Difference in weights.

"Julian Symondson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:opr81e2lkulihyoj@left...

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 16:48:02 +0100, Alan Holmes <alan@holmes-
g4crw.freeserve.co.uk> wrote: A heavy comfortable bike is
not necessarily the problem that many cyclists assume. The
Dutch are some of the best long distance cyclists and they
plod on inexorably on bikes that most UK cyclists wouldn't
be seen dead

on.

Yebbut I think that for leisure riders weight is less about
speed and more about handling and if, as you say, you prefer
the handling of the heavier bike that's great. Lets face it,
I've lost 5kg since xmas which is the same as the difference
between a lightweight racer and a hybrid but I'm not going
faster (allowing for the fact I get fitter as the winter
becomes more of a memory) but I still prefer the feel of a
lightweight bike (I use a heavier one in the winter).

It's just a matter of personal preference.
--
Regards, Pete

Quoted message said:

It's just a matter of personal preference.

I'm not saying the lightweights aren't fun simply that for
long distance touring comfort is more important than weight
- you can keep going longer and further if you are
comfortable.

--

J u l i a n

__o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Julian Symondson said:

A heavy comfortable bike is not necessarily the problem
that many cyclists assume. The Dutch are some of the best
long distance cyclists and they plod on inexorably on
bikes that most UK cyclists wouldn't be seen dead on.

I'd like to see some statistics before accepting that Dutch
long distance cyclists use heavy bikes.

Quoted message said:

I had a lightish drop handlebar road bike for years and
thought it was the bees knees until I got a hybrid
style touring bike with dynamos, locks, extra bottle
cages, 26 X 1.5 Marathon tyres, extra spokes, massive
hubs, full racking etc. It was about 4 kilos heavier
than the road bike.

Initially I panicked and wondered what I had done (it cost
an arm and a leg), but as soon as I put my leg over (as it
were) I was converted. The more upright position, the
ample gearing, the powerful braking and the shear sense of
security and stability made the whole experience of
cycling utterly different. Shortly after getting it I
cycled 140 miles to the York Rally with full camping gear
- it took 12 hours and I still had the energy to walk into
town for a drink and to go out for a fast spin on
Saturday. On the road bike I would have bonked out after
about 8 hours because of the extra concentration required
on lighter weight bikes.

I didn't know that concentration consumed so many calories.
Are you sure that something else isn't a factor in this?

Quoted message said:

I still try and keep weight down where I can (I just
bought a titanium saucepan - how posey is that!!) but on
the whole I no longer worry about weight.

The trick with long distance cycling is to remain
unstressed. You must eat enough, drink enough and go slow
enough to stay calm and relaxed all day long. It might
take a little bit longer to get there but you enjoy the
journey as well as the arriving.

How much do you weigh?

--
Michael MacClancy Random putdown - "I've had a perfectly
wonderful evening. But this wasn't
it." -Groucho Marx www.macclancy.demon.co.uk
www.macclancy.co.uk

Michael MacClancy said:

I'd like to see some statistics before accepting that
Dutch long distance cyclists use heavy bikes.

The chances that some of them do are approaching 1, if you
think about
it. "Dutch long distance cyclists" are not, I would
imagine, completely unified in the machinery they ride.

But if you think serious long distances are untenable on a
heavy bike go to HP Velotechnik's site and see what people
have got up to on Streetmachines. Light they ain't, but
they've been on some very serious tours.

Quoted message said:

I didn't know that concentration consumed so many
calories. Are you sure that something else isn't a factor
in this?

Concentration seems an odd thing to blame, but comfort and
ability to relax in terms of position /is/ a major factor
IME. I probably expend more calories on a day tour on the
Streetmachine than my old drop bar tourer but I'd feel wiped
out after 100km on drops because my body ached, as opposed
to just my legs.

Pete x.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111
ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382
640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net
[email hidden] dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗

Peter Clinch said:

Michael MacClancy said:

I'd like to see some statistics before accepting that
Dutch long distance cyclists use heavy bikes.

The chances that some of them do are approaching 1, if you
think about
it. "Dutch long distance cyclists" are not, I would
imagine, completely unified in the machinery they
ride.

I agree. My comment was based on a suspicion that Julian was
asserting that the Dutch routinely ride long distances on
their traditional Dutch bikes.

Quoted message said:

But if you think serious long distances are untenable on a
heavy bike go to HP Velotechnik's site and see what people
have got up to on Streetmachines. Light they ain't, but
they've been on some very serious tours.

I didn't mean to suggest that long distances are untenable
on a heavy bike. And I'm sure that a recumbent would be my
weapon of choice were I to do some loaded touring although I
might consider a Streetmachine a bit heavy for my own
lightweight frame. I think it's true to say that lighter
riders will be happier on lighter bikes so suggesting that
heavy bikes are better for touring is potentially
misleading. I think lighter riders will also try to carry
lighter loads when touring although I don't have any
personal experience.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I didn't know that concentration consumed so many
calories. Are you sure that something else isn't a factor
in this?

