27 ms·

I would be interested in seeing recumbents used in individual time trials perhaps. However, they seem to be significantly less nimble which is flat out dangerou

by thwest 11y ago

I would be interested in seeing recumbents used in individual time trials perhaps. However, they seem to be significantly less nimble which is flat out dangerous in the peloton. Their wheel base is longer, so I wonder if a peloton might actually be slowed by being spread farther apart. Also they are absolute trash for climbing.

SeanLuke 11y ago
How about small-wheeled bikes? The Moulton AM, a heavy, steel, fully suspended bike with 17" wheels, set the flying 200m faired world record in 1986, and it still stands. My understanding is that the current UCI rule which bans small-wheeled bikes (1.3.018) is a descendant of a rule specifically enacted to ban the Moulton. And not for safety reasons.
- thwest 11y ago
  Do you have a link for the Moulton record? The Moulton site has a weird phrasing about top speed and doesn't provide the time. If there really is a design advantage to small wheels, I wonder what the physics there are. Large wheels are good on road where you will encounter potholes etc. Anyhow, those small wheels are too ugly to be seen riding.
  - SeanLuke 11y ago
    > Do you have a link for the Moulton record? Sure. http://www.ihpva.org/hpvarec3.htm http://www.ihpva.org/hpvarec3.htm [Also http://www.whpva.org/land.html http://www.whpva.org/land.html ] Search for "Moulton". Also has a few other records as well. In fact, IIRC, there is no upright bike with an IHPVA speed record on that page that is not a Moulton. > Anyhow, those small wheels are too ugly to be seen riding. That's what penny-farthing people used to say about your bike. Though small-wheeled bikes have their own disadvantages (gearing challenges, mechanical trail), all other things equal, large-wheeled bikes are slow. UCI's restrictions have basically held back the industry. :-(
  - SeanLuke 11y ago
    > If there really is a design advantage to small wheels, I wonder what the physics there are. Large wheels are good on road where you will encounter potholes etc. Meh. 17" wheels do great on the road. So the physics is basically this. DISADVANTAGES. Small wheels have a steeper angle of attack, so they're somewhat bumpier on tough surfaces. That's easily dealt with using a small full suspension to glue wheels to the road, just like it's done on motorcycles. Small wheels are more difficult to gear high. There are lots of common approaches to that. And small wheels often have more squirrely steering, because it's harder (not impossible) to give them a lot of mechanical trail. This in turn presents a problem for going downhill fast where steering stability matters. Last, of course, the tires wear out faster. ADVANTAGES. Numerous. Small wheels are far more aerodynamic. They can be much lighter. They are far, far stronger and require fewer spokes. And they have much smaller rotational inertia, translating into faster acceleration and deceleration. Last, they allow for a much wider range of design options, including fairings. Large wheels are quite cumbersome in that regard.

by thwest 11y ago

SeanLuke 11y ago

How about small-wheeled bikes? The Moulton AM, a heavy, steel, fully suspended bike with 17" wheels, set the flying 200m faired world record in 1986, and it still stands. My understanding is that the current UCI rule which bans small-wheeled bikes (1.3.018) is a descendant of a rule specifically enacted to ban the Moulton. And not for safety reasons.

thwest 11y ago
Do you have a link for the Moulton record? The Moulton site has a weird phrasing about top speed and doesn't provide the time. If there really is a design advantage to small wheels, I wonder what the physics there are. Large wheels are good on road where you will encounter potholes etc. Anyhow, those small wheels are too ugly to be seen riding.
- SeanLuke 11y ago
  > Do you have a link for the Moulton record? Sure. http://www.ihpva.org/hpvarec3.htm http://www.ihpva.org/hpvarec3.htm [Also http://www.whpva.org/land.html http://www.whpva.org/land.html ] Search for "Moulton". Also has a few other records as well. In fact, IIRC, there is no upright bike with an IHPVA speed record on that page that is not a Moulton. > Anyhow, those small wheels are too ugly to be seen riding. That's what penny-farthing people used to say about your bike. Though small-wheeled bikes have their own disadvantages (gearing challenges, mechanical trail), all other things equal, large-wheeled bikes are slow. UCI's restrictions have basically held back the industry. :-(
- SeanLuke 11y ago
  > If there really is a design advantage to small wheels, I wonder what the physics there are. Large wheels are good on road where you will encounter potholes etc. Meh. 17" wheels do great on the road. So the physics is basically this. DISADVANTAGES. Small wheels have a steeper angle of attack, so they're somewhat bumpier on tough surfaces. That's easily dealt with using a small full suspension to glue wheels to the road, just like it's done on motorcycles. Small wheels are more difficult to gear high. There are lots of common approaches to that. And small wheels often have more squirrely steering, because it's harder (not impossible) to give them a lot of mechanical trail. This in turn presents a problem for going downhill fast where steering stability matters. Last, of course, the tires wear out faster. ADVANTAGES. Numerous. Small wheels are far more aerodynamic. They can be much lighter. They are far, far stronger and require fewer spokes. And they have much smaller rotational inertia, translating into faster acceleration and deceleration. Last, they allow for a much wider range of design options, including fairings. Large wheels are quite cumbersome in that regard.