. I’m sure if you ride primarily MTB your cadence is slower.

This is mostly because of the historic habit of manufacturers supplying 175 cranks on MTBs; a patently bad solution as those low cadences resonate with full suspension; Enduro pros and DH use short cranks to be able to get a lot of power down without it all dissipated in the dampers.

I remember reading a roadie timetrialling book in 1987 that explained that MTBs use longer cranks for more torque in muddy riding. That was the prevailing view back then: “MTBs are slow and need leverage”. Nothing like the modern sport at all.

I used to do cadence drills on rollers up to 180rpm – 65mph. Only came off once, leaving a nice burn mark in the carpet of the rental property.

Optimum cadence is influenced by crank length. Optimum (efficient) cadence tends to get lower with longer cranks. The optimum power efficiency doesn’t tend to be much different for the different crank lengths but it does occur at different cadences. If you’re on 175 cranks, say, 70-80 may be optimum. On 170s, maybe 90. Training to have a power band either side of an optimum cadence can be a very useful thing.

There is lots of dogma, nonsense and wilful ignorance in bike training programmes so a lot of them will predicate that 90 is good and 95-100 is better. Generally none of it has science behind it. It is about as justified as 220 minus your age for maximum heart rate.

What can happen at low cadences is you have to engage other muscle groups just to stabilise your body against the torque you’re trying to generate – having your arms and shoulders suck oxygen out of your blood is obviously taking available aerobic capacity away from your legs. That’s where the higher cadences come in – if the cadence is reasonable, the torque is low and you can contain the effort to your legs with your upper body cantilevered against the torque reaction through your core – that’s pretty efficient.

Just on the balancing thing…

When all the TRVs are shut, the flow will go to the last remaining path of least resistance. This is easy to design in with either a bypass or a permanently on radiator.

When all the TRVs are open, you expect to get an proportionate flow through all the rads. This is hard to achieve and is why you need balancing.

The pressure drop across a pumped system with an incompressible fluid (water) is determined by the flow rate and resistance to flow. It is just like calculating resistance in an electrical parallel circuit.

1/R = 1/R1 + 1/R2 + 1/R3 …

or 1 = R/R1 + R/R2 + R/R3 ….

You can think of this latter form as the proportion of the total flow going through each radiator. If R1 has a resistance close to zero (path of least resistance), then the total resistance R will be close to zero and R/R1 will be close to 1. Almost all the flow will go through that one radiator.

Lot’s of approximations in this. The theory gets as far as saying it is easier to balance circuits where all radiators have some form of restriction rather than trying to balance things with everything wide open.

That restriction also reduces overall flow rate lowering the return flow temperature. This is good for boiler efficiency (condensing).

The other valve is usually a “lockshield” valve. Their purpose is to provide resistance to flow through each radiator so that the flow has the motivation to flow evenly through all your radiators rather than sending all the water through the path of least resistance in a single radiator. Slowing the flow also assures the return temperature is low enough for a condensing boiler.

This is called “balancing” your radiators. Usually involves thermometers on the feed and exit pipes being moved around from rad to rad as you make adjustments.

The lockshield is so that it is set once and doesn’t get tampered with.

F&B wimborne white modern eggshell.

does the job far better than the “dumb” wireless thermostats British Gas supply, and battery lasts

I specced hive because it was battery powered and I needed that for the application.

My experience with the Hive though is that it fails to know what temperature it is and needs resetting by putting in a freezer. That’s a pretty fundamental failure to be any good as a thermostat.

The Alexa integration isn’t worth anything. The general nature of these consumer smart platforms is they need imperative instruction. “Do this NOW”, “Do that at some time”. There’s nothing smart about it. They’re basically just gadgets that need programming so they appeal to programmers. What’s missing is any sort of visionary product management delivering behaviour. In Alexa’s case that’s partly down to the vendor having low ambitions for maintaining the “Alexa skill” and the infrastructure hosting their API (on AWS no doubt) but the platform itself is stateless and imperative so behaviour is entirely delegated to third parties and is very patchy.

This thread is the embodiment of that. The thermostats and their extended smart ecosystem can geofence the user, so the function is “switch off when not at home”. That’s demonstrably useless for the scenario when you WFH.

Just like all consumer tech, the best bits of the tech are gimmicky and pitched at closing the sale to customers who can be nudged by marketing and media into buying tat (guilty as charged). You’re not getting a trimmed down version of a commercial building management system. You’re getting a one trick wonder where sooner or later the security certificates that let them phone home will expire and you’ll have forced obsolescence and you’ll be buying more tat, hastening the end of human existence on this planet with all the excess CO2 from sourcing, manufacturing, packaging, shipping, running the server farms, disposal.

