that's what makes sense to me. Couldn't figure out why a disc would be worse. Thanks.

(damn, now I have to go out and buy a disc.)

Some of us do regular TT as well as Tri's. Since USA Cycling is adopting UCI rules in 2006 (I think that's when it happens), Softrides will be illegal. I'm not going to drop several grand on a bike that I can't race in a year.
That and they look funny.

elund wrote: At IMFL every time I saw a beam bike the rider was bouncing wildly. It didnt look efficient.


It certainly seems this might be the case...if you are bouncing, wouldn't you be less efficient? Then again, it's economy that's more important, that's why we ALL pedal at rpms that aren't as efficient as the really low rpms that are proven to be more efficient. But, we all know we go faster in a race by being more economical by using less calorically-efficient higher rpms. My definition of efficient is: power output per calorie burned. My definition of economy is: power output over a long (greater than a few minutes) period of time. Maybe these aren't the correct terms, but, these are the terms I'm using...I'll be glad to change the terminology to the correct ones if someone would like to correct me.

But, here's an idea for discussion: When you push down with your RIGHT leg, the resultant force would unweight the rider/beam, but, it isn't constant...i.e., the force on the crankarm starts off at near zero at 12:00 and builds to it's maximum (somewhere around 3-4-5-6 o'clock?), then this force on the RIGHT crankarm drops to it's lowest levels as the crank passes the bottom of the stroke. The maximum upward bounce (from unweighting the rider/beam) would lag behind, but closely coincide with the time of maximal downstroke force. At first glance, this seems inefficient, because not all the power is going to turn the crank...some of the power raised the beam/rider.

BUT, there is a return downward movement of the rider/beam!

This downward movement occurs after forces from the RIGHT leg begin to decrease...somewhere around the bottom of the stroke. What happens at the bottom of the RIGHT pedal stroke? The LEFT pedal is at 12:00...could the force that raised the rider/beam be re-captured by the LEFT leg since the beam is now falling? IOW, if the left leg is now pushing, and the beam is falling, could the left leg be capturing this movement and transferring it to the left pedal? At some point, the beam quits dropping as the left leg pushes harder, and the beam rises...again, the beam falls as the left leg pushing forces wane...and the RIGHT leg is back on downward pushing duty...potentially re-capturing force from the dropping rider/beam?

Here's another possibility...the bouncing a beam tends to exhibit can be attenuated by pulling up with the opposite leg! Let's say your RIGHT leg is pushing down and it tends to raise the beam/rider...if you pull up with the LEFT leg, you can attenuate the distance that beam/rider will rise. Perhaps riding on a beam encourages a "rounder" pedal stroke?

If you consider side-to-side "wiggling", I don't see how that could help...seems to me that a non-vertical movement would always be wasteful.

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

"Softrides are heavy and weight does matter on most courses. Try lugging one of those behemouths up the hills in Lake Placid twice and then tell me how much fresher you feel on the run. Cervelo frames a a little heavy also. I don't have one of those either. "

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

In 2001, Steve Larsen won IM Lake Placid on a P3

In 2002, Ryan Bolton won IM Lake Placid on a Softride...He ran a 2h49 marathon not bad all...

I personaly own 2 cervelos P3 and Soloist, no softride. I do love my cervelo, but I have to admit the Softride offers a more confortable ride and has fast. I did test it for a 60mi ride, i felt way fresher getting out of it!

Most people will say they feel better getting off the softride more so than a conventional frame. Bumps really don't effect you. I also think that riding a softride is similair to a training aid. it forces you to become an efficient pedaller or look like a pogo stick. The beam highlights your pedalling flaws. Always push down and you ride like this -_-_-_-_-. Pedal smooth and the beam will be rather quite and still.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

"BUT, there is a return downward movement of the rider/beam"

Without getting into the engineering, I'll just tell you it doesn't work that way. I've ridden a Softride, and you have to pedal in circles or you bounce. The bouncing is out of synch with the pedal stroke, so it's lost energy. When you pedal good circles, the bike goes faster.

