To watt or not?

Most cyclists have at one point or another, within the last few years, heard about an epically revered electronic device that has graced nearly every high end road, mountain, triathlon and track bicycle in the professional world of cycling.  This small gadget that can be wedged almost seamlessly in between crank arm spiders, non drive side arms, pedal spindles and rear hubs is known as the power meter and has quite literally changed the way that all professional and many sportive cyclists alike ride and think about the bicycle.  In essence it’s simple; hop on your bike and turn on the power meter (some have inertial actuation and will automatically turn the power meter on and off), link it with the preferred Bluetooth or ant + compatible display unit and you have an instant measure of your wattage output at a claimed median +/- 3-6% margin of accuracy.  It sounds simple enough but somehow still begs the questions as to why it is that we have seen a seemingly overnight obsession from the pro peleton trickle down to the amateur and sportive side of cycling.

The watt prevails

There seems to have been an undeniable affinity throughout the history of human kind (recorded and not I would imagine) to out-do his and/or her fellow counterpart regardless of context.  We have seen it change the face of the planet on innumerable occasion and give rise to how, why and where many of us are on this very day; but this certainly is another can of worms for another day of thought fishing.  The point here is that the technology previously mentioned is a very accurate and tangible method of accumulating data that enables us to compare our abilities to one another with very little effort, thus perpetuating the all too enduring game that is in a word one-upmanship.  The watt variable has become the ultimate barometer in metrics when it comes to the not so simple equation of figuring out who is the strongest, fastest or most efficient.  Important and emphasized though they may be, the popular Vo2 max  test, heart rate per minute, and cumulative miles traveled is truly irrelevant when it comes to measuring one cyclists ride to another’s or even to that of their own.  If one were to go out for a ride of 20 miles in length one afternoon while measuring the time require and compared it to another ride the next day of the same length, on the same roads, a massive door of inconsistencies would be opened up.  The variables at hand are almost innumerable including temperature, air pressure, wind, nutrition, glycogen levels, lactate levels, tire pressure, clothing choice (aerodynamics or lack thereof) ect.  By quantifying and isolating the wattage output of a rider, you can bypass and thus negate all factors listed previously.  Regardless of all accounted and unaccounted variables, the reading of a power output from any given rider says they are simply working this hard, for this particular amount of time (example: 300 watts for 25 minutes).  This has indeed become the end all be all metric in the cycling world today but the question still remains; why?

various power meters

The Numbers game

 With the advent of the all too popular cycling app Strava (measures and compares your cycling times from various points throughout each city worldwide while simultaneously comparing it with your peers in descending order of lowest times) the everyday cyclist has come one step closer to becoming just like one of the pros.  Determine your point a to b, go out there and give it your all and let Strava do the work of sizing you up with the rest of the cyclists who rode the same portion.  This game against the clock was injected into the modern cycling psyche with the infusion of the power meter and gave rise to a very powerful dose of competitive nature within those who both did and didn’t lack the inclination and outlet all together.  Enter anywhere USA, where almost anyone and everyone who is “serious” about cycling has a smart phone with the Strava app.  We now cycle about in a sea of virtual races, where passerby’s furiously blast along at near threshold rates of all variety without so much as casting the slightest glance in the direction of anything non conducive to the “Strava Crushing” nature of the player.  Kiss your friendly wave or ding of the bell goodbye because the daily commute has now been rendered a time trial and your being in the way is nothing more than an obstruction to the end game; numbers.  

enter straava

 

Riding to feel

To come back to square one for a moment would be to look beyond all measures of quantifying riding ability in the name of boiling the act of cycling down to its purest, most refined and potent form; something almost all of us inherently took with us through our journey on the bicycle from day one.  This essence spoken of is joy, and it’s why most of us continue to mount or cycles in pursuit of our next destination or calculated adventure.  We wouldn’t be here continuing our cycle oriented ventures if we lacked some form of pleasure derived from the experience of riding itself.  It’s this exact assertion that leads me to question whether something such as a power meter is more of importance to our overall riding experience or a hindrance.  The answer to this will be multi dimensional and very personal starting with why and how it is we ride a bicycle altogether.  Is it your aim to be the absolute best and sit atop the cycling pedestal with a KOM (king of the mountains) throne, or to experience a ride filled deeply with the subtle nuances and minuscule intricacies that make adventure and exploration what they really are?



this is your mortgage payment worth of cash just spent
on the new SRM power meter

