Spada Stiletto Wheels, "Ciclismo", Ottobre 2003

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
andrew
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 10:19 pm

by andrew

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.

User avatar
cadence90
Posts: 1695
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:52 am

by cadence90

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

danielgillett

by danielgillett

www.2peak.com

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

Check it out

www.2peak.com

jim
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 5:04 am

by jim

no reply to my last post, ye olde bald one?

User avatar
cadence90
Posts: 1695
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:52 am

by cadence90

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

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post