I think some of you people need to get a life with your comments on here. Its not a PHd paper is it. Its a quick look at the difference between the 2, and clearly there is a difference.
@Cranedude21 sorry I meant that. And I know that 2 minutes in a race is an enternity but still, not enough of a change for me to think we've advanced that much in 5 decades.
@pdblouin33 Your comment is invalid. This guy was not talking about a peleton of TT rigs, he was comparing a standard road bike to a TT bike. Apples and oranges.
The only problem is that they don't have a 1970's rider. Advancement in technology in this case,correlates with a regression in rider determination and heart.
This test is retarded. The bike setup wasn't even the same. The test course was very flawed, too. A 20 minute TT is a poor way to measure the differences. I'd like to see multiple riders do the same mountainous, 3 - 4 hour ride on 2 different days with each bike, with identical setup, fitting, and gear for each test. As is, this is just wanking about the new stuff.
Haha, but no one would watch my video. I understand the logistical difficulty in doing such a thing, but the way they did this was just lazy. With a bit more preparation and work they could have done something more accurate, more interesting, and more useful. If they're strained for time, it could at least be a series of 40k TTs with identical setups and riders.
@jordanamed True, but even with things in favour of a new bike, its only about a 10% difference in 60 years of bike manufacture. Imagine how small the difference is between each year of bike model, yet people still frequently upgrade.
I'm saying, why do you feel the need to comment on something you clearly hate? I'm sure you have better things to do than share your feelings of disdain with anonymous strangers.
If your going to compair old against new, fit both bikes to the dude who is riding them. His first coment about the old bike is that it does not fit him, pedals, bars seat etc. What a waste of fucking time this was, pathetic, fucking wank......!
C'mon the old bike doesn't even fit the rider! This was a one sided biased camparison. Who came up with this idea didn't follow through at all. If your are going to do the test do it properly. Use the same rider on both bikes and make the old bike as good as it would have been in the 50's. Then let's see what the difference is. Not much I'll bet..... mrray
Put clips on the vintage bike! What a ridiculous comparison. It had very little to do with weight or aerodynamics...had much more to do with the fact that the ride wasn't clipped in. The big winner is cycling shoes and clips...not the bike.
Of course, 300 pounders will continue paying thousands of dollars to shave a few ounces off their bike....which is another big win....losing weight.
@pastortravis rather than shave the weight off my bike, i would rather keep it, as it has been my experience the more weight i have on the drive wheel, the more speed i can get out of a bicycle, which is why i like those heavy old shwinn bikes, that and with as much as they weigh, noone wants to steal them. LOL
That's probably because it weighed 50 pounds. My first road bike was a 63cm Schwinn Varsity, ca. 1972 or so, it weighs at least 40 pounds. It won't steer for shit, but it keeps momentum like nothing else.
@jordanamed yeah, moving the weight of those older bikes is easy as long as you have muscle, and yeah, those old heavy bikes did keep their momentum alot better. alot of the older bicycles were made with longer cranks from the pedals to the journal, and i could get them moving faster, now they are shorter in lentgh to the pedals and geared down which makes it hard to get much good speed any more. give me a bicycle made in the 70's over todays garbage any day.
@MacGyver0076 modern bikes have no specific cranks or gear range. everything is up to customer, any crank length 168.5, 170, 172.5, 175 is widely available, any gear from 53x11 to 34x27. In 70s-80s this choice was very limited
I love my modern carbon fiber bike, and I wouldn't go back to my old Schwinn. It was good training pedaling that 50 pound monster up mountains, and lugging it up and down subway stairs. Plus, no one will think about stealing it if it's got even a crappy chain on it.
The gearing on my new bike spins out at around 40 with a 105 cadence, that's decent speed. Feedback, handling, and braking are all 100x better, too.
