.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Most significant advance in bike technology for speed?
Date: 24 Jan 2025 23:51:10 GMT
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <lvinbeFe2t8U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <vn0pv2$2cdge$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 1Z64KbfLPfG5SGQT0AnjEgJc7wmC8J3JCfXOAyw/WbWL997UqN
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Vfvns6zFLCD06oPIwqI1li9jl7M= sha1:H2w5QM+PlKgNiFEPsF0BS/xvVvk= sha256:arqL3WwoBxVLiCDYVHchnw/xj83ZgaV52/um0In0O98=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Bytes: 3852

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift 
> levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology 
> ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little 
> respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average 
> race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, 
> Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including 
> during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the  years 1930 - 1960 
> average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI 
> is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
> 
On a broader point bit like disks eventually coming to road, MTB had if not
integrated brakes and shift levers that one didn’t need to move one’s hands
or even shift finger positions, with thumb shifters.

Ie it was being done on a related design so was inevitable just matter of
when.

> But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments 
> regarding bicycle race speeds?


> 
> Here’s my list:
> 
> Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on the 
> ground.
> 
Probably that one actually I believe that Penny farthings could shift,
where raced around Herne Hill which is old ish Velodrome in East London.
And they certainly could shift probably the biggest jump.

Don’t get me wrong been lots of improvements, some have been speed by
default even in the 90’s MTB didn’t really last long in races be that
frame/components etc. be that getting a double puncture, loosing the chain
or something bending/snapping!

That’s certainly come a long way racers now expect their bikes to last the
race and even over multiple runs!

> Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
> 
> Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The 
> Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
> 
I believe that bikes went to cranks as they didn’t have anything drive
chain as such yet.

> The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the 
> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on 
> braking.
> 
> Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling resistance.
> 
> The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much 
> more aero riding position.
> 
> Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on 
> a tire.
> 
> Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
> 
> The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and 
> light weight.
> 
> Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower 
> uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
> 
> Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but 
> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
> 
> Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever 
> diminishing returns.
> 
Roger Merriman