/Rant

I’m heading back to my bothy

That was a feature. If the suspension was asked to work a bit hard, it would self-soften. Obvs.

Hive say not to put their thermostat in the same room as a TRV. Though I wonder if that’s because they sell smart TRVs.

Nah. It is basic function. The thermostat will call for heat if it is low. It will switch off the boiler when it is satisfied. If you have a TRV that switches off before the thermostat is satisfied, that room temperature will never increase enough to satisfy the thermostat. The “call for heat” then becomes “permanent on” and the boiler will cycle on and off repeatedly based on its target circuit temperature. This will be inefficient and with all the house TRVs closed (satisfied) you’ll need a good bypass valve to ensure the pump isn’t just stalled pumping against a set of closed valves.

If you have a interlinked system where the call for heat is based on whether any individual smart TRV is calling for heat, my comment above won’t apply.

I’ve been disappointed in the smart thermostat installs I’ve had.

The Nest (Gen 3 and E) is a pleasant device aesthetically and in its tactility but its smarts are predicated on whether you have left the home or not and that’s about it. Left on auto-learning it instigated a schedule that set the wrong temperature almost at every stage. It doesn’t have a useful boost function and you have to set an aggressive schedule to turn down the temperature in case someone sets it ridiculously high. Best feature is you can PIN lock it and restrict temperature adjustments. Eco setting is pointless – it isn’t something you can switch to on the device with the PIN set; it should just be the extreme end of the temperature adjustment on the device.

Hive is godawful. It does have boost but doesn’t do anything smart. It is basically a programmable where you set the schedule on an app on your phone. Why oh why don’t these apps have template schedules? Plus the thermostat frequently goes out of calibration and you have to stuff it in the freezer to get it working again.

Can’t comment on any others.

A lot of the fundamentals of skiing have equivalents in MTB. The main things I was given to think about were:

– finding the middle of your skis (kind of the boss stance, so you can dynamically move out of centre and return)

– the ways a ski can interact with the snow (weighting left to right, forward/back, angulation, steering,weighting/unweighting); that’s just about all they can do, so it is about how your positioning and movements invite those changes in the ski/snow contact

– stance (wide to get more side to side weight transfer so suitable for hard pack/high speed/carving, narrow to form a platform for soft snow/moguls)

– basic differences between long turn carves and short turn techniques

– separation of upper body from lower body

Now I was also learning with a disability that the paediatric surgeon for my club foot had told my parents would mean I’d never be able to ski. With a locked left ankle this meant I had to pay closer attention to equipment setup that most people but this gave me an important insight…

… most beginners skip over the importance of keeping their heels in the back of their boots.Most beginners cannot perform the exercises that ski instructors give them because their heels are not in the back of their boots. When you get taken out of your comfort zone, your foot tenses up and your toes claw your heel out of the back of your boots.

Rule #1 Keep you heel in the back of your boots.

Young kids are the only people who its allowable for them not to keep their heels in the back of their boots (racing snowplough). Everybody else needs to. Wit the heel properly located, the lower leg angles forward and the knee becomes a hinge – with the heel forward, the lower leg is forced to the vertical and you can’t push your weight through into the boot.

Find an instruction course that shows you what these concepts look like and it is a good basic instruction course.

Others will no doubt critique this but I’ve tried to sum up the very core essenceof the sport. If you’ve done 20 years of snowboarding you’ll know the snowboarding equivalents of many of these. For instance you’ll know exactly the importance of keeping your weight central/forward to keep control through a turn on steep terrain. The advancement becomes a matter of combining the basic elements using situational awareness (type of snow / type of terrain) and having a wealth of muscle memory.

First couple of stages will be the muddiest if it is set up like usual. Expect a bit of a paddle in dark woods. Not steep except in short stretches. Expect exposed roots.

