Human powered vs. Electronic drivetrain.

[mortirolo]

Electronic drivetrain (I mean Di2, EPS, eTap...) is maybe better, but:

Bicycle is a human powered vehicle? Including drivetrain too?

[ooo]

Using legs muscles is always healthy, but extended mechanical ulnar/median nerve sensory/compression is not that good for hands in a long term.
Even using pc keyboard and mouse is unnatural and dangerous, think how much more input you have to perform with your hands on a bike...

[prendrefeu]

...might as well fold the UCI into the various forms of Motorcycle racing then.

[mortirolo]

Using legs muscles is always healthy, but extended mechanical ulnar/median nerve sensory/compression is not that good for hands in a long term.
Even using pc keyboard and mouse is unnatural and dangerous, think how much more input you have to perform with your hands on a bike...

Cobbled sectors in Paris–Roubaix are not too healthy, so need to cut out from the route.

Tour the France is too long and not healthy too.
One week is more than enough.
We need plain etaps with max. 100km on mirror smooth route.

[Calnago]

I will now stop playing the piano as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[djwalker]

Why shouldn't the electronic gear shifting (NOT motors powering the bike) be legal? They are not performance enhancing. If you are arguing against technology then you should also ban bike computers, power meters, race radios, etc.. I would argue that bike computers and powermeters being used for pacing has way more of a performance benefit than electronic shifting.

[wingguy]

Bicycle is a human powered vehicle?

Yes.

Including drivetrain too?

If you want it to be.

But lots of people don't. Lots of people really, really like electronic gears and we all know that the industry would have been extremely unlikely to invest in developing those systems if they hadn't been allowed to market them through racing in the pro peloton.

And for reference, I've never owned DI2, EPS or Etap and I have no desire to in future. (Unless or until they can use the electronics to come up with something that is a fundamental departure from and improvement on conventional derailleur architecture.)

[AJS914]

And here I thought this was going to be about e-bikes.

I don't see a problem. Di2 doesn't help you go faster. You click the button, it shifts. With mechanical, you click the button or move the lever and it shifts.

I could see a future scenario where an on-board computer is reading power and speed and shifts the bike to help the rider, for example, achieve the fastest possible sprint. That could be a problem when the computer or AI, instead of the rider is making the decisions.

[mortirolo]

Why shouldn't the electronic gear shifting (NOT motors powering the bike) be legal? They are not performance enhancing. If you are arguing against technology then you should also ban bike computers, power meters, race radios, etc.. I would argue that bike computers and powermeters being used for pacing has way more of a performance benefit than electronic shifting.

"you should also ban bike computers and powermeters"
No, not have to.
Without powermeters we will see better race, but those theoreticaly legal on bicycle.

Electronic (not electric) drivetrain isn't compatible with human powered definition.

[mortirolo]

Bicycle is a human powered vehicle?

Yes.

Including drivetrain too?

If you want it to be.

But lots of people don't. Lots of people really, really like electronic gears and we all know that the industry would have been extremely unlikely to invest in developing those systems if they hadn't been allowed to market them through racing in the pro peloton.

And for reference, I've never owned DI2, EPS or Etap and I have no desire to in future. (Unless or until they can use the electronics to come up with something that is a fundamental departure from and improvement on conventional derailleur architecture.)

[mortirolo]

And here I thought this was going to be about e-bikes.

I don't see a problem. Di2 doesn't help you go faster. You click the button, it shifts. With mechanical, you click the button or move the lever and it shifts.

I could see a future scenario where an on-board computer is reading power and speed and shifts the bike to help the rider, for example, achieve the fastest possible sprint. That could be a problem when the computer or AI, instead of the rider is making the decisions.

I wouldn't see that future...
I could see a future scenario where an on-board computer is controling brakes and handlebar by electic motor, so Zakarin can beat outdated Nibali in downhill.

Electronic:
You need electic motors for gear changing.
Energy comes from accumlator, battery.

Mechanical, Hydraulic:
Energy comes from your muscle, heart, blood circulation, lungs...

[Jenmoss]

What I do know is that the soul and passion is slowly being dragged out of cycling for the sake of producing and promoting equipment that’s in all honesty is not needed and in the case of power meters
has caused the TDF in particular into a yearly bore fest. Riders have stopped racing each other and stare at their stems . Let’s be honest in the last few GTS if we did not have Contador we would have had controlled mundane racing. Riders no longer race on instinct . Everything is pre planned like Froomes downhill attack . What about attacking because you feel strong or because your opponent don’t look to good or here’s a thought how about just put the gas down and go man v Mano with your rivals and race . Riders. Are now scared to attack .
Ban PM ban radios and race and let the road decide not the computer. Disc brakes and electronic shifting was never needed in pro racing even a lot of the aero stuff is pointless when your sitting in the peloton. It’s just ways to make money and now we see the open promotion of e bikes . What the fu+k is the point of riding a bike? You ride a bike to stay healthy and exercise not to press a button that pedals for you , get a fu&&ing motor bike because riding a e bike is not cycling.
I just can’t see where the excitement in racing is going to come from this season now Bertie has gone.

