Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Galleries NEW FAQ Contact About Impressum
It is currently Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:40 pm
Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed ✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken ✔ FIXED
- Avatars cannot be uploaded ✔ FIXED

Please note that we will soon do some changes in WW board template design in case to get a fully mobile/desktop responsiveness board!
If you find more errors please post it here: http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=139062


All times are UTC+01:00





Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 5:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 10:19 pm
Posts: 108
Are you serious? The independent variable was heart rate? If so, the "study" is bunk. I might believe the test IF the independent variable was power, but heart rate is way too variable. Besides, there are so many other factors to consider when testing a product (wind, temperature, etc.) that a "test" with only two trial (n=2) is even more flimsy.

The attack on the "model" developed by analytic cycling is a joke. It's like the attack on the "theory" of evolution.

In three words, Analyticcycling.com is right.

Ciao,
Andrew

EDIT:

Hm.. The article states: "The average heart rate reached during the test with the Stiletto was 159 bpm, while with the Ksyrium the average was 158 bpm. The tests were conducted in a short time period with equal weather and physical conditions, utilizing a consistent cadence and power." But it also states that they ONLY used a heart rate monitor. So do they have h.r. data and power data or just h.r. data? Regardless, subtle shifts in the wind change completely fudge up the data. And my other point that n=2 also shows that this "test" really is invalid.

So my conclusion is: Go to http://www.analyticcycling.com and see for yourself.




cadence90 wrote:
Joel wrote:
1 min on 25 is not that much. When you ride a climb one two times, you'll be faster the second time with the same condition, just because you know what follows,etc.

This is the climb they use for all their testing, it says so in the article.
Also, the article mentions the force exerted was kept consistent, 159bpm on the Spadas, 158bpm on the Ksyriums, in order to provide a clear basis for comparison. It's not like they didn't know know the climb with the other products and therefore by the time they got to Spada familiarity bred betterment.
It's more like Ferrari testing at Maranello: everything except the one variable being observed is kept consistent. Seems valid to me.


Top
   
 Post subject:
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 5:30 am 


Top
   
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 5:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:52 am
Posts: 1623
Actually, the independent variable was the wheelset in question.
But, whatever, I simply translated the article as a favor to the Forum.
And I do think real world testing is more valid than an Excel model, excuse me.

_________________
"Gimondi è un eroe umano, che viene sconfitto ma che continua la sua corsa fino a tornare a vincere." - Enrico Ruggeri


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:26 am 
www.2peak.com

Possibly the best for calculations, they have individually tested different wheels!

Check it out

www.2peak.com


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2004 8:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 5:04 am
Posts: 149
no reply to my last post, ye olde bald one?


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2004 5:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:52 am
Posts: 1623
danielgillett wrote:
www.2peak.com

Possibly the best for calculations, they have individually tested different wheels!

Check it out

www.2peak.com

Dan,
I'm curious about that thing. Are you referring to the Speed Calculator?
If so, I ran several calcs of the different wheels they list: same hilly ride, same rider power, elevation, distance, rider weight, bike weight, etc. All data the same except wheels. According to that thing, the Alex would perform marginally better than the Ksyrium, the Lightweight even worse; but a "Box rim 32 hole" performs the best of all!
Are you sure this is an accurate calculator? Just wondering how it's set up, and it leads me to believe that theory doesn't necessarily reflect practice....

_________________
"Gimondi è un eroe umano, che viene sconfitto ma che continua la sua corsa fino a tornare a vincere." - Enrico Ruggeri


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Carbon Frame & AL Wheels Vs Quality AL Frame & Carbon Wheels

in Road

jeffy

13

1528

Wed May 04, 2016 4:33 pm

KimJaeCheon View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Campagnolo wheels??

in Road

53cxzero

9

997

Mon Nov 28, 2016 1:31 am

robertbb View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. 77 Composites wheels

in Road

liam7020

2

434

Fri Jun 03, 2016 12:53 am

Akennelly View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Has anyone tried to run EE brakes with CLX 64 wheels?

in Road

Imaking20

0

208

Sun Nov 20, 2016 1:46 am

Imaking20 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. New wheels for new bike!

in Road

ardennes777

7

994

Thu Apr 07, 2016 2:54 pm

wangsanegara View the latest post


All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], catpoison, flafonta, Fluoro7, Google Adsense [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 33 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited