mmm, actually in a way the glasses are the same as before. Oakley discontinued the old Zeros he wore before and these are the new models. Check out the new Dartboards, I love mine although they aren’t billed as sports glasses.
Did you see Fabian Cancellara while finishing? It looked like his legs legs were not going symmetrically all the way around - one leg would be at the bottom of the pedal stroke, then the other leg would quickly swing around to catch up. Could that be due to rotor cranks? I’ve never seen them in action, but it would be cool for you if he was using them.
Yep. Notice Mayo and Brad McGee were also wearing the new Zeros. Pretty stupid looking if you ask me. Sort of reminds of the glasses Harry Carry (sp?) from the Cubs used to wear. Fine for an 80 year old Harry. Dumb looking on a cyclist.
So was Cancellera using Rotorcranks or not ? Either way, he was impressive today (stage 1) in the intermediate sprints, duking it out with Boonen and O’Grady for those bonus pts. How come more pros are not using Rotorcranks if the gains are supposed to be that significant. I can’t really see any downside to using them, in fact the downside to not using them appears to be losing time to a Rotorcrank users. Gary, can you elaborate on this ?
I am not sure if he is using them, however I know that most teams in the Tour have component sponsors (cranks) that pay them to ride their product, which limits the riders ability to ride Rotors (we don’t pay), we are seeing this with two pro teams that will be in the Vuelta but can only use the Rotors for TT stages. Shimano and Campy pay big bucks.
I am not sure if he is using them, however I know that most teams in the Tour have component sponsors (cranks) that pay them to ride their product, which limits the riders ability to ride Rotors (we don’t pay), we are seeing this with two pro teams that will be in the Vuelta but can only use the Rotors for TT stages. Shimano and Campy pay big bucks.
Apparently you have not seen pro team component contracts. Most teams do not get money to use drive train components. In fact, Shimano and Campy are actually notorious for being cheap in that regard, and there are teams in the Tour who buy their Shimano and Campy parts. This is also why so many teams ride non-Campy and non-Shimano cranks, including four in the 2004 Tour.
Ullrich goes against the wishes of and contracts with the two biggest companies in the bike industry, Shimano and Giant, to ride a non-Giant with non-Shimano wheels in the prologue of the biggest bike race in the world. Do you think he would not ride a different crank if he wanted to?
As far as brake levers go, these look like both the most aero AND complimentary to the lack of bend in the base bar.
Maybe he figured out that the AX brake doesn’t stop worth a darn, and it is not worth the aerodynamic advantage.
and 5) It looks like a totally new design for a skinsuit.
Latest and greatest Oakleys that they want us cycling fans to buy.
Sometimes, a computer can be a distraction. Who knows what the reason is?
The mechanic liked mounting the skewer that way better, or maybe it was figured out that skewer orientation does not matter in the big picture aerodynamically.
Oakleys? Maybe the curved temples on the Ms won’t fit under that helmet. I know that it annoys me (and adds nearly two full seconds to my T-1) because I have to put my Ms OUTSIDE of my helmet straps…
As to the computer, why would you need a computer when you’re simply red-lining? He’s got an earpiece for any info he needs.
Lance has always worn Oakley Pro M Frame sunglasses. This year he is wearing the ZERO model. I can’t believe he would change on his try for 6 (TDFs), but who knows. Maybe he didn’t like the way the Pro M’s fit inside the new helmet with all that padding now. Just a thought.
Your correct. And those disadvantages are still valid, but the advantages of a derraileur system have been clearly proven to overcome them for a hilly course.
For rotorcranks I am not so sure. I’ve considered them, but I have yet to be convinced, and to shell out the money I have to be convinced. I’ve read the research, but I don’t feel its convincing (I’m an industrial research chemist so I’ve learned to be highly critcal of any study). Also, the theories behind why they would work don’t convince me.
All that said, I feel that their is the possibility that they do have a benefit, I’m just not willing to part with my money on the gamble that I could be wrong.