=?iso-8859-1?Q?RE:_=5BCR=5D_L=FCders_-_Masi?=

(Example: Production Builders:Peugeot)

From: "David Bilenkey" <dbilenkey@sympatico.ca>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?RE:_=5BCR=5D_L=FCders_-_Masi?=
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:00:30 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20060215202817.87128.qmail@web82209.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


http://www.biketechreview.com/archive/wheel_theory.htm

"How can it be that wheel inertial forces are nearly insignificant, when the advertisements say that inertia is so important? Quite simply, inertial forces are a function of acceleration. In bike racing this peak acceleration is about .1 to .2 g’s and is generally only seen when beginning from an initial velocity of 0 (see criterium race data in Appendix D ). Furthermore, the 0.3kg/0.66lb difference in wheels, even if this mass is out at the rim, is so small compared to your body mass that the differences in wheel inertia will be unperceivable. Any difference in acceleration due to bicycle wheels that is claimed by your riding buddies is primarily due to cognitive dissonance, or the placebo effect (they paid a lot of money for the wheels so there must be some perceivable gain)."

David -- David Bilenkey Ottawa, Ontario, Canada dbilenkey@sympatico.ca
> -----Original Message-----
> From: classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org
> [mailto:classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org] On Behalf Of
> Jerome & Elizabeth Moos
> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 3:28 PM
> To: Sergio Servadio
> Cc: Fred Rafael Rednor; classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: Re: [CR] Lüders - Masi
>
>
> Good, then maybe we have found the real expert in this that
> we have always lacked. Is it not true that the force
> required to achieve angular acceleration or deceleration is a
> function both of the mass of the rotating object, and of its
> distance from the axis of rotation? And is it not also true
> that because the frame attaches to the wheels at the hub
> axle, that it acts at zero distance in respect to angular
> acceleration? This has always, as far as I know, been the
> basis for those who asserted that the weight of the rims and
> tires was crucial, while the weight of the frame was
> inconsequential, at least for acceleration and braking. This
> fits with the Classical Mechanics I studied, but I took only
> the few courses required for an engineering degree, so if
> you, as an instructor in the subject, can point out a fallacy
> in this common interpretation of mechanics, I'd be very
> interested to hear it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerry Moos
> Big Spring, TX