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

"At IMFL every time I saw a beam bike the rider was bouncing wildly. It didnt look efficient.".

It isn't efficient. Riding a Softride takes time and discipline. It ain't PCs, but it's the next best thing. Once you master circular pedalling, SRs are fast.

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

I have a Rocket. In races, I often see Classic/Qualifier riders bouncing up and down on their bikes. I'll see some Rocket owners with a tiny bounce, but in any event, only 1/100th the bounce of Classic/Qualifier riders.

The only time I have any bounce is when I'm spinning really high RPMs. I probably spin a tiny bit slower than other riders of my caliber on diamond frames, but I've never noticed any impact from the marginally decreased spin.

I've tried high RPMs and I've grinded it out. I really don't see that much of a difference, so I gear to the level just below the bounce. Its probably a 5 - 7 RMP difference.

I have to admit, it drives me insane when I see other Softrider owners bouncing so much. I want to scream at them to "smooth out your pedal stroke" and/or "put it in a bigger gear," but to this point I have always refrained.

I'm not good at biting my tongue. It just seems really severe to offer advice to a rider during the race - - especially as I can see that rider coming back later in the race during the run with a nice "see ya later" comment (damn all you fast runners) as he passed by me.

Any other softride owners feel the same way about offering advice to the "bouncers?" I want to offer my 2 cents, but I don't see that it would be appreciated.

"BUT, there is a return downward movement of the rider/beam"

CE Wrote: Without getting into the engineering, I'll just tell you it doesn't work that way.

I'd like to see it with a high-speed camera. If the beam is already falling before the opposite foot is pushing, it would tell me the bounce is simply inefficient. I suspect this is the case, but, I'd still like to see it. Also, since everybody's pedal stroke isn't the same, could be that it isn't as inefficient on every individual's stroke.

Still, like you said, I think beamers encourages a "rounder" stroke...and I think that is a good thing.

I'd also like to get that high-speed camera to compare the different beam setups not only during pedalling but when cornering hard through a bumpy turn...specifically to see what happens as far as lateral movement in a hard turn. Heck, as long as we have this camera available, lets run some double-diamond bikes through the same turn to see if a weighted-beam bike out-corners an outside pedal-weighted double-diamond bike due to the reported/theorized better tire traction provided by the suspension bikes.

When we're through discussing all the theory and tests, it still comes down to better comfort for me on long rides, so, hopefully I'll get to ride more this next year without lower back pain and saddle area issues.

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

"I'd like to see it with a high-speed camera. If the beam is already falling before the opposite foot is pushing, it would tell me the bounce is simply inefficient. I suspect this is the case..."
- - So do I. I've ridden Softride (liked it a lot) and it just took me a couple of days to really get smooth on the thing. I suspect that a steady diet of that would make you a better rider. Your TitanFlex must be similar, if not as pronounced.

"I'd also like to get that high-speed camera to compare the different beam setups not only during pedalling but when cornering hard through a bumpy turn...specifically to see what happens as far as lateral movement in a hard turn."
- - That's one I'd pay to see as well.

"Heck, as long as we have this camera available, lets run some double-diamond bikes through the same turn to see if a weighted-beam bike out-corners an outside pedal-weighted double-diamond bike due to the reported/theorized better tire traction provided by the suspension bikes."
- - Not to mention seeing if the lateral sway of the beam is an asset or a liability. I've always been curious about that.

"When we're through discussing all the theory and tests, it still comes down to better comfort for me on long rides, so, hopefully I'll get to ride more this next year without lower back pain and saddle area issues."
- - Count on it. I wish I'd had a SR for CaliMan last year. That was definitly 40 miles of bad road!!

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

Bumps in the road never go away. When a softride goes over the bumps the energy is transferred through to the beam. That's why you see them bounce. On a conventional frome those bumps are transferred and absorbed by the body and not the beam.

You should scream at them, that would be f*cking funny IMO.

