Shocks for Road Bikes

[email hidden] (BretCahill) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Shocks greatly reduce the maximum forces in a structure allowing for a much lighter vehicle. Maybe
you don't want 10" of travel in a criterium bike shock but someone ought to consider racing on
something that is rigid _up to a certain point_.

Europeans do a lot of things right but cobblestone bikeways ain't one of them.

Bret Cahill

Dear Brett,

I think that the UCI rules forbid suspension:

uci.chch01.pdfOpen ↗

In any case, a suspended frame is likely to be heavier than a rigid frame, given the same kind of
materials and techniques, because the suspension unit is going to be heavier than a simple naked
frame tube, outweighing any potential gains from slightly flimsier tubes made possible by a
softer ride.

The real advantage of suspension, as I understand it, lies in cornering. It keeps the tires in
contact with the pavement, increasing traction. This is said to be the key to most of the small-
wheel suspended Moulton bicycle's racing success--its suspension gave it an advantage over
traditional rigid bikes on bumpy, twisty courses where cornering was crucial.

Carl Fogel

It's been tried. I have a tape of the '94 Paris-Roubaix. It was mentioned that many/most riders had
suspension forks (RockShox Ruby, for example). Museeuw had a full-suspension Bianchi. At one point,
he tried to chase down a long break by Tchmil, but could not get to within 8 seconds. That he
couldn't might be due to the heavier frame, the grasshopper effect of the suspension, or because
Tchmil was just plain too strong that day.

[email hidden] (BretCahill) wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Shocks greatly reduce the maximum forces in a structure allowing for a much lighter vehicle. Maybe
you don't want 10" of travel in a criterium bike shock but someone ought to consider racing on
something that is rigid _up to a certain point_.

Europeans do a lot of things right but cobblestone bikeways ain't one of them.

Maybe make a new branch of the sport a little less bloody.

It's always depressing to see someone's wheels WAY up in the air.

Bret Cahill

I understand Cannondale has some system that's rigid until the surface gets too rough then it
goes into suspension mode. Something like that should eliminate the squishy response problem
during sprints.

The only thing left is the extra weight and since the maximum forces in the structure would be
limited, some weight saving modifications may be possible that would offset the additional weight of
the shocks.

It would be interesting if anyone could develop a composite material that could emulate the
Cannondale mechanism.

richard [email hidden] in

Quoted message said:

Message-id: <[email hidden]> writes:

It's been tried. I have a tape of the '94 Paris-Roubaix. It was mentioned that many/most riders had
suspension forks (RockShox Ruby, for example). Museeuw had a full-suspension Bianchi. At one point,
he tried to chase down a long break by Tchmil, but could not get to within 8 seconds. That he
couldn't might be due to the heavier frame, the grasshopper effect of the suspension, or because
Tchmil was just plain too strong that day.

Not very scientific.

Maybe having the same guy do several time trials on different surfaces with different bikes.

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (BretCahill) wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Shocks greatly reduce the maximum forces in a structure allowing for a much lighter vehicle.
Maybe you don't want 10" of travel in a criterium bike shock but someone ought to consider racing
on something that is rigid _up to a certain point_.

Europeans do a lot of things right but cobblestone bikeways ain't one of them.

road bikes HAVE shocks, at all four sides of the vehicle, two on the front and two towards
the rear...

arms/legs

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 vecchios.comvecchios.comOpen ↗ "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"