Concentration seems an odd thing to blame, but comfort and
ability to relax in terms of position /is/ a major factor
IME. I probably expend more calories on a day tour on the
Streetmachine than my old drop bar tourer but I'd feel
wiped out after 100km on drops because my body ached, as
opposed to just my legs.

But you wouldn't be bonking, would you? Muscle aches and
discomfort are something else. I personally don't see why a
well set-up lightweight bike should be so much more tiring
to ride than a heavier one. After all, Lance Armstrong rides
the Tour on a very light bike. The main reason IMO for
touring on a heavier bike is that it's going to be stronger.

--
Michael MacClancy Random putdown - "I've just learned about
his illness. Let's hope it's nothing trivial." - Irvin S.
Cobb www.macclancy.demon.co.uk www.macclancy.co.uk

Michael MacClancy said:

I didn't know that concentration consumed so many
calories. Are you sure that something else isn't a factor
in this?

The brain uses a huge number of calories (perhaps someone
can tell us how many).

It might seem strange but I think that if you are worried
about every pebble and pothole that you do get tireder
quicker than if you can just keep rolling without any
concern which can do on a heavier (ie stronger and more
reliable bike).

I find I do the best mileages when I am thinking about the
bike least - ie when I am on tour and everything is
interesting and new. Fitness is important of course but
psychological state is as well.

Quoted message said:

How much do you weigh?

10.5 stone

--

J u l i a n

__o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Michael MacClancy said:

I agree. My comment was based on a suspicion that Julian
was asserting that the Dutch routinely ride long distances
on their traditional Dutch bikes.

Quite a lot of them probably do. It might not be the
biggest country in Europe but there's plenty of scope for a
good tour.

Quoted message said:

I think it's true to say that lighter riders will be
happier on lighter bikes so suggesting that heavy bikes
are better for touring is potentially misleading.

Fair comment.

Quoted message said:

But you wouldn't be bonking, would you? Muscle aches and
discomfort are something else. I personally don't see why
a well set-up lightweight bike should be so much more
tiring to ride than a heavier one. After all, Lance
Armstrong rides the Tour on a very light bike. The main
reason IMO for touring on a heavier bike is that it's
going to be stronger.

All other things being reasonably equal, quite so, but they
often aren't. It depends where the weight is going. If, as
on the Streetmachine, the weight goes on things designed to
improve load-lugging and comfort then the extra weight may
well be a good thing. I find it is for me, even on an
effectively unladen day ride. On the rougher backroads I
like my roadgoing suspension: it not only makes the ride
more comfortable but it makes the bike more efficient,
despite the extra weight. Chunkier tyres can have a similar
effect. Serious racks modelled on the Forth Bridge weigh
more but they don't oscillate if you get out of the saddle
like light duty ones do, so you don't lose energy to moving
your bags side to side and you don't lose a degree of
control which /is/ fatiguing. And so on.

Professional cyclists aren't very good case studies for
typical touring, as they're amongst the fittest people on
earth and most of us, errrr, aren't, and they aren't
carrying luggage which affects the bike's handling. I
wouldn't like to tour on Lance's Tour bike: I wouldn't get
up the big hills with luggage and the saddle would probably
cripple me.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111
ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382
640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net
[email hidden] dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗

Julian Symondson said:

The brain uses a huge number of calories (perhaps someone
can tell us how many).

I don't think you're actually using many more joules through
worrying about things, but I would agree it makes a
difference to one's basic feelings of tiredness if you're a
nervous wreck (or partway to being). The rather benign radio
interview I did the other day /drained/ me, though I don't
think it burned many calories!

Quoted message said:

It might seem strange but I think that if you are worried
about every pebble and pothole that you do get tireder
quicker than if you can just keep rolling without any
concern which can do on a heavier (ie stronger and more
reliable bike).

I like the Streetmachine because it does just this, but a
lightweight bike can be strong and reliable. If someone
gave me the option of a tour on a Moulton New Series or a
Galaxy, I'd go for the (22 lb, but very strong and fully
suspended) Moulton!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111
ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382
640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net
[email hidden] dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

I think lighter riders will also try to carry lighter
loads when touring although I don't have any personal
experience.

This doesn't apply in my case (10.5 stone). To reiterate
previous points, I think that comfort is everything when
touring. If you find you need a goose down pillow and
silk pillow cases to get a good nights sleep then take
them. If you need 2 pints of beer to get to sleep - take
them. It's wrong to think of cycling only in terms of
speed and distance. You need to create a whole viable
lifestyle when touring otherwise you get fed up and go
home or you simply blindly aim at targets all the time
without enjoying whats going on.

The idea that a heavy bike is misery to peddle is just not
true - you just go slower but otherwise its just the same.

Also consider Josie Dew who knows more about touring than
any of us I suspect.

josiedew.co.ukfaq.htmOpen ↗

--
--

J u l i a n

__o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Peter Clinch said:

Julian Symondson said:

The brain uses a huge number of calories (perhaps someone
can tell us how many).

I don't think you're actually using many more joules
through worrying about things, but I would agree it makes
a difference to one's basic feelings of tiredness if
you're a nervous wreck (or partway to being).

