GreatScott wrote:
Interesting! Looks like I need to study gear ratios.
You are the strongest cyclist of our little sample size of 180lb riders (based on an IF of .70 at NP of 223). What chainring did you run with the 11x32 cassette? Any by standard crank, do you mean 175mm? Your VI of 1.03 proves your point that it worked well!
Assuming you ran a 53/39 like fs16scott, I can see you guys would have a lot more power for the descents.
Scott
Jaymz
W: 180 lbs
Gearing: 11x32, 53/39, 175mm
NP: 223
AP: 216
VI: 1.03
IF: 0.70
Cadence: 86 rpm
Bike Time: 5:21
fs16scott
W: 179 lbs
Gearing: 11X28, 53x39, 170mm
NP 225
AP 207
VI 1.087
IF .81
Cadence: 80 rpm
Bike Time: 5:24
GreatScott
W: 180 lbs
Gearing: 11x28, 50/34, 172.5mm
NP: 198
AP: 180
VI: 1.1
IF: 0.72
Cadence: 73 rpm
Bike Time: 5:59 I think all the discussion about powering and having sufficient gearing on downhills is totally misplaced, certainly on a course with steep downhills like Whistler. NO ONE passed me on the downhills and I am sub 140 lb rider who almost never pedaled on downhills. I just got into my tuck with my face between the aero pads hands on the aero pads, elbows tucked in to my side and my butt on the top tube and passed everyone in my path while going at zero watts including many big guys pushing watts for no reason If the big guys refined their tucks, they would go infinitely faster than me with their weight. Same deal at IM Tremblant, same deal at IMLP, same deal at IM France. The only "tougher course" where the downhills are somewhat shallow where pedaling is faster than a proper aero tuck is Kona.
Basically you want to use a variant of the Obree egg position. You can do this from your saddle too rather than the top tube. I have no idea how Obree ever pedaled from that position, but for coasting at 65-80 kph it is dead stable and fast. If you are a bit worried, you can keep your hands on the brakes on your base bar, but it's slightly wider, but certainly saves a lot of kilojoules over the day.