@jordanamed yeah, people dont want a bike with a crappy looking chain but, if you had the chance to steal a bike, would you take the light one or the heavy one? that is another reason i like those old shwinn bikes, they weigh so much that noone around here would want to steal it, . i offered to let a guy ride the schwinn, after 10 minutes he gave it back and said he wasnt going biking with me any more if he had to ride that. something about hard to balance with the weight of the bike. LOL
@tylerjandreau Have you ever tried cornering on a Time Trial bike? It's brutal. That's why Tour de France riders can't use them - imagine 50 riders shoulder to shoulder with bikes that can't be controlled. Pileup!
@tylerjandreau it is so the air is kept cleaner when he is time trialing however it was exceptionly wide, but i don't think the camera work showed you how fast he should of been going, so that would of impacted the way he took the corner, Rapha a an increadibly good team, ( having experiance with riding with some of them ) who specilize in CRIT racing so all of them should be good at cornering.
@nssurge no but i have ridden with the team Rapha, and have got to know a few of them as my coach was their coach and often when they are at a training came in devon my coach arranges for use to ride with them.
Lol!! Men's Fitness mag ... dead giveaway there. It's like watching a "I lost 80 pounds in just 3 weeks" commercial -- slant the whole thing for the desired (slanted affect). Then again, even with all the advances in frame, forks, wheels, aero-bars, helmets, nutrition, fluids, etc., the bike times at Ironman Hawaii are still not much faster than 25 years ago.
The single bif=ggest factor is whether the bike fits the rider. I have a collection of old racing bikes from the 60's and 70's and sometimes bring one out to a training ride. I have no problem keeping up with the group on a 1970 Peugeot PX-10 or a 1978 Raleigh Professional. I have ridden events at the local velodrome on a 1968 Peugeot track bike and turned in times as quick as on my Rush Hour Pro.
Granted, new technology and design is superior, but it's not everything.
Sorry, I can't buy this. There are several flaws to the comparison which others have commented on but my personal experience has shown that the older bike can do better. For example, 2 century rides on 2 different bikes & the same route; a 1951 Bates BAR w/8 speeds & a 1979 Mercian KOM w/12 speeds & sealed bearing hubs. My time on the Bates was 20 minutes faster &, no, the Bates wasn't the first bike ridden on the course.
@innismor11 The weather was similar; no noticeable wind. I'm only making an observation based on experience & not claiming a valid test result during which all variables are controlled. However, race times in the past on the old machines are surprisingly quick, ie. a sub 4 hour time for a century in the 50's on a tricycle no less!
Dead I hear correctly that the rider was using clip pedals?
I think that alone makes a tremendous difference, regardless of which type of bike you're on. Any bike with clipless pedals is faster than one without.
Well let's see, his muscles are optimized to work mostly likely on that TT bike, and he's completely unused to the old bike...invalid test. What should be measured is the course time given a consistent wattage, and the only variances would be the geometry, aerodynamics, and body position. All that in order, then you may have something to talk about.
What a load of piss. He wasn't giving it any beans on the steel bike at all. Bare jokes from a video that all about some getting some brand time and punting a few more one-crash and it's done bikes to bored execs....
interesting, but this is far from a fair comparison, the rider should have been given more time to adjust to the steel bike, even if it was bikes from the same era it'd be obvious that he'd be faster on his own bike. Of course the modern bike is faster, but probably not by 2 mins.
the first bike you can get for under £50 . the second bike £1000 min. seems likea lot to pay for 2 min whe he could of got areo bars for the first bike
Bad comparison. Shouldn't they use the same rider, maybe in two different days so he could rest up and try another bike? Different riders have different fitness levels and this video can't prove how the older race bike is slower anyways. This vid sucks
I just picked up a 1960 road bike. It is only as fast as my lowrider. I can only maintain 22-24mph or so for any distance and max out on flat at around 32mph My lowrider is 44 pounds, My 1960 ten speed is 32 pounds.
I would love to try a new lightweight bike and see what I could do.
@spikedbeetle The weight doesn't make too terribly much of a difference once you get going, as far as flat out speed is concerned. Also, wtf kind of drivetrain do you have on a lowrider to reach 20mph?