Fuel economy and diminishing returns

Perhaps your goal is to become a better cyclist by engaging the pedals more efficiently and getting the most out of your ride in terms of strength gains, endurance and technique.  This ambition is exemplified in virtually every cyclist regardless of whether or not they actively implement measures  to improve in such realms.  As discussed earlier the power meter is a very useful tool for gauging performance through various conditions and certainly helps make a workout and its merits seem more tangible.  Though it’s perfectly normal to want to be good at whatever it is you do, it does indeed come at a cost that is for some much higher than others.  With a power meter costing anywhere from $700 - $3,000 (equal to or greater than a nice bicycle) for the total package it’s not hard to imagine that one would want to explore other options when trying to look for solutions to become a better cyclist.  One of the first and most obvious places to look would be in the places where there is no financial cost.  They say you “don’t get something for nothing” but in this case it’s true in the monetary sense.  Something as simple as a correct and comfortable bike fit will give rise to massive gains in bio mechanical efficiency.  The pedal stroke is everything in the art of cycling (yes i just elevated it to such status) and if we are incapable of engaging in a correct, evenly balanced pedal stroke with both sides of our body we are massively limiting our ability to transfer power from our torso, hips and legs, down to the pedals and into our rear wheel.  A bicycle fit will help mitigate if not eliminate many common irregularities with regards to the previous and can often times be done DIY style by sifting through forum discussion, watching how-to videos and making comparisons with people that have actually tested such methods.  A second and equally critical method in becoming a better cyclist that’s next to free is the act of engaging in a healthier lifestyle. Kicking old habits that are a hindrance to healthy living may be the most cost effective measure one can take in this pursuit.  Of course this idea goes beyond nutrition and dips into aspects of life such as posture, sleeping habits and environmental conditions.  If we can hone in on the variables that both give rise to and take away from our health we can make adjustments accordingly and find those “free gains” in our quest.



Here we have Eddy Merck atthe giro doing his thing 45+ years back; acomplishing more than most could ever
 wish to with even  the most modern technological counter parts while simultaneously lacking a power meter,
heart rate monitor or cycle computer(non existant at the time). Just saying...

Still, after all this the question remains; ride to watt or not?  The power meter certainly is an effective tool in the ever growing world of cycling related gains but comes at a rather steep price and might not be cost effective for you.  If you find yourself at a point where you have truly begun to plateau in your cycling abilities, perhaps a power meter is the answer for you.  As almost any professional cyclist will tell you, the numbers are indeed everything, and without quantifiably repeatable exercises such as interval training and sustained power output the game would simply not be what it is today.  The question looms; are you a pro searching for such margins, or perhaps a Joe just looking to be a fit cyclist and have fun out there riding your bike? 

Dear god, please save friction shifting! Part 2

A look and step back

 

Lets talk about "retro" bicycle components for a moment; particularly those being drivetrain related and the merits that such products can wield.  Although the lack of product support for pre existing components may be a difficult aspect to look past when considering an outfit for a new(er) bicycle build, in terms of economy, serviceability, reliability and ease of replacement, the "retro" bicycle parts are often the way to go for one willing to piece together their idea of a perfect machine while simultaneously attempting to evade the landmine like traps that are strategically placed at every corner by bicycle profiteers.

 

When talking again about shifters with no indexing whatsoever in the mechanism, a friction style shifter opens up the door for users to mix and match nearly any combination of drivetrain systems imaginable.  Take a Sachs derailleur set, Campagnolo cassette, Shimano wheel set and Suntour shifters and you have yourself a perfectly compatible hybrid drive train system.  To try and fathom such a setup in modern times with equally modern components would quite literally be impossible. 

The only major wildcard variables in the equation are the amount of travel in the parallelogram of the derailleur, and the size of the larger cogs on the cassette or freewheel.  Being able to mix and match 5,6,7 and 8 speed components is god send to the DIY home mechanic who loves the idea of using all that old gear that has been accumulating in boxes over the seasons.  Not only is this approach economically more feasible being that many of these components are literally given away at bike swaps and garage sales, but it is just as much a way of repurposing supposedly outdated products that usually serve their task as well they did when were made granted they was taken care of.  An aspect that seems to be gaining just as much momentum in this discussion as the mechanical merits are the sustainable aspects of building a bike in such a way.  With throwaway "dumpster bikes" becoming ever so prevalent, its always refreshing to see that old dusty garage bike get tuned up, modified if necessary and made road ready for what are usually many more years worth of riding.  With components becoming superseded nearly every season (suspension technology much?) it makes perfect sense to work with a platform that is rooted in commonly used standards, allows for interchangeability and can be replaced with easily accessible components. 