Google says about 20W, ie 20% of your entire (resting)
power. There's little doubt in my mind that thinking hard
about a problem uses extra energy - I can get very hot when
puzzling over something!

James
--
If I have seen further than others, it is by treading on the
toes of giants. ne.jphomeOpen ↗

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 11:49:37 +0100, "Julian Symondson"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Michael MacClancy said:

I didn't know that concentration consumed so many
calories. Are you sure that something else isn't a factor
in this?

The brain uses a huge number of calories (perhaps someone
can tell us how many).

The brain uses about a fifth of the body's energy, and 100W
bulbs are used to simulate people in building thermal
efficiency testing. (Or certainly they used to be)

So it's about 20W (i.e. about 20J/sec, or about 72KJ/hour)
of which about 25% (=> ~5W) goes on visual signal
processing.

Does anyone know the correct conversion factor to calories?
IIRC it's about 4KJ : 1 Kcal, so my guess is

~ 18Kcal/hour

But that's for sedentary people indoors.

I've no idea a) how brain energy consumption rises with
mental effort, or b) how mental effort when cycling compares
with say, sitting in front of the telly, or doing a
crossword.

Quoted message said:

It might seem strange but I think that if you are worried
about every pebble and pothole that you do get tireder
quicker than if you can just keep rolling without any
concern which can do on a heavier (ie stronger and more
reliable bike).

I find I do the best mileages when I am thinking about the
bike least - ie when I am on tour and everything is
interesting and new. Fitness is important of course but
psychological state is as well.

Quoted message said:

How much do you weigh?

10.5 stone

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

in message <opr82hmgwilihyoj@left>, Julian Symondson

(') said:

The idea that a heavy bike is misery to peddle is just
not true

Oh yes it is. No-one doon ra barras wants a heavy bike
these days!

Given the choice between _pedalling_ a light bike and
_pedalling_ a heavy one, though (all other things being
equal) I'd choose the light one every time.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke)
jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗ Das Internet is nicht fuer
gefingerclicken und giffengrabben... Ist nicht fuer gewerken
bei das dumpkopfen. Das mausklicken sichtseeren keepen das
bandwit-spewin hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen
das cursorblinken. -- quoted from the jargon file

Julian Symondson [email hidden] opined the
following...

Quoted message said:

Also consider Josie Dew who knows more about touring than
any of us I suspect.

Having seen the photo of her bike in C+ (I think) the other
month, I can honestly say that I think she's a nutcase.
While I agree that speed isn't everything, the reason I like
cycling is the balance between covering enough ground to
watch the scenery change, and travelling slowly enough to
notice. If I'm travelling too slowly, I don't enjoy it any
more. Given that my next bike is likely to be in the
Streetmachine order of weight and geared up for touring,
it'll be interesting to see how this pans out. When looking
at camping equipment to use on cycle touring, I'm naturally
gravitating towards the lighter-weight "high- tech"
equipment in preference to standard camping fare.

Jon

Jon Senior <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote:

: Having seen the photo of her bike in C+ (I think) the
: other month, I can honestly say that I think she's a
: nutcase. While I agree that speed

I don't. I wouldn't travel that way myself but when you're
away for a long time (6 months - 12 months say) then create
comforts start to matter more than a bit of extra weight.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune clune.orgclune.orgOpen ↗ "Technolibertarians make a
philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

On 6 Jun 2004 16:37:30 GMT, "Arthur Clune" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

I wouldn't travel that way myself but when you're away for
a long time (6 months - 12 months say) then create comforts
start to matter more than a bit of extra weight.

And a robust bike is at a premium when you might be several
days walk from the nearest bike shop.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Arthur Clune [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

Jon Senior <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote:

: Having seen the photo of her bike in C+ (I think) the
: other month, I can honestly say that I think she's a
: nutcase. While I agree that speed

I don't. I wouldn't travel that way myself but when
you're away for a long time (6 months - 12 months say)
then create comforts start to matter more than a bit of
extra weight.

But given the travelling method is by bike, vastly
increasing the weight and thusly having some effect on
handling and performance must naturally decrease the
comfort. Choosing a 'bent of some variety or even a trike
which is more naturally conducive to supporting large loads
would make more sense for comfort than carrying an MFI
fitted kitchen (plus matching accessories) around. ;-)

The problems that I could see with her setup were not
limited to weight. The greatly raised CoG could not be good
and robust frame or not, that level of load will add to the
wear and tear of components.

Each to their own an' all, but I couldn't help but feel that
a part of the reason for carrying so much stuff was to
greatly increase the interest level of the story.

Jon

Simon Brooke said:

Given the choice between _pedalling_ a light bike and
_pedalling_ a heavy one, though (all other things being
equal) I'd choose the light one every time.

So would I, but IME all other things generally /aren't/
equal. And I personally like the things that contribute to
my bike being heavy more than I want light weight from them
not being there (suspension, comfy chair, robust CroMo
frame, strong racks for 2 sets of panniers, dynohub
lighting, hydraulic brakes, bombproof tyres, mudguards).
YMMV, of course.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111
ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382
640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net
[email hidden] dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