Thanks @dangeourbrain. My beard feels more luxuriant already…

Electric fire toast is best. you need to bend a fork to hold the bread and be able to hook onto the fire and be careful not to also touch the element

Did this with a gas fire in my college days. Bent a coathanger shelf onto the grille and could toast away to my heart’s content. Thanks for bringing back that memory

Grill? That’s the thing in the oven that makes smoke, isn’t it? I was hoping for something a little bit more artisan for sure. I might try one of our pizza trays on the cook top

I learnt to snowboard on a ski trip when the weather closed in and we all couldn’t be arsed to ski. Instead we went and hired snowplanks for the day. Because it was Chamonix and a long time ago, the boards were for hard boots and we were only doing it for a giggle and figured our ski boots would work fine enough; maybe just loosen a buckle a bit. Next stop the chairlift at Le Tour…

… None of us had much confidence in actually scooting our way onto the lifts so we carried the boards (we paid homage to the Monkees at the top of the lift). And reality hit.

… We were in a whiteout with snowboards, ski boots and no effing clue at the top of a red run. Six blokes. Learn or perish. We had one runaway board when somebody didn’t get their leash on. Most of the rest of us pushed ourselves upright and felt the balance, slipped the edge and started moving in the right direction. Turns were a learning process.

Blah blah. Everybody lived. Some took up snowboarding in preference to skiing.

To answer the question… don’t do it like ^^^^.

For skiing the answer for me was to work a season (two in fact) and get ski instructor foundation training. They broke down skiing to its core elements and got us to consider which elements to bring to bear in any skiing situation we found ourselves in. A lot like Cathro. I had three inspirational instructors who ran courses for a small class of season workers as a bit of relief from the monotony of punter lessons.

On a sainsbury carton of orange juice from circa 1995…

“This juice is made from oranges grown locally in Florida. It is especially juicy and easy to drink”

Oh FFS

If your want a cheap FTP upgrade on Zwift, buy better fans. A cooled body can sustain power. You get that from pedalling IRL, but the low cooling air flow rate of fans for indoor training is seldom sufficient. Your heart rate will be elevated for any output and your stamina will suffer.

Also….

defaults -currentHost write -g AppleFontSmoothing -int 0
vs
defaults -currentHost write -g AppleFontSmoothing -int 1

On retina screens macs no longer use sub-pixel anti-aliasing. For a less than retina dpi, sub-pixel anti-aliasing may be a benefit but depends on the RGB subpixel layout (see above). Browsers may implement some font anti-aliasing independent of the os giving mixed results. Bugger.

Subpixel layout.

Mac expects RGB. The Samsung maybe BGR. Turn the monitor upside down and rotate the screen display settings 180 degrees and see if it comes as clear as an RGB.

On the C1, the seal crossing the transfer port pretty much happens with the piston resting/compressing the top out stop.

When you release pressure it is possible for the piston to pass above the transfer port (suck down) with no chance of any of the negative air releasing. This leaves the fork in a state very different from its intended working state.

Definitely cycle the fork pulling out to a hard topout and nudging it a bit into its travel when adjusting pressures.

OP, we become morally obliged to cannibalism. Obvs.

With flats, the pedal provides the stiffness. You don’t need a stiff shoe. Stay away from too much sole thickness though.

Was SPDS from 1992-2011. Flats for preference since. Nukeproof and 5.10s for me.

I had a 330d that I loved for the cruising mpg, cruise control, oomph when you needed it and hated for the run flats.

I now have (sigh) a CRV 1.6 diesel which, for its sins, is Euro 6 emissions and ULEZ friendly. On a run it is easily showing 50s mpg.

Used to have a supercharged 4.6l petrol V8. 12-14 mpg – maybe 18-22 on a cruise. Drove it to Italy and back. Been poor ever since.

Just remember the boiler is rated to heat your house. When all it is doing is heating itself it only needs to be on for a miniscule fraction of the time temps are close to freezing when there is no other call to heat from the house (night time typically).

Don’t fuss about the frost protection. When it fires up for frost protection it just gets a bit of heat soak into the thermal mass of the boiler and the bypass pipework. If it does it for 5 minutes, twice a night, it is equivalent to having your heating on for ten minutes longer. I had a problem of frost protection operation triggering the over-temperature cutout (bypass valve had gone dodgy) that meant I had a really good indication of how often the frost protection was kicking in and it wasn’t that much (Central Scotland rural location).

Stacking spacers makes the fit “bigger ™”; less horizontal from bb to the bars but more vertical which wins out.

Lee McCormack would disdain.

The key is how low the frame stack measurement is that goes with the frame reach. If the stack is low, the “reach” may be marketing and not actually that long. You need both parts of this puzzle to understand how much you need to furtle the fit.

I’ve got some ancient Inov8s Roclites that I just loved and even ran a half-marathon in. Haven’t been able to find an Inov8 replacement that works for me these days.