@jesuriah I have a 65 tooth front gear and a 20 tooth rear cog on a 3 speed hub. I have held 24+mph for several miles on flat. It is hard to maintain anything above that for an extend period of time though.
My low gear for one full pedal rotation travels15.33 feet. Second gear is what I use most. It travles 21.08 feet and third travels 28.83 feet for one full pedal rotation.
Watch utah tour de donut 7-16-11. There is a picture of it toward the end of the video.
One person with two bikes means zero statistical data. Get 100 riders and the same test, then maybe you'll have a valid result. Thanks for nothing Mens Fitness.
Of course there is a difference between a normal road racing bike of any era and a TT bike . You need to compare that old road racing bike with a new road racing bike, not a TT bike. All those guys like Obree and Boardman showed us that in the 90's. And if the rider was having problems pulling on the up stroke then my guess is he didn't have the proper cleats. With proper shoes and clips you are never going to slip out of the pedals.
@jesuriah YEah I mean toe clips and straps but with the old cleats that you nailed to your shoes. Didn't they have them in the 50's? IDK maybe not but I remember riding bikes like that in the early 80's and with the proper cleat, toe clips and straps you were not going to slip out of the pedals in fact so much so that it's kind of scary when you really do need to get out.
Everybody used shoe plates with toe straps in the 1950s even if the plates were two strips of leather nailed to the shoe sole. Usual shoe plates were aluminium and were just as secure as modern clipless pedals. In fact it was a while before sprinters changed to clipless because they were afraid of pulling a foot out at the finish.
Not really a valid test, though unless you use the same rider - or better, multiple riders.
If you look at the average speeds of the Tour de France, you''ll be surprised how close the old ones are to the new ones. But by the commercials, each year a few new technologies appear which added up rise the bike's performance with at least 1%. 1.01 ^ 50 = 1.644 in fifty years. So, we should have 64% higher speeds now than in the 1960.
I think they should do more research in a test like this. The old school guys could get pretty aerodynamic even on the old bikes. It was obvious in the video that the rider did not know how to do an optimal ride on the old bike, which made the test a bit unfair. I'm not saying the the modern bike would be slower, but it would would not have won by 2 minutes. It would also be interesting to compare the race times between the same bikes with 5 lbs of weight added.
@1stPlaceDirector A aero frame tt bike, skinsuit, aero wheels, and an aero helmet is definitely 2 minutes faster... The guy on the road bike does a decent job of being in the drops. It's not just about getting low to be aerodynamic, the aero bars allows for a much narrower position as well as an easy way to hold the position. Ask Greg Lemond if he thinks aero bars are significantly faster. This on top of the clothing/helmet, wheels, and frame/fork are proven to be significantly faster.
@1stPlaceDirector you must also take comfort and the long distances traveled in the actual races. The comfort of modern shifters and geometries makes a huge difference in a long race. That extra 5 lbs would make a lot bigger difference 4 hours into a ride than in the first 20 min.
a bike will just be as good as the rider. One of the reasons why I think bicycle companies are in it for the money and not for the sport.
auomauom 1 day ago
I think some of you people need to get a life with your comments on here. Its not a PHd paper is it. Its a quick look at the difference between the 2, and clearly there is a difference.
deve8uk 1 day ago
So in 50 years we managed to shave 2 seconds at a cost of how much for that Specialized?
froochie123 1 day ago
@froochie123 That was minutes...
Cranedude21 1 day ago
Comment removed
froochie123 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Cranedude21 sorry I meant that. And I know that 2 minutes in a race is an enternity but still, not enough of a change for me to think we've advanced that much in 5 decades.
froochie123 1 day ago
Nonsense!
crlbertone 2 days ago
:)
ClarksonsinUSA 4 days ago
Facebook/CyclistsForRightOfWayUK
CyclistsFROWUK 5 days ago
yeah but with the aerodynamics comes a heavy price: looking like a speeding spermie
cammlol 6 days ago
i dont know if if looking like a massive knob with more money than sense is worth the 2 minutes i could shave off my commute
Cssfiend 1 week ago
When cavendish is rinding on a 2009 bike and schleck on a 1950 cavendish would beat him on the mont ventoux :p
TheObbyer 1 week ago
chill on the edits
dezmundo1251 1 week ago
Seriously WTF, A TT bike vs a standard road bike? I'm glad these guys aren't scientists!
rustynail12345678 1 week ago
@rustynail12345678 in the 50's they rode on those bikes, also TT's.