An elegant, practical, road ready bicycle equipped with accessories for day to day use.  Light, pump, saddle bag and fenders for what must be semi-wet weather conditions. 

 

Are 6,7 or 8 gears enough? 

 

With modern gearing componentry climbing in number from 8 and 9 gears in the early to late 90's to 10 and 11 gears in the 00's, one has to wonder when enough is enough, and at what cost.  To compare a 7 speed gear cluster from the late 80's with a modern 11 speed cluster of today you will immediately notice two differences, the first being the overall width of the cluster and the second being the width variation of the cogs.  The trade off when squeezing more cogs into an almost equal in size package equates to one thing; compromise.  The compromise is longevity, and it increases exponentially as you continue to shrink products such as cogs and chains to achieve a wider range in gearing as well as increasing dish in the wheel build to accommodate a wider cassette.  A few important question to ask yourself follow.

• Is the cost-benefit ratio of having a "higher end" gearing setup such as 2 x 10/11 speeds truly rational? 
• How often do you find yourself needing to gain more speed when riding at 35+ miles per hour (think giant front ring and super small rear for insanely fast descending)?
• Does the weight penalty of having an older and slightly heavier gearing setup make much of a difference in the scheme of the bike build? 
• Do the marginal differences in incremental cog steps and overall gearing spectrum justify the massive difference experienced in cog and chain life between say an 8 speed vs 11 speed setup?
• How expensive is it to replace a drivetrain related component as opposed to something of the retro varietal.

Although these are clearly all personal questions that can only be answered by each individual depending on various circumstance, there is certainly a bit of rhetoric here.  I can confidently say that I myself, all of my close friends and even cycling acquaintances would answer no to all of the above. 

The reality of the matter is that 99.999..% of us are not and will never become professional road, mountain or cyclocross racers needing to benefit from the marginal gains derived from such product selection.  Most of us enjoy riding for the sake of it and look for our dollar to go as far as it can when it comes to commuting, recreational or sportive cycling.  We wont be in contention for this years Tour De France and certainly won't benefit by pretending as if that's the case when making purchases such as those of super high end, fully modern grupos from fill in the blank manufacturer.


Equally elegant as the bike posted above, but a completely different breed.  A thoroughbred designed race steed geared with electronic shifting for the most competitive of the competitive. Carbon fiber everything here with enough proprietary componentry to drive you insane; this is not your commuter grocery getter by any stretch and will set you back a cool $10,000 u.s.d



Your local bike shop is your best friend

 

When it comes to practically outfitting your bicycle with retro-ish componentry there is no better or closer place to look than your local bike shop.  When approaching the neighborhood shop about purchasing older second hand bits you will usually be greeted with smiles as typically the owners are more than happy to liquidate mass accumulation of old stock and bulk.  Old discarded and replaced parts in particular can be had for a song if your smart enough to bring in your town's preferred local craft beer (Yes, I will make it black and white; all bike shop employees, mechanics and owners drink beer; an empirically observable fact, period).  With not much more than a few 10's in your pocket you can walk out more times than not with a very large step in the direction of completing or retrofitting that project that has been needing your TLC. 

Dear god, please save friction shifting! Part 1

Backdrop

In the early 1900's the derailleur as we know it came into inception and inevitably its own fruition shortly there after.  The abilities and interface for the bicycle rider was forever changed with a device that conveniently, and often times not as much, moved the chain from one cog to another This was the advent of the derailleur.  Standard became the outfitting of bicycles with shifting mechanisms and derailleurs to actuate gear change, enabling riders to navigate roads of all terrain and elevation with relative ease.  It seems easy for one to posit an argument that a golden age of bicycle design was that of the early to mid 19th century and that what followed in the wake of advances as described previously would give rise to a plethora of cross-compatibility, time tested reliability, and ease of serviceability. What follows is a post that touches on bicycle industry standards, planned obsolescence and marketing gimmicks as much as it does the simple devices that are the friction derailleur and shifter which blessed the bicycle market for more than half of the last century.



Here we have a well used and functioning (to this day seeing miles) offering from the now defunct component manufacturer Suntour.  A beautifully designed, simple in nature and incredibly light weight piece of kit that graced many a high end road bike of the 80's.


The year is 1968 and Suntour, or Madea industries as often branded, has revolutionized gear shifting by inventing the slanted, single pivot, parallelogram rear derailleur.  This simple yet effective refinement in design dominated the industry until 1988 (patent expiration) and paved the way for inspiration and blatant carbon copying alike.  Gear shifting was crisp, consistent and predictable with the slanted parallelogram derailleur coupled with consistently incremental steps in gear selection.