I'll wager $5 that the softride would corner better given the same rider on a double diamond and a softride. In my sharper or off camber turns or rough turns is where you would see the greatest gains through a corner. I think my softride corners better than my current TT set up. I'd say I can carry 5mph more through a turn comfortably on the softride. Figure the avg tri/du course has at least 6 turns and your suddenly about 15-20 sec further up the road.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

My experience, sounds similar to yours. I had a sponsorship deal with Softride back in the early- mid '90s when they were really trying to get the bikes out there. I trained and raced on a Softride Solo for 4 years. Loved the bike and recorded some very fast times( all time best times) in both triathlons and ITT's on it.

I don't race anymore and ride for fun and fitness. The Softride sits in the garage in bit's a pieces and I have been riding, when I do ride, Cervelo road bike for the few last years. I have a picture of me riding that Softride Solo at IMH in 1993 sitting on my desk here at work. The hardest thing I found about riding a Softride was weaning myself off it when I went back to a "normal" bike. There is a period of transition that you must go through going back to a fixed seat-post.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Hasn't it been shown that the best TTers are mashers, not "round pedalers", in that they put a lot of force into each downstroke? Wouldn't that imply that altering this winning method to accommodate the beam would put one at a disadvantage?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Hasn't it been shown that the best TTers are mashers, not "round pedalers", in that they put a lot of force into each downstroke?

I don't know. Has it? If so, are we talking about pure time trialers, or triathletes?

And when you say mashers who who put a lot of force on the downstroke, does that necessarily mean that they're not round pedalers? Mrs. Vitus grinds a bigger gear than I do, and has a much rounder pedal stroke. My growing impression is that it's generally easier to pedal in circles while "mashing" a big gear than while "spinning" a smaller one.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I recall reading a reserch paper a few years ago, where they had taken top time trialers into the lab a tested them on where they were applying max force trying to determine what was the optimal pedal stroke.

Despite all the talk of spinning and a smooth pedal stroke it would seem that the top TT cyclists apply max force from 3 o'clock to 6 o'clock and that's it.

The other key pedal stroke technic tips I have been told about are to imagine you are scraping mud off the bottom of your boot and that the best cyclists, seem to have this ability to get the leg that is not applying force out of the way quickly and effciently on the backstroke to A) give themselves a micro rest and B) keep that leg out of the way so that the other leg CAN apply max force( ie the legs are not working against one another)

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

ken wrote: Hasn't it been shown that the best TTers are mashers, not "round pedalers", in that they put a lot of force into each downstroke? Wouldn't that imply that altering this winning method to accommodate the beam would put one at a disadvantage?


I don't think so. I certainly haven't seen such proof...doesn't mean it doesn't exist, I just haven't seen it.

But, Lance Armstrong isn't considered to be a masher (at least, not anymore), and he seems to have decent TT results last time I checked. On the other hand, Bjorn Andersen is a masher, and he seems to do OK in TT's, too.

What is happening in the pedal stroke of these two riders? LA MAY be pedalling in "squares" without pulling up much at all, and BA MAY be a very "round" pedaller even though he is at an rpm commonly called "mashing". On the other hand, LA may be a very round pedaller, and BA may only push down. (I think they are both on the rounder side of the line, but, I don't know.) I guess my point is that neither "spinning" nor "mashing" denotes pulling up or not. One can "spin" while only pushing down or while pulling up. One can "mash" while only pushing down or while pulling up.

When I'm on a favorite circular TT course (Lowe's Motor Speedway in Charlotte), there are some 30+mph TTer's that pass me. Most of them are at a higher rpm than I am, but some are at my same rpm, and some are at a lower rpm than I. I'm also passing people that are at a higher rpm then I, the same rpm, and lower a rpm.

I don't see the proof here.

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

Fleck's recollection matches mine. Of course the maximum force is applied on the downstroke...somewhere between 3 o'clock and later.