OvercomeThePain 1 week ago
1:29 off the track lol
I8uLUVm 1 week ago
Comment removed
I8uLUVm 1 week ago
LOL @ the self proclaimed "experts" who think there was such a thing as a TT bike in the 50s
All the gear and no idea eh lads?
LOL :-D
bluesman979 2 weeks ago
@pdblouin33 Your comment is invalid. This guy was not talking about a peleton of TT rigs, he was comparing a standard road bike to a TT bike. Apples and oranges.
tylerjandreau 2 weeks ago
How stupid is it to compare a road bike to a time trial bike? OF COURSE it's going to be faster! Wankers...
oraclepw 3 weeks ago
Dumb.. Eddy Merckx , Major Taylor Coppi and others did not have clipless pedals but they knew how to pedal you wanker..
sprocketandwheel 3 weeks ago
Why didn't they do road bike vs road bike? They probally did and it was too close for their advertisers approval! ;)
bloodswetandgears 3 weeks ago
yeah why use a tt bike, F tards. Thing was probably slower in the corners anyways.
hillclimber440 3 weeks ago
Put that wanker on the TT bike up against Ferdi Kubler on that old road bike, and see what the results are then.
arklat 4 weeks ago
Lame, defined.
aaronjohnmaughan 4 weeks ago
Who wants to make a video of a 50's road bike and compare it to a modern single speed mountain bike and use that to claim old bikes are faster?
bantam700 1 month ago
Why road bike vs time trial bike?
Please old road bike vs modern road bike.
soulfulcyclist 1 month ago 3
4 thousand dollars and you only gain 2 minutes, I'm sorry I'd rather want my old steel one.
MrKikelenon 1 month ago 4
I would have like it compared to a modern road bike not a time trial bike.
SkullLikeASecret 1 month ago
screw the canadian forces.
glewberdoober 1 month ago
RETRO RIDER IS STRONGER == I CAN PULL MY WEIGHT , besides steel is
real.
ripedecomp 1 month ago 9
herpa derp
funkyseefunkydo 1 month ago
The only problem is that they don't have a 1970's rider. Advancement in technology in this case,correlates with a regression in rider determination and heart.
cAnthonyL 1 month ago
@cAnthonyL and IQ by the sounds of it...
levrone007 1 month ago
All this states is that people of yester years were more stronger and tougher than weaklings of today.
matteoiseuro 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Do you want free iTunes gift-cards?!?
1. Download the free application: "APP Trailers" from iTunes
2. Enter the code "freefivehundred" for 500 free points towards your first free iTunes gift card!
FreeAppTrailerPoints 1 month ago
Because you think cyclists should pay road tax?
AnthonyB465 2 months ago
@ 1:31 did he crash?
shuffledude100 2 months ago
This test is retarded. The bike setup wasn't even the same. The test course was very flawed, too. A 20 minute TT is a poor way to measure the differences. I'd like to see multiple riders do the same mountainous, 3 - 4 hour ride on 2 different days with each bike, with identical setup, fitting, and gear for each test. As is, this is just wanking about the new stuff.
jordanamed 2 months ago 53
@jordanamed great you could do a video like that, it would be fantastic..
elinfiernoentusojos 3 weeks ago
@elinfiernoentusojos
Haha, but no one would watch my video. I understand the logistical difficulty in doing such a thing, but the way they did this was just lazy. With a bit more preparation and work they could have done something more accurate, more interesting, and more useful. If they're strained for time, it could at least be a series of 40k TTs with identical setups and riders.
jordanamed 3 weeks ago
@jordanamed yes, this video is stupid...
elinfiernoentusojos 3 weeks ago
@jordanamed I also think it depends on the cyclist as well. My friend's think my bike is better. When I use theirs i can beat my own bike.