Suntours GT derailleur geometry.  The slanted parallelogram
design that is principle in all modern derailleurs to this day 

As Suntour and others continued to refine geometry and basic design principles of their wide selection of derailleurs for decades to follow, the market experienced a massive influx and overabundance of rear mechanisms, and thus today the bicycle market has become flooded with discarded, forgotten, and carefully stashed n.o.s (new old stock) derailleurs.  A quick search on ebay or craigslist will overwhelm buyers with options spanning the latter part of the last decade.  For not much more than 10 to 30$ one can have what is in most cases a near perfectly shifting derailleur.  With a modern counterpart costing upwards of 2 to 6 times as much in price,  the price difference in and of itself should easily encourage buyers to take a step toward the previous, and away from the latter.  This simply is not the case generally speaking, and the reason seems to be threefold.

Index Shifting

In 1984 the super-giant component manufacturer Shimano refined and patented what would soon become a universal concept for virtually all bicycle shifting components to follow.  The design was called the S.I.S (Shimano index system) and allowed users to shift from one gear to another with a definitively audible and equally felt "CLICK" that engaged gear shifts and locked the shifter and derailleur into the users gear selection.  Although Shimano can never claim pioneer status with regards to index shifting, it did serve as the biggest proponent of the time, as well as marketing and manufacturing an image and interface that became reputable worldwide.  Suntour was the first to counter with their own version of indexing and soon after the Italian manufacturing counterpart Campagnolo followed with its own unique iteration. With this seemingly overnight component shake up, all index shifting platforms came with new sprocket spacing and cog width, as well as new pull ratios for the corresponding shifter/derailleur combination(the amount of travel achieved in the derailleur body relative to movement in the shifting mechanisms).  Convenient and confidence inspiring this new style of shifter/derailleur combination was, it inevitably paved the way for the negation of virtually all friction shifter actuated rear mechanisms and shifting units.





Another robust and elegant offering from Suntour.  This was one of the last all-friction actuated thumb shifters of the late 80's and benefited from the time tested ratcheting function that made Suntour shifters so sought after.  Still used, still shifting flawlessly. 



The grupo and planned obsolescence

In the 1960's Campagnolo's think tank conjured up what is commonly referred to as the "grupo".  The idea is that one can purchase a full outfit (drivetrain, brake set, cockpit, necessary bearings, ect) to dress their newest bicycle frame acquisition.  Prior to the grupo, if one were to have a bicycle frame and fork but lack componentry and wished to build up their steed, they would have to selectively piece together the bits necessary.  The lack of uniformity gave rise to many a bicycle outfitted with sometimes Japanese, French, Italian and American components all at the same time.  Although there was nothing inherently wrong with this Frankenstein-esc approach to bicycle assembly, but from a marketing standpoint there was a massive void in the industry that Tullio Campagnolo was quick to fill.  Fast forward four decades and enter a new millennium with the groupo concept exemplified massively by all the big component manufacturers.  The big difference this time around is that not only are shifting components from previous or later iterations often incompatible with one another due to reasons listed previously, but as the bicycle industry moved in the direction of "more is better" in terms of gearing (8,9,10 and even 11 rear gears) it obfuscated almost every generation of componentry other than that of its own.  To shift with Shimano 9 speed derailleurs one needs a 9 speed shifter offered only by Shimano to make corresponding gear shifts.  If for example you find yourself destroying the shifter of your favorite older generation 7 speed setup, finding a compatible shifter from the same company, and same generation, is not far from pulling teeth in the sense that product support for such "dated" products is nearly non-existent today.  Sure, there are many do it yourself alternatives out there for the tinkerer, but most of these approaches require sourcing older second hand components or heavy modification to work.  The simple fact of the matter is that the year to year basis of "progression" in the bicycle industry is not much more than planned obsolescence in the guise of the latest fill in the blank marketing strategy.  Seldom do we see new design come from the "Big Players" that actually improves product from years prior and does not lock the buyer into brand and groupo specific submission.  If having an 8,9,10,or 11 speed product from Shimano, Sram or Campagnolo means that we are limited to having respective 8,9,10, or 11 speed products only, wouldn't stepping away altogether not be the perfect rebuttal to the slap in the face marketing strategies that we have been victim to for so long now in the bicycle industry?  The logical conclusion here would be to ask yourself how exactly this can be achieved within reason.  In part 2 this question will hopefully be answered in adequacy.