On the maximalist side, have tried Altra Olympus 4 and Hoka Speedgoat. The wide toebox on the Altras is awesome, but the heel pocket feels loose and like the shoe is constantly trying to fall off. It doesn’t fall off but it feels like it will. The Speedgoat was brilliant. Doesn’t look as wide a fitting but was comfortable and secure and seemed very low effort/impact to run in.

The posted article was (ahem) journalistically challenged.

Here’s a picture from the European Transport Safety Council just so we have a clear understanding of what ISA is: https://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/ETSC-ISA-infographic.pdf

[essay incoming]

Way back at the beginning of this pandemic our ninny of a PM alluded to Dunkirk spirit and attempted to don a mantle of Churchillianism. He picked the wrong WW2 analogy.

He could instead have picked the Blitz: [cigar and brandy mode] “If you are an anti-vaxxer, you are against the war effort. You ignore the blackout and have your curtains wide open with the lights on. You invite death on your neighbours.”/[c&b]

Let’s forget about Boris and go back to the basics.

Vaccinated means: when exposed to SARS-COV-2 individuals might get infected but their primed immune system will recognise the pathogen and mount a response before too much virus takes hold.

Unvaccinated means:
1. The amount of reproduced and incubated virus in your body is higher, should you be infected
2. The rate of onward infection is higher
3. The chance of incubating a further mutation of the virus is higher
4. Your own course of illness has a higher chance of landing you in hospital, in the ICU or in the ground (not to mention risk of long-covid)

Statistical likelihood of a better individual outcome from being unvaccinated vs vaccinated varies based on a multitude of factors. This is true. The statistical view develops over time – the start of this is what is done throughout clinical trialling a new vaccine. The statistics can never predict the outcome for an individual. Adverse reactions do occur. The licensing of a therapeutic or vaccine only takes place after the statistical picture has been reasonably developed through a sequence of trials. That’s the hard science. It is done diligently by professional doctors and reviewed by other specialist doctors in government agencies. I’ve met them. They’re good people in command of their specialism. But vaccine rollout is, indeed, the most pressured regulatory process. The risk of a new substance being rolled out to the population as a whole and causing widespread serious adverse reactions is horrifying for those same doctors.

The rollout plan for Covid vaccines is actually incredibly simple. Because the disease carries a significant risk of death that increases with age, vaccinating the oldies first (based on clinical trials data) has hardly any down side. Vaccinating successively decreasing age groups gives you a chance to develop the picture of what type of adverse reactions occur and the likelihood of occurrence. Any statistically significant reaction can be researched and projected to indicate any population where the risk of receiving the vaccine exceeds the risks of not receiving the vaccine. The rollout is epidemiological in nature. It is based on statistics. Slicing and dicing the data may reveal hidden trends. This is the work done behind the scenes in a vaccine rollout, leading to the guidance of who should get the vaccine.

The epidemiological/statistical approach is scientific; it assures better outcomes for society but it does not guarantee individual outcomes. Society could do better in extending guarantees and assurances to individuals unlucky enough to suffer rare adverse reactions. The cost should be on our broader society to underwrite those who, through no fault of their own, suffer and, maybe, die; collateral damage from protecting society from a raging pandemic.

An individual’s choice to not get vaccinated is not a simplistic matter of personal freedom; exercising that particular freedom introduces risks that the freedom of others will be disproportionately curtailed. But, of course, to even mention that freedom isn’t free brings out the accusation of authoritarianism.

It is a stick and carrot conundrum but the best we hear is: “Trust us: we’re the Government”. No stick (because we won’t get reelected). No carrot (because we’d have to fund that from a functioning economy). Better to bluster through in a cozy haze of stage-managed sound bites than actually have to do any “governing” per se. Laissez f***ed.

Transparency in society and trust in those in power is needed for vaccination to be a straightforward choice. We have a backdrop of an entirely justified low level of trust in a flawed government in a polarised society. We have media outlets that value sensationalism over fact. We have “news” that is little more than voyeurism. We have on-line echo chambers where algorithms reinforce our prejudices.

I can call the PM a ninny and I can call out all the political grandstanding and opportunism that has transpired over the last 18 months but that’s just noise and has no bearing.

Despite the Government, I can see that every critical step I’d expect to see followed in a vaccination programme has taken place. Vaccines = gid, because science. Anti-vaxxers = misinformation victims. Society = could try harder.

Thanks for the input.

Conservation area but not a listed building. Phew.