Nazteh 2 weeks ago
@jordanamed To be fair, he managed an 11% faster time on the newer bike... after sprinting around on the heavier bike first.
hadlock 1 week ago
@hadlock wasn't the same guy.
bwmacca 1 week ago
@bwmacca They explain that they are using the same rider in the first 24 seconds, and you get clear shots of his face on both bikes
hadlock 1 week ago
@jordanamed id like to see jessica albas tits but its not gonna happen. maybe just watch the video and take it for what it is? schmuck.
RichSeabrook 1 week ago
@jordanamed True, but even with things in favour of a new bike, its only about a 10% difference in 60 years of bike manufacture. Imagine how small the difference is between each year of bike model, yet people still frequently upgrade.
jboram1 4 days ago
just because u dont pay road tax and arent cornish dont make me idiot
kentcyclist 2 months ago
get in the way of me car
kentcyclist 2 months ago
@kentcyclist Your an idiot.
AnthonyB465 2 months ago
@AnthonyB465 why do u think so antonio ?
kentcyclist 2 months ago
Hey, it's more Nick Nolte ad (or whatever that guy's name is).
innismor11 2 months ago
why dont cyclists pay road tax and insurance
kentcyclist 2 months ago
@kentcyclist because paying taxes is for pussies and faggot democrats like you
localSickened 2 months ago
@localSickened
Cycles are somethink for children only
kentcyclist 2 months ago
@kentcyclist
Going out of one's way to make internet comments about something you hate is for morons only.
jordanamed 2 months ago
@jordanamed what
kentcyclist 2 months ago
@kentcyclist
I'm saying, why do you feel the need to comment on something you clearly hate? I'm sure you have better things to do than share your feelings of disdain with anonymous strangers.
jordanamed 2 months ago
If your going to compair old against new, fit both bikes to the dude who is riding them. His first coment about the old bike is that it does not fit him, pedals, bars seat etc. What a waste of fucking time this was, pathetic, fucking wank......!
carlosdeno 2 months ago
Well, hello mr. personality!
alteregoash 2 months ago
Faster and you look like an idiot!
devildog5001 2 months ago
So, a new bike is faster than an old bike...thanks for clearing that up.
dontknomuch 2 months ago
C'mon the old bike doesn't even fit the rider! This was a one sided biased camparison. Who came up with this idea didn't follow through at all. If your are going to do the test do it properly. Use the same rider on both bikes and make the old bike as good as it would have been in the 50's. Then let's see what the difference is. Not much I'll bet..... mrray
mrraymond99 2 months ago
what a boring video.
Creatureluke 3 months ago
Put clips on the vintage bike! What a ridiculous comparison. It had very little to do with weight or aerodynamics...had much more to do with the fact that the ride wasn't clipped in. The big winner is cycling shoes and clips...not the bike.
Of course, 300 pounders will continue paying thousands of dollars to shave a few ounces off their bike....which is another big win....losing weight.
pastortravis 3 months ago 3
@pastortravis rather than shave the weight off my bike, i would rather keep it, as it has been my experience the more weight i have on the drive wheel, the more speed i can get out of a bicycle, which is why i like those heavy old shwinn bikes, that and with as much as they weigh, noone wants to steal them. LOL
MacGyver0076 2 months ago
ya it is two different people
zackdevan 3 months ago
body position was the key factor.
zackdevan 3 months ago
i used to have a racing bike from the 60's or 70's, i could get up to 50 mph on that thing, and people think 42 on a new bike is something. pahahaha.
