[CR]Re: "Q" and other mythology.

(Example: Production Builders:Peugeot:PY-10)

Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 03:10:32 +0000 (UTC)
From: <billydavid13@comcast.net>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: [CR]Re: "Q" and other mythology.

I would suggest that Harvey Sachs doesn't have to care about the Q-Factor of his vintage bikes because they are all reasonably low, something which may not be true of contemporary road bikes. People's anatomy varies and we are all somewhat adaptable. Still there's plenty of reason to believe that ergonomics suffer the more one's legs splay out. Figures? Data? Engineers had lots of data supporting Biopace. But the people who race bikes to win pretty much ignored that. Clinchers are supposedly faster than sewups but that hasn't exactly convinced the pros yet either. I think Jan Heine has made a pretty good case in BQ for favoring low Qs. {I know Biopace wasn't exactly aimed at racers, but even at my low rpms they really, really sucked, in spite of all the charts and graphs that showed they shouldn't have.} Billy [in favor of lower Qs] Ketchum; Chicago, IL; USA.