[tymon_tm]

regarding equimpment, pro cycling is a manufacturer-driven discipline these days. most of the novelties only cost you money, without so much as a hint of a real benefit. bikes do get more complicated, thus not only do mechanics need more time, more tools and more effort to work on them, but they're more prone to all sort of failures we haven't even heard of 10-15 years ago (like breaking the carbon (!!) RD cage or being unable to shift gears due to battery issues). on an amateur level it's more or less the same - you can basically trash your bike with one petty accident - with all sort of parts made from carbon (cockpit, drivetrain, wheels etc) we're riding disposable stuff that rarely survives what bikes in the beginning of the century would.

sure, bikes are nicer one'd say, but are they really? isn't that only our mind that tells us new stuff is better, while it rarely is? take bars for instance - what do those fancy one piece, nearly frame-worth units provide us with? and don't tell me aero, you unfit, sitting on three spacers fat bastard!

of course pro bikes are for pros - so every small benefit counts, no matter the cost. OK, if that's the issue, how come Trek Sega hasn't won at least half of the races this season? and how come most riders spoke against discs, which, according to PR sheets, save lifes? how come Fabs would ride the most important races on mechanical DA, while Di2 is faster, better, stronger, BS-er?

one more issue - with this constant strive for *more* the cost of entering pro cycling is increasing rapidly. equipment costs fortune, most of the stuff you break - you break for good, and you *need* all that to compete, right? I've seen few local junior races this season, hardly anything WT-level. but the equipment, man, I bet in some cases mortgages are a must.

[AJS914]

Harsh! Is buying a $10K bike with some spacers any different than the guy that buys a Porsche 911 Turbo but never drives it to it's limit? I have no problem with people wanting trinkets and buying them with their money. It's fun. It's pleasurable to have a new top of the line bike. Just don't fool yourself that it might transform you in any way.

As a consumer, one can just vote with their dollars. Personally, I refuse to spend $2000 on a wheelset. For my riding, no wheelset is worth that kind of coin. I also think carbon clinchers are a fundamentally flawed product so I will not buy into that BS either. Vote with your dollars - your carbon bike from 2008 with 10 speed is still a great bike. Nobody forces people to buy aero, wider rims, wider tires, frames to fit the regime, discs, $300 helmets, $300 bibs, etc.

I agree that grand tours have become a 2000 mile time trial. Guys like Froome have found success by not attacking or responding to attacks but by time trialing up climbs day after day. Even if we banned power meters, I think they would still take this strategy. The rider who could do this by feel would be the most successful.

I also think the peloton is still chemically enhanced so their are less pronounced differences between top riders. In the pre-EPO era guys like Hinault, Lemond, or Merckx were significantly better than the average rider in the peloton. They didn't show up with 5 "super domestiques" that could tow them up mountain climbs. Those guys didn't exist.

[tymon_tm]

I'm not against buying expensive stuff, heck, I ride it myself . but IMHO it's consumerism at it's worst - buying something one doesn't really need, and what's barely better than the stuff it replaces, but is *new* and all the signs in the sky tell you it's essential to have it.

I understand there's also the thing called progress - if we stuck with what's working and not pursue other options we're basically back to caves, because, well, it's warm and cosy, why go building tools or growing plants.

but there's the thing - how much more do we really need. how much more is enough and not too much. how much of too much is just a guilty pleasure, and where does it become nothing less of an amok. we use more and more energy and resources to turn a 6-inch phone into a 6,1" one. we misuse oceans of water to produce stuff branded "eco friendly". yes, bike industry fits right into the picture - the one of having to produce new-er stuff only for the sake of producing it, and making millions on top of that.

if sport is about being more than a human so to speak, the business it's inevitably surrounded by is dragging it down. I had a crack this fall playing endlessly with Madone P1 site. I had to had it, wanted it so badly I could "feel" it's not hanging in my garage. then at one point I thought, WTF, it's like eating that another donut only cause it's there. and then my friend wrote this piece - https://medium.com/@czerski/uncertainty ... 8f85eed99 . of course, what's a single bike in the great shape of things. what's a car. what's a house with a garden watered daily and profusely. nothing. I bet you'll agree. I bet all - what - 8 billions of us will agree...

ps. this one's pretty good too - http://globalwarming.berrens.nl/globalwarming.htm