MacGyver0076 3 months ago
@MacGyver0076
That's probably because it weighed 50 pounds. My first road bike was a 63cm Schwinn Varsity, ca. 1972 or so, it weighs at least 40 pounds. It won't steer for shit, but it keeps momentum like nothing else.
jordanamed 2 months ago
@jordanamed yeah, moving the weight of those older bikes is easy as long as you have muscle, and yeah, those old heavy bikes did keep their momentum alot better. alot of the older bicycles were made with longer cranks from the pedals to the journal, and i could get them moving faster, now they are shorter in lentgh to the pedals and geared down which makes it hard to get much good speed any more. give me a bicycle made in the 70's over todays garbage any day.
MacGyver0076 2 months ago
@MacGyver0076 modern bikes have no specific cranks or gear range. everything is up to customer, any crank length 168.5, 170, 172.5, 175 is widely available, any gear from 53x11 to 34x27. In 70s-80s this choice was very limited
plyrvt 2 months ago
@MacGyver0076
I love my modern carbon fiber bike, and I wouldn't go back to my old Schwinn. It was good training pedaling that 50 pound monster up mountains, and lugging it up and down subway stairs. Plus, no one will think about stealing it if it's got even a crappy chain on it.
The gearing on my new bike spins out at around 40 with a 105 cadence, that's decent speed. Feedback, handling, and braking are all 100x better, too.
jordanamed 2 months ago
@jordanamed yeah, people dont want a bike with a crappy looking chain but, if you had the chance to steal a bike, would you take the light one or the heavy one? that is another reason i like those old shwinn bikes, they weigh so much that noone around here would want to steal it, . i offered to let a guy ride the schwinn, after 10 minutes he gave it back and said he wasnt going biking with me any more if he had to ride that. something about hard to balance with the weight of the bike. LOL
MacGyver0076 2 months ago
I dont get the point of this vid, a bike from the 50s is'nt as fast as a modern one? thanks dont think I'd have realised that
errbud 3 months ago
put 2litres of water on your bike and there goes all your weight savings
Hurlanator 3 months ago
the biggest advantages for the rider on the new bike would be clipless pedals and the aeor bars.
Riverhead1967 3 months ago
I'll take/pick a classic 50's bike anyway that's if I can find one
kers1ecm 3 months ago
what the fuck? they act like having two different people doesnt matter at all hahahaha
austify 3 months ago 3
This guy cannot corner what so ever.
tylerjandreau 3 months ago 41
@tylerjandreau Have you ever tried cornering on a Time Trial bike? It's brutal. That's why Tour de France riders can't use them - imagine 50 riders shoulder to shoulder with bikes that can't be controlled. Pileup!
pdblouin33 3 weeks ago
@tylerjandreau it is so the air is kept cleaner when he is time trialing however it was exceptionly wide, but i don't think the camera work showed you how fast he should of been going, so that would of impacted the way he took the corner, Rapha a an increadibly good team, ( having experiance with riding with some of them ) who specilize in CRIT racing so all of them should be good at cornering.
TrickyDicky89 2 weeks ago
@TrickyDicky89 you havent rode for any teams baker ;)
also ill message you a link to my cranks
nssurge 2 weeks ago
@nssurge no but i have ridden with the team Rapha, and have got to know a few of them as my coach was their coach and often when they are at a training came in devon my coach arranges for use to ride with them.
TrickyDicky89 2 weeks ago
well look at the times from the 70's and the current bikes...
122ffsdd 3 months ago
Lol!! Men's Fitness mag ... dead giveaway there. It's like watching a "I lost 80 pounds in just 3 weeks" commercial -- slant the whole thing for the desired (slanted affect). Then again, even with all the advances in frame, forks, wheels, aero-bars, helmets, nutrition, fluids, etc., the bike times at Ironman Hawaii are still not much faster than 25 years ago.
innismor11 3 months ago
The single bif=ggest factor is whether the bike fits the rider. I have a collection of old racing bikes from the 60's and 70's and sometimes bring one out to a training ride. I have no problem keeping up with the group on a 1970 Peugeot PX-10 or a 1978 Raleigh Professional. I have ridden events at the local velodrome on a 1968 Peugeot track bike and turned in times as quick as on my Rush Hour Pro.
Granted, new technology and design is superior, but it's not everything.
