Opportunity to tell the UCI to reduce the weight limit

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

Posts: 271
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:26 pm
Location: Norway

by hna

tymon_tm wrote:some competition aspects:
-ban radio communication
-level chances for ALL national teams at WC - be that, four- or five-man teams, whatever works

I agree with the last one, but I tend to dissagree with the common belief that radios makes boring racing. Radio ban =/= exciting racing. In fact, many of the most exciting races the last couple of seasons have been with radio communication. Without radios the controlling teams do not tend to give the breakaways a very long leash and it ends in a sprint finish anyway. It doesn't make that much of a difference.

As long as the race routes are boring and the amount of riders on a team is too large we will have boring racing. Regardless of having radios or not.

by Weenie

User avatar
Posts: 7926
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

by djconnel

HammerTime2 wins the thread.

Posts: 347
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:10 am

by Rush

Ivan wrote:Thanks for th link !

Completed the survey. In my eyes, the UCI has a huge impact on how bicycles look like and how technological developments are implemented but the UCI doesn't realize this. Banning Obree's truck position, Boardman's lotus bike, ... Not to mention the recumbents. If not for the UCI, I would commute 10 kph faster to my work every day.

That's essentially what I wrote.

Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:36 pm

by twigstim

All government is bad government. Free market cycling all the way! We should have competing "governing bodies."

Posts: 669
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 5:23 am
Location: Olympic Nat'l Park, WA

by UpFromOne

djconnel wrote:HammerTime2 wins the thread.

It's not necessarily a bad governing body per se, it's the deeply corrupt and incompetent leadership.

Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:20 pm
Location: Denmark

by munk93

I wrote alot of stuff. Something that I might get slaughtered for in here. I recommended them to lower the weight limit to 6 kilos. Then I told them to short down the stages to a maximum of 170 km. (Shorter stages. Riders wont get that tired and hopefully more attacks) You have to look at the level of entertainment. Opposite to everyone else in here, I'm happy that UCI are putting restrictions on what is allowed. I don't like the "aero-roadbike boom". The traditional frames handle better, and could bring down the speed a bit. Think about it. It's not getting any better to be a spectator when the peloton is becoming faster. It just takes less time for the riders to pass, and then you can go home. And if the speed isn't that high, then the riders wont get as hurt if it was. They can go nuts on the tt frames instead. Then there are the looks. the kneesocks or compressionsocks, are ugly as f*** same goes for the new Giro skaterhelmet. If they removed all these restrictions we end up looking at a bunch of freaks all desperately trying to gain that small advantage on the others. But lowering the weight limit to 6 won't do that much IMO. They will be able to go faster uphill. I don't see the big problem there.
Now go ahead. Slice me up :wink:

Posts: 946
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Northeast USA

by jvanv8

Nice little questionnaire. I liked munk's proposed weight limit of 6kg. Even if it's not very future-forward, it's much more in keeping with the industry today. We all know 6.8kg has been a joke for years, but now first time cyclists are rolling out of the shop for their first ride under 6.8kg which makes one wonder what a creme de la creme rider and machine should be. 800+ grams should also help with some of the big names reinvest into R&D for lighter and more efficient designs, which there is little incentive or reward in this rendition of the UCI.
AX Vial Evo: 4970g
Addict SL : 5235g
My Cycling Blog
Strava: Wayward Cyclist

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Last post