This paper (I believe it was by Coyle, et.al., if it was the same paper) also had a discussion section where the author said that some of the riders, that didn't push down as hard as the fastest riders, partially compensated by having a "rounder" pedal stroke technique...similar to the "scrape the mud off the bottom of your shoe" and/or picking up the rising leg. And if these riders didn't have those stroke characteristics, they would have been further behind the very fastest. I don't remember the number of riders tested, but, it wasn't a big number (8? 12?).

This paper only showed what the pedalling characteristics currently were in this small sample of riders. If the best riders in this small sample happened to be "rounder" pedallers, it would not PROVE that round pedalling is "better", just as the paper didn't PROVE that not-so-round pedalling is "better".

Back to the bouncing...it would be my guess that bouncing would be inefficient...unless it were timed to recapture the forces with the opposite leg...something Cuz E thinks doesn't happen. I don't think the timing is sufficient to recapture energy either...but, I don't know. Anecdotal evidence such as Fleck's PRs and lots of other people's PRs occuring while on a beam bike isn't proof that beam bikes are faster, and, without seeing these people ride, I don't know whether these people rode with no bounce, little bounce, or a kangaroo bounce during their PRs. My guess is, they were smooth during their PRs, which might lend some support that smoother pedalling is a worthy goal. Again, I don't know.

What I DO know, is that riding on a beam is much more comfortable for me, and I hope to be able to put in many more comfortable miles this upcoming year. Perhaps, more miles will translate into faster times...if not, at least I'll be in less pain, so I'll enjoy it more.

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

Over the past few months I've been able to purchase 2 brand new Zipp 2001's, both still in the original bubble wrap and in the original Zipp box!! The second one is being built as we speak. I've now built up 4 of these bkes. They are very fast. NO bouncing on the beam, since I pre-load the beam and eliminate any bounce. The shock absorbsion(sp?) comes from the beam sitting on top of 2 elastomars. You can tighten the beam so as to squish the elastomers and get no bounce yet the beam still absorbs the road shock.

I've had a Softride, aluminum frame bikes , carbon frame bikes, lots of different manufacturers and a custom made Tiemeyer, but I always return to the Zipp's!

---

.
.
Paul

That's really cool! What are the Zipp beams made of? Do those beams have no flex, or just a little? How much total travel do you estimate your seat has on a Zipp? As you can tell, I've never seen one of these up close!

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

The carbon beam and frame are all hand made. Its just like a carbon bike frame, hollow! The beam will not have any movement if you pre-load the beam with the pre-load bolt. I can not push down on my beam and see it move at all. Even without a heavy/tight pre-load I'm sure you would not be able to depress the beam much against the elastomers anyway.

There is a pivot bolt that holds the beam to the frame...about 6-8 inches behind this bolt is the elastomers. The beam sits on the elastomers and has a bolt that is accessable from the top of the beam where you can either pre-load alot or a little onto the elastomers. Its actually a great setup once you get the beam height adjusted. You have to mount the beam then measure the BB to seat rail height. If its not right you have to take the beam off, adjust the height with an internal bolt that the elastomers sit on, remount the beam, pre-load as desired, re-measure, repeat until its right!

Softrides - as far as bouncing is concerned - I never felt it on my SE7 at race speeds. If I rode slow or at a high rpm over 105 then I would feel a bounce to the beam. With all the discussion about the effects of the bounce compared to effeciency....I actally had a feeling that IF I did bounce....it helped at times when I got tired. NOPE -no proof other then the feeling I had. I could have sweared the bouncing was helping me!

---

.
.
Paul

Not sure if Softride's are faster. I did see a guy at IMFL with a broken beam. He told us he had to ride stading up for the last 60 miles due to beam failure.

That sucks for him, but it is pretty impressive he went on to finish the race.

My definition of "masher" is one who exerts a lot of force over a small portion of the pedal cycle. It's not related to cadence. We don't know if Armstrong (or Andersson) is a "masher" by my definition; all we know is that he puts out a whole lot of power over a long period of time. As someone else mentioned, a study was done using force-measuring pedals (the only way to determine where in the pedal stroke the force is being applied), and found that the best cyclists/TTers put out their power over less of the cycle than others.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"