Scaffolding is up. The builders have been in doing other works. They’re good. We’ve had a structural engineer in too. Was just feeling like I was in a conversation triangle and needed to take a breath over the weekend and understand what we’re in for. Five stages of grief and all that.

Specifically thanks for unanimously ruling out keeping the concrete. Really helpful (although I hope 120 year old concrete is generally ok as that’s what the floors are made of)

Having done a fair few natasp engines and done mapping from scratch… even good “tuners” are following methodologies that cannot possibly succeed in producing a correct engine map.

If you’re into a custom remapping, the most common natasp scenario is you’re trying to get fuelling and advance appropriate in a mapping vs throttle opening and rpm (alpha-N). If you have 16 throttle sites and 16 RPM sites you have 256 values for both fuelling and advance. The tuner will operate the rolling road to tweak the values at each site. The fuelling maps produced are always spiky. But the process fails because a recorded value at each site tells you nothing about the interpolation between sites. Just because you get a spike at one location (resonances) there is no assurance that the requirement you recorded was the actual peak. Should the interpolated fuelling as you progress away from the spike actually go up or should it go down?

The answer actually comes from data sampling theories. You’re basically attempting to reconstruct an analogue signal from digital samples. You cannot reproduce features above Nyquist frequency, so all the spikiness is actually useless information. Smoothing it all out is usually the much better answer.

This is not how the majority of car tuners think however, so the starting point from “tuning” is almost always a bad base map.

Next we get into the sticky world of compensations. These usually aren’t high up the tuner’s priority list but it is really vital to have effective and independent compensation for air and water temperature. Altitude compensation is also required but should be mathematically derived for alpha-N.

But the biggest issue is transients. These are genuinely hard to handle for all traditional injection scenarios (not so much direct injection) because the charge fuel mass is not a simple matter of the fuel from the injector getting atomised directly into the inducted air. Inlet tracts are a complex environment where there is a dynamic wetted area of inlet tract provides a major path for fuel getting into the charge. If you’ve had a production car tune with an overrun fuel cutoff, you have lost most of the wetted area and you need to over-inject transiently to provide enough fuel not to momentarily run lean and have a massive hiccough and kangaroo on throttle openings. All snap shut throttle transients tend to overfuel momentarily anyway for the same reasons.

Fuel has the other useful property of cooling down the combustion chamber. If you run too lean at too much power, the heat build up will tend to cause nasty detonatey things to happen.

Easiest way out of all these situations is to add fuel and disable fuel-cutoff on overrun so that is what most tuners do. Snap, crackle, pop.

Real car manufacturers have massive programmes to get their engine tunes calibrated and research programmes to introduce new technologies to work around the messy, swirly mess of internal combustion. This takes time and money and gets paid back by being replicated over as many unit sales as possible. It isn’t possible to do this stuff in the aftermarket.

But the aftermarket doesn’t give two sh*ts because the dumb punters are just crying out to be relieved of their money: make unfounded claim; violate all rules on pollutants and not killing catalytic converters and give ’em what they want… mail order, plug-in add-ons, bad boy noises and a sticker.

Zero stack anglesets on their way as well.

I used to upgrade more than I do nowadays. The last few bikes to come my way, I’ve picked the specs to not need upgrades.

Contact points have to be right but I’ve been moving my Burgtecs between bikes since 2017. Brakes, I have my preference of brands but I’ll ride anything that doesn’t try to kill me but I’ll swap out to big rotors front and rear. Drivetrain, I’m on a mix of 11 speed XT and 12 speed GX between my enduro bike and eMTB (and not the right way round); run ’til broken.

Suspension. I’ve done aftermarket upgrades over the years: Push tunes; Bos Deville; Vivid Air. I’ve done tweakage: tokens, bands, settings etc. When Shockwiz came out I bought 3 to run front and rear simultaneously and to also have one on another bike. Tweakage galore. But the bikes I’ve bought since 2018 have been on Lyrik/Super Deluxe combos that don’t take much setting up but work phenomenally and reliably.

Wheels. I’ve got a nasty habit of dinging them. Treat them as a wear item.

Tyres. No right answer. Probably where I’m tweaking most at the moment. Combining low rolling resistance rear with Rimpact vs a heavier carcass tyre . Even on my eMTB I’m trying fast rolling combos so I can chase Strava descent segments at >25kmh.

