Can anyone explain why time trial bikes aren't used everywhere on road?
If they are quicker and more aerodynamic than a normal road bike then why aren't all road bikes like it?
[img] 
[/img]
yeah. and why arent all cars like this too.
The comfort/view of the road ahead is compromised. The handling is not as good. They are normally geared for flat or gently rolling terrain. They don't play nicely with others.
[img] 
[/img] They're getting there....
I thought everyone used them. This is a picture of me earlier commuting to work.
[img] 
[/img]
Watch how many riders crash on corners on time trial bikes. The position is no good for much in the way of climbing either.
So there is downsides to riding them such as the gearing/position and how they corner.
Thanks for the sensible reponses... cheers for the usual stw sarcastic ones too gents, brightened up my Friday afternoon.
In raceing the UCI has rules which essentialy tell you how a bike should look like what Joe Public thinks a bike should look like (tubes can't be full aerofoils, double diamond frames, bars below the saddle, saddle behind the BB etc).
The public then buys stuff that looks like the pro's.
The fastest bikes would be recumbants anyway.
Time trial bars and position in a 80rider road bunch. No thanks.
At risk of repetition, they're designed to go fast, in a straight line on relatively flat terrain, for a short period of time. They're incredibly stiff and rigid, with little or no compliance and they force the rider into an aerodynamic position that is extremely uncomfortable. They're also comparatively heavy, all that areodynamicing (!?) adding up to extra weight, the idea being that they usually only have to accelerate once or twice in the course of a TT, and once they're up to speed the weight is less of an issue. So, if you want a bike that shakes you around like a bag of bones, knackers your back, climbs like a dog, accelerates like a dog and that gets blown around in cross winds (all those areodynamicy thingies don't half catch the wind), then fill your boots..
My timetrial bike is geared highly and with close gearing .I use 55/45 and an 11/21 cassette .I dont use it on hills !
Can anyone explain why time trial bikes aren't used everywhere on road?If they are quicker and more aerodynamic than a normal road bike then why aren't all road bikes like it?
They're designed for flat out speed at the expense of comfort and practicality. The geometry is aimed more at high speed stability rather than useful things like going round corners.
Bit like asking why all cars don't look like Formula 1 cars...
There was a long uphill TT in the Giro, no one used a TT bike for it.
Just an example of whats been said, its horses for courses.
My understand is yes, recumbants if the route is flat but they're not much good going up hills?
On a lumpy (though not necessarily full mountain) TT stage I reckon a good TT bike would have a recumbant?
Cheers
Danny B
chilled , TT bikes are awful climbing , awful cornering for the most part (unless you count specially adapted triathlon bikes that seem to be a bit less severe angles)
they are heavier and dangerous in group riding due to the brake position
they are uncomfy they are stiff
they are fast on flat timed rides where you sit on the rivet adn dont really care about comfort 😀
if your ever up aberdeen way paul gies a shout - you can experiance the discomfort for your self..... i have a planet X stealth and still i ride my old jalopy OCR on the road for training I dont race in groups on the road though
To be honest... I always thought a TT bike would be cool as **** for commuting about on, in some sort of idealised world I have in my head - where cars don't exist and trains run on biofuel and are driven by pandas.
Commuting on a TT bike is great, suddenly EVERYONE wants to race you.
(not so much commuting as riding it to work on days where you've an evening TT and no time to go home first, but still)
😀 that's my new word for today!areodynamicing
The fastest bikes would be recumbants anyway.
I bet even in the hands of a pro rider a recumbent would be last in the TdF.
I bet even in the hands of a pro rider a recumbent would be last in the TdF.
In the GC, yes probably right as it would loose so much time on the mountain stages but I bet a fully faired jobbie would win the points race simply because on all the flat stages it would cruise away from them all and score numerous solo breakaway stage wins.
No eyed deer - Trains driven by pandas!!!!
What did you have to drink at lunchtime? Surely they would get bamboozled by the controls.
A recumbent would be quicker than the peloton with all the aerodynamic benefit riding in a pack brings? Those peletons really motor. I'd be surprised if a lone recumbent would be able to match the speed.
Pretty unforgiving and not very comfortable
so wobbliscott hiding at about half the height and having a full fairing making for very undisturbed air .....
ill take a bet on the recumbent..... but only if a recumbent riders on it .... a pro cyclist is no good unless hes a recumbent rider in his spare time.... so many different muscles used.
I think the figures are that a recumbent is about efficient as a normal rider in the middle of a peleton. That means that whilst those sheltered in the middle might be putting out the same numbers as the recumbent rider, those at the front chasing him down would not. If the recumbent could jump the peleton they would have to be very organised rotating at the front to catch him. The best bit is that any normal rider could not take much of a draft from the recumbent so any rider jumping the gap would soon drift back.
ive tried to draft a few recumbents in the past on flat sections
the bottechia more upright was ok , plenty draft off that but the speedmachine gave Zero draft
the fared one that passed me in holland didnt even let me get on the back the dude was just going so much faster than i was,
What a brilliant conversation, recumbent versus peloton. Where do I get tickets for that?!
How about recumbent on a track, now that would be a sight to behold surely?!
how long till someone ask if it would be faster if you fitted 29er wheels to the recumbent?
🙄
I bought a copy of cyclist yesterday. In that was an article on whether road wheels were the right size.
Anyone for 750r standard wheels with a bb150?
How about recumbent on a track, now that would be a sight to behold surely?!
They're too long, they don't go round the corners very well.
They tried it at Manchester a few times. Works on longer shallower outdoor track, they've had recumbent races at Herne Hill a few times.
Had quite an argument with a rider once when he asked to do a crit race on a recumbent - no, it's not UCI-legal, you're not insured and 4th Cat crits are plenty dangerous enough thanks without having a recumbent in the midst. He was insistent that he'd just ride off the front but the answer was a plain and simple no.
As to the recumbent vs TdF - I reckon the TdF would win cos they'd get on their bikes after breakfast and go. The recumbentist would still be combing the muesli out of his beard.
Steroetypes are great aren't they? 😉
the fared one that passed me in holland didnt even let me get on the back the dude was just going so much faster than i was
That happened to me in Germany. Only thing was, he was on a normal road bike. I think it was either Jens Voigt or Tony Martin, that's the only explanation I can think of.