GL0BEmaster 4 months ago
Sorry, I can't buy this. There are several flaws to the comparison which others have commented on but my personal experience has shown that the older bike can do better. For example, 2 century rides on 2 different bikes & the same route; a 1951 Bates BAR w/8 speeds & a 1979 Mercian KOM w/12 speeds & sealed bearing hubs. My time on the Bates was 20 minutes faster &, no, the Bates wasn't the first bike ridden on the course.
oldtrikerider 4 months ago
@oldtrikerider Did you control the wind factor the two rides? I'm afraid that matters more than anything else.
innismor11 3 months ago
@innismor11 The weather was similar; no noticeable wind. I'm only making an observation based on experience & not claiming a valid test result during which all variables are controlled. However, race times in the past on the old machines are surprisingly quick, ie. a sub 4 hour time for a century in the 50's on a tricycle no less!
oldtrikerider 3 months ago
Dead I hear correctly that the rider was using clip pedals?
I think that alone makes a tremendous difference, regardless of which type of bike you're on. Any bike with clipless pedals is faster than one without.
fuzzywzhe 4 months ago
saddle way too low on the first bike... which looked about 1970 not 50's... same rider needs to do both tests.
0132222 4 months ago
Well let's see, his muscles are optimized to work mostly likely on that TT bike, and he's completely unused to the old bike...invalid test. What should be measured is the course time given a consistent wattage, and the only variances would be the geometry, aerodynamics, and body position. All that in order, then you may have something to talk about.
RBikeEnthusiast1 5 months ago
1 can do 13 mins for 10 k's this guy is slow
timthecyclistable 5 months ago
Zoo and Nuts are better
alco48 5 months ago
What a load of piss. He wasn't giving it any beans on the steel bike at all. Bare jokes from a video that all about some getting some brand time and punting a few more one-crash and it's done bikes to bored execs....
ggrant999 6 months ago
interesting, but this is far from a fair comparison, the rider should have been given more time to adjust to the steel bike, even if it was bikes from the same era it'd be obvious that he'd be faster on his own bike. Of course the modern bike is faster, but probably not by 2 mins.
mightyPants 6 months ago
the first bike you can get for under £50 . the second bike £1000 min. seems likea lot to pay for 2 min whe he could of got areo bars for the first bike
cyclinghelp 6 months ago
Bad comparison. Shouldn't they use the same rider, maybe in two different days so he could rest up and try another bike? Different riders have different fitness levels and this video can't prove how the older race bike is slower anyways. This vid sucks
ahson211 6 months ago
And the rider and his weight trumps ALL aerodynamics research.
FPChris 7 months ago
I just picked up a 1960 road bike. It is only as fast as my lowrider. I can only maintain 22-24mph or so for any distance and max out on flat at around 32mph My lowrider is 44 pounds, My 1960 ten speed is 32 pounds.
I would love to try a new lightweight bike and see what I could do.
Where are you at? Sign me up for a test!
spikedbeetle 7 months ago
@spikedbeetle The weight doesn't make too terribly much of a difference once you get going, as far as flat out speed is concerned. Also, wtf kind of drivetrain do you have on a lowrider to reach 20mph?
jesuriah 7 months ago
@jesuriah I have a 65 tooth front gear and a 20 tooth rear cog on a 3 speed hub. I have held 24+mph for several miles on flat. It is hard to maintain anything above that for an extend period of time though.
My low gear for one full pedal rotation travels15.33 feet. Second gear is what I use most. It travles 21.08 feet and third travels 28.83 feet for one full pedal rotation.