Had this on my Lyrik with a bent flap of plastic type thing. With careful positioning an RRP proguard max doesn’t cause the same problems

Just a comment on how the load has cracked the root of the rim bead. The lifetime loading that will have introduced the greatest single instance of load in this location. When we hear a bead snap into place with a satisfying crack that is a hammer blow. Dry assembly of tubeless tyres with excessive pressures result in the biggest loads and the biggest shock loads. I have no way of telling what this rim has suffered, but this is a conceivable manner by which a single peak loading would have been experienced.

From a purely engineering POV, this will be a fatigue failure. Aluminium alloys fatigue. The further the loading stays away from the material limits, the longer aluminium structures last, but even with moderate loadings aluminium alloys eventually fatigue. When a structure reaches fatigue failure earlier than we expect we look for the cause of initiation. In examining this rim I would look for stress risers in the design or treatment of the rim. Is the failure anywhere near the join? Could it be heat treatment related after welding?

In the absence of evidence of a mechanical initiation, you then have to consider the nearest the structure has come to overload. Hence, I mention the bead seating on a 2.6 inch tyre. Hunt’s specification for this rim says maximum 30psi for a 2.6″ tyre. If you didn’t overpressurise the tyre, the fitting of the tyre is the most likely time 30psi was exceeded and the bead seating would be a likely event for overloading.

But this is conjecture and circumstantial evidence at best.

We always chase optimum performance from lightweight components. Manufacturers chase thinning of wall profiles to meet market expectations. “Strong, light, cheap? Pick two”, etc. Material for material, thinner profiles are weaker.

Fatigue in aluminium happens. It has a statistical likelihood of occurring. Without evidence, you are just unlucky. If the component is marginal for your use, either change your use or replace with a stronger alternative. Light rims with big tyres? Such a combo is always going to be challenging at exactly the point where your rim has failed.

The single biggest introduction of load to cause a failure like this would be bead seating.

Does your neighbour lower their flag at sunset? Do they raise it at sunrise? Poor show if not. In my youth, “rescuing” neglected flags was a fairly standard order of business for a Friday night out on the lash. If your neighbour’s flag remains in place more than a month please come back here and loudly lament the drop in standards of the youth of today.

Back in the eighties the Sun headline:

‘”My Tory toffs were oh so sweet”, says marshmallow strip queen, Vashanti’

I contemporaneously got to hear about the precipitating antics from the girlfriend (present at the event) of a Tory Toff. The takeaway was something about rich, amoral, entitled types having an indestructible relationship with doing something naughty, getting caught and then denying everything until the next fast-moving scandal comes along to draw the spotlight; a fine tradition I think many of us recognise in our glorious government.

Have PM’d an option.

Like it or not, B1 springs aren’t a current part and stock is drying up.

Learning to optimise the C1 needs a few changes.

C1 rides higher. Your bar position is higher. Stack is higher. Reach is shorter. You need to make cockpit adjustments to make a C1 feel close to a B1.

In terms of the air chambers, C1 is barely any different to B1. Yes, the negative is marginally smaller. Yes, there is marginal extra volume in the lowers. The key word is marginal. Seriously, it’s marginal. It is the same air shaft. It is the same positive chamber. If you set the same pressure, you get the same support (except marginally (for two marginal reasons)). It feels different (mostly) because the fork lowers are held in a different position relative to the piston and the proximity of the top out stop.

Mostly the comments about support are because we all (individually) suffer pavlovian conditioning regarding sag setup.

The lowers on a B1 fork look to be “deeper in the travel” (compared to where the piston is sitting). So…

…some people pump B1 up harder and get more support ‘cos they want less sag
…some people lessen pressure with C1 ‘cos they want more sag
…you can bottom out a C1 easier (because you put less pressure in it to hit an arbitrary sag expectation)
…you perceive support from the C1, because it is just offset higher in its travel by the longer footnut

Potentially, some of the feel of the B1 is because it has a softer (pneumatic) topout.

Truth is, we’re all appalling witnesses and the collective hive mind is a bumbling village idiot. Two little bits of metal (alike, but not entirely the same as the prior bits of metal) have us pondering our navels and contemplating the metaphysical.

Disclosure of my current collection:
Lyrik 170 Solo Air RCT3 (2016), light rebound tune charger 1
Lyrik 160 Solo Air RCT3 (2018) Charger 2
…podiums in 2019 as a 160 B1
…tested as a 160 C1
…now testing as a 170 B1
Lyrik 170 B1 Ultimate (2020) – eMTB – plan is to transfer the C1 kit to this fork