Re: Most significant advance in bike technology for speed?

On Sun, 26 Jan 2025 06:56:29 -0500, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 1/25/2025 11:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:

On 1/25/2025 10:04 AM, cyclintom wrote:

On Fri Jan 24 14:33:53 2025 Frank Krygowski  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.)
>
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.
>
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
>
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective ?gear.? (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
>
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.

>
>
>
>
Frank, using average speeds of flat races where the riders are in high
gear all of the time, the roads have been vastely degrading year to
year and the distances have been being reduced is hardly a way to
measure the effect of shifting components.

 
Are there degraded roads? Yes of course. But generally the typical
paving of the classic era with Bartali and Coppi
 
https://www.todaysport.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/bartali-giusto.jpg
 
Is now different:
 
https://pezcyclingnews.com/travel/giro-2016-dolomites-preview/
 
 
 

>
That's a point I was going to bring up about race speeds increasing
faster before the 60's as well - paved roads play a big factor.
>
There's also the difference in race structure where in the early years,
rides were completely unsupported to the point that all riders were
responsible for their own repairs.
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eug%C3%A8ne_Christophe#1913_and_the_Tourmalet_incident
>
Paved roads and team support lead to the increases in overall speed in
the early years of racing.

And, just maybe a bit of the go fast medication?

The acceptance of drug-taking in the Tour de France was so complete by
1930, when the race changed to national teams that were to be paid for
by the organisers, that the rule book distributed to riders by the
organiser, Henri Desgrange, reminded them that drugs were not among
items with which they would be provided.[16] In a 1949 interview with
Fausto Coppi, the 1949 and 1952 Tour winner, he admitted to
amphetamine use and said "those who claim [that cyclists do not take
amphetamine], it's not worth talking to them about cycling".[17]
--
Cheers,

John B.