Watch utah tour de donut 7-16-11. There is a picture of it toward the end of the video.
spikedbeetle 7 months ago
@spikedbeetle That is the largest chainring I have ever seen in my life, lol. Props man!
jesuriah 7 months ago
One person with two bikes means zero statistical data. Get 100 riders and the same test, then maybe you'll have a valid result. Thanks for nothing Mens Fitness.
m015094 8 months ago 2
@m015094 Exactly...
maubab 8 months ago
Of course there is a difference between a normal road racing bike of any era and a TT bike . You need to compare that old road racing bike with a new road racing bike, not a TT bike. All those guys like Obree and Boardman showed us that in the 90's. And if the rider was having problems pulling on the up stroke then my guess is he didn't have the proper cleats. With proper shoes and clips you are never going to slip out of the pedals.
rediryou 10 months ago
@rediryou "With proper shoes and clips you are never going to slip out of the pedals."
There's not a lot of quill pedals with a cleat systems from the 50's....He was using toe clips and straps.
jesuriah 7 months ago
@jesuriah YEah I mean toe clips and straps but with the old cleats that you nailed to your shoes. Didn't they have them in the 50's? IDK maybe not but I remember riding bikes like that in the early 80's and with the proper cleat, toe clips and straps you were not going to slip out of the pedals in fact so much so that it's kind of scary when you really do need to get out.
rediryou 7 months ago
@rediryou OOOH yeah I remember reading about those, very uncommon, but I can't remember when they came into use.
jesuriah 7 months ago
@jesuriah
Everybody used shoe plates with toe straps in the 1950s even if the plates were two strips of leather nailed to the shoe sole. Usual shoe plates were aluminium and were just as secure as modern clipless pedals. In fact it was a while before sprinters changed to clipless because they were afraid of pulling a foot out at the finish.
Not really a valid test, though unless you use the same rider - or better, multiple riders.
BelperFlyer 2 months ago
not a fair test
saintdracula1 11 months ago
thats 70's bike, not 50's
theMGTS 1 year ago 51
@theMGTS
I'd even go as far to say '80s. @ 0:29 those calipers look aero-ed a la mid-80s Shim 600. The crank looks quite smoothened(?) too.
A set of aero bars & SPDs on that would bring the two much closer, IMO.
lewis72 2 months ago
the rider's voice reminds me alot of Devvo. anyone get that reference?
weevil3582 1 year ago
can't understand the fuck you're saying, mumbles.
gavranarh 1 year ago
If you look at the average speeds of the Tour de France, you''ll be surprised how close the old ones are to the new ones. But by the commercials, each year a few new technologies appear which added up rise the bike's performance with at least 1%. 1.01 ^ 50 = 1.644 in fifty years. So, we should have 64% higher speeds now than in the 1960.
csuporj 1 year ago 2
@csuporj
Wind resistance increases exponentially with speed... i don't think u can justify a 64% increase in speed with such basic analysis.
martykaiser 1 year ago
@martykaiser Not exponentially, but cubically. Significant difference.
wdeboer0 11 months ago
@wdeboer0 Actually, the drag force is dependent on the square - not the cube - of velocity.
skoockum 9 months ago
I think they should do more research in a test like this. The old school guys could get pretty aerodynamic even on the old bikes. It was obvious in the video that the rider did not know how to do an optimal ride on the old bike, which made the test a bit unfair. I'm not saying the the modern bike would be slower, but it would would not have won by 2 minutes. It would also be interesting to compare the race times between the same bikes with 5 lbs of weight added.
1stPlaceDirector 1 year ago 34
@1stPlaceDirector cmon its from men's fitness mags.... dont expect too much
mekore 5 months ago
@1stPlaceDirector A aero frame tt bike, skinsuit, aero wheels, and an aero helmet is definitely 2 minutes faster... The guy on the road bike does a decent job of being in the drops. It's not just about getting low to be aerodynamic, the aero bars allows for a much narrower position as well as an easy way to hold the position. Ask Greg Lemond if he thinks aero bars are significantly faster. This on top of the clothing/helmet, wheels, and frame/fork are proven to be significantly faster.
Shadowboost 3 months ago
@1stPlaceDirector you must also take comfort and the long distances traveled in the actual races. The comfort of modern shifters and geometries makes a huge difference in a long race. That extra 5 lbs would make a lot bigger difference 4 hours into a ride than in the first 20 min.
juice12369 2 months ago