Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious

Liste des GroupesRevenir à rb tech 
Sujet : Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious
De : jeffl (at) *nospam* cruzio.com (Jeff Liebermann)
Groupes : rec.bicycles.tech
Date : 21. May 2025, 18:15:34
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <5v1s2kd1oemf3o9k1n7jldttl2nrgnaps2@4ax.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
User-Agent : ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
On 21 May 2025 16:56:39 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Wed May 21 10:20:27 2025 zen cycle  wrote:
On 5/20/2025 4:58 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
On Tue, 20 May 2025 16:43:34 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
 
On 5/20/2025 1:38 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 20 May 2025 11:44:29 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
 
"Science of cycling still largely mysterious"
 
This article from 2016 recently popped up again:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/science-of-cycling-still-
mysterious-1.3699012
 
As is the case with most issues, if I think I need to know something I
go about trying to learn it. I've little time for learning about stuff
I have no need to know.
 
Yep. So much for curiosity, so much for education... Ignorance is bliss!
 
No, ignorance would be when someone doesn't know something they need
to know.
 
 
the irony of being ignorant of the definition of ignorance.....
 
Just for the edification of the floriduh dumbass - ignorance is not
predicated by need.
 
 
 
 
Perhaps you can tell us more about your virtual races and how they add in
rolling resistance and wind resistance. Talk about ignorance!
 
>
Maybe try it if you’re so interested? As you complain about roads/weather
would give one an option.
>
Roger Merriman

Good idea.  Tom might already have a power meter somewhere:
<https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89085&group=rec.bicycles.tech#89085>
"Like I said, I had a power meter on my Colnago and after reading a
couple of times and recording that 298 watts it matched what I thought
I was making and I had no further need for it. It is still laying
around here somewhere but I couldn't care less."

Tom could start by connecting his existing power meter to his
computer, install the app, create an account, and he's ready to ride.
Or, he can use his Garmin speed/cadence sensor(s).  With Tom's
impressive wealth, cost should not be an obstacle.  14 day free trial.
After that, $20/month or $200/year plus sales tax.

"Zwift: your complete guide"
<https://www.bikeradar.com/features/zwift-your-complete-guide>
"If you have a power meter, you can make do with any kind of trainer
or rollers. Zwift will use the data from your power meter to calculate
your in-game speed, but obviously you’ll miss out on simulated
gradients and controlled Workouts that come with using an indoor
training bike or smart trainer.  A speed/cadence sensor is the most
basic option and enables you to use your regular bike (with no power
meter) attached to a conventional trainer."


--
Jeff Liebermann                 jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272      http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann      AE6KS    831-336-2558

Date Sujet#  Auteur
20 May 25 * Science of cycling still largely mysterious77Frank Krygowski
20 May 25 +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious57Catrike Ryder
20 May 25 i`* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious56Frank Krygowski
20 May 25 i +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious48Catrike Ryder
20 May 25 i i+* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious3AMuzi
20 May 25 i ii+- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Roger Merriman
20 May 25 i ii`- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i i`* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious44Frank Krygowski
21 May 25 i i +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious30Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i i i`* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious29Frank Krygowski
21 May 25 i i i +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious11zen cycle
21 May 25 i i i i+* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious9Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i i i ii`* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious8Frank Krygowski
22 May 25 i i i ii +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious5Catrike Ryder
22 May 25 i i i ii i`* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious4Frank Krygowski
22 May 25 i i i ii i `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious3Catrike Ryder
22 May 25 i i i ii i  `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2AMuzi
22 May 25 i i i ii i   `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
24 May 25 i i i ii `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2Joy Beeson
24 May 25 i i i ii  `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i i i i`- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i i i `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious17Catrike Ryder
22 May 25 i i i  `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious16Frank Krygowski
22 May 25 i i i   `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious15Catrike Ryder
22 May 25 i i i    +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious5Catrike Ryder
23 May 25 i i i    i`* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious4Frank Krygowski
23 May 25 i i i    i `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious3Catrike Ryder
23 May 25 i i i    i  `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2Frank Krygowski
23 May 25 i i i    i   `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
23 May 25 i i i    `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious9Rolf Mantel
23 May 25 i i i     `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious8Catrike Ryder
23 May 25 i i i      +- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
23 May 25 i i i      `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious6AMuzi
23 May 25 i i i       `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious5Catrike Ryder
23 May 25 i i i        `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious4AMuzi
23 May 25 i i i         +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2Frank Krygowski
23 May 25 i i i         i`- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
23 May 25 i i i         `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i i `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious13zen cycle
21 May 25 i i  +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious9Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i i  i`* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious8AMuzi
21 May 25 i i  i +- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i i  i +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2zen cycle
21 May 25 i i  i i`- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
22 May 25 i i  i +- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1John B.
22 May 25 i i  i +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2John B.
22 May 25 i i  i i`- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
22 May 25 i i  i `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Rolf Mantel
21 May 25 i i  `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious3Roger Merriman
21 May 25 i i   +- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Jeff Liebermann
21 May 25 i i   `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1zen cycle
21 May 25 i +- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Roger Merriman
21 May 25 i `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious6Frank Krygowski
21 May 25 i  `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious5Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i   `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious4AMuzi
21 May 25 i    `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious3Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 i     `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2Frank Krygowski
22 May 25 i      `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
21 May 25 `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious19Wolfgang Strobl
21 May 25  +- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Catrike Ryder
21 May 25  `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious17zen cycle
21 May 25   +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious11Roger Merriman
22 May 25   i`* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious10Frank Krygowski
22 May 25   i +- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Roger Merriman
25 May 25   i +* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious3Roger Merriman
25 May 25   i i`* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2Frank Krygowski
25 May 25   i i `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Roger Merriman
25 May 25   i `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious5Wolfgang Strobl
25 May 25   i  `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious4AMuzi
25 May 25   i   `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious3Roger Merriman
25 May 25   i    `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2Frank Krygowski
26 May 25   i     `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Roger Merriman
22 May 25   `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious5Wolfgang Strobl
22 May 25    `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious4Frank Krygowski
22 May 25     `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious3Wolfgang Strobl
22 May 25      `* Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious2Frank Krygowski
24 May 25       `- Re: Science of cycling still largely mysterious1Wolfgang Strobl

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal