Equipment - Could Tires Increase My Available Effective Wattage By 25%?

TL;DR Check your tires

The Tsunami in its original color with the Bastognes, Jets, and Stinger 6s.

Backstory

I've been very unhappy with my aero clinchers (Jet 6/9 front/rear). I originally bought them because "aero > weight" and I literally bought (aka spent money) into that theory.

The reality is that for whatever reason I don't like the wheels. In fact I avoid the Jets unless absolutely necessary. I used the Jet 6 on the trainer, which is kind of ironic when you realize that on a trainer the only thing the front wheel does is hold the bike level.

I struggle every time I give the Jets a chance. I can't accelerate well with them and even in a higher speed situation I need time to accelerate them (where you'd think that since I'm already going fast it would primarily require more aero work to go faster).

I hem and haw about selling them all the time, deciding one day that I'm going to sell them, then the next to not sell them. I didn't ride the front Jet 6 for about 2 years, preferring to leave it sitting in the basement after riding it maybe a dozen times. I rode the rear Jet 9 for part of a season just because I felt like I should ride it if I wasn't selling it.

I didn't have a lot of metrics on the wheels but one thing stood out - they were heavier than my other wheels.

Wheel Weight

I've always liked riding lighter wheels. They respond instantly when I jump - they make my jump better, accentuating the only strength I have on the bike. That's a good thing.

I also learned that in group ride situations wheel weight affects me significantly. This is because I apparently make short, sharp punches to the pedals to close minor gaps, or even to adjust the gap ahead of me. These "pedal punches" are very short, like a quarter revolution if that.

I learned this when the Missus and I went on a group ride on our tandem with every other bike a single rider bike. We'd previously done one other group ride and that was with all tandems and a triplet - those bikes accelerated and decelerated like our tandem and it was an easy ride so I was more concerned with not crashing than with sitting on a wheel. On the group ride with the single bikes I didn't want to get dropped. I found myself doing these little "pedal punch" efforts to close tiny gaps, where I involuntarily slammed the pedals for about a 2 o'clock amount of power (it seems it's from 1 o'clock to about 3 o'clock). When I say tiny gap I'm talking closing a few inches to the rider in front of us - I was just adjusting our speed a bit.

The problem was that the increased mass of the tandem meant that my quarter revolution power surges didn't do very much. Not only was my little pedal punches too weak, I couldn't even ask the Missus to punch the pedals with me because I was learning that I did this as we rode!

With the tandem I needed to turn the pedals hard for two or three full revolutions instead of doing that little quarter revolution punch. Of course it strained my reserves to the limit. As might be expected a very short time later we went off the back. We lasted maybe 5 miles of that ride.

So apparently I have that thing that I do to adjust the gap to the next rider in front of me. And I really only have a sprint as far as "stuff I can do in a race". For those kinds of efforts I like lighter wheels.

It only reinforced my belief that I prefer lighter wheels.

Why Jet Wheels?

Back in the day I did a bunch of back-to-back sprints on different wheels, to see if there were substantial differences in wheels speeds. If you knew me back then you may have noticed that I went from racing 280 gram rim box section wheels to suddenly showing up with my TriSpokes, Spinergy Rev-X, or Zipp 340s.

Aero made a huge difference for me. Lighter weight allowed me to get up to speed quicker but without aero I'd hit an aero wall and stop accelerating. With aero wheels I could blast through that aero wall and keep accelerating.

Importantly during that test I had the same tubulars on all the tubular wheels, and the same clinchers on the few clincher wheelsets I tested. At least for the tubulars rolling resistance was probably close to identical between the wheels.

In addition the different wheels varied in weight as well, and by switching between different weight wheels I started getting a feel for how heavier wheels felt versus lighter ones. Aero wheels inevitably weighed more but they just kept accelerating. The lightest wheels, all non-aero, hit top speed quickly but the top speed was substantially lower than those of the aero wheels. I fitted lighter wheels for the slower, jumpier Cat 3 type races, where I'd be jumping out of corners and the sprint started at sane speeds. I'd usually choose my most aero wheels for the faster, steadier Cat 1-2-3 races, where it was single file all the time and the sprint was just maintaining some insane speed over the last lap.

Therefore the Jets seemed to make sense. Only thing was that when I first got the Jets I had this subjective feel like "Oh, they're heavier." No objective numbers, just a feeling.

My Jets

When I finally weighed the wheels I attributed my disdain for the Jets to the 3 lbs weight difference between those and my race wheels (Stinger 6 f/r or Stinger 7/9 f/r, about 3.1 and 2.8 lbs lighter respectively) or even the 2 lbs weight difference to my other clinchers, the sister wheelset HED Bastognes. The fact that all but the 7/9s have the same hubs and spokes means that virtually all the weight difference is in the rim/tire/tube/etc. They call that rotating weight and I was taught a long time ago that rotating weight was worse than static weight.

I also have non-aero clinchers as mentioned above, the HED Bastognes, which I prefer to the Jets. They wear the same tires, same brand tubes (different valve lengths), so the wheels are set up the same. However the Bastognes weigh 2 lbs less than the Jets.

Note: I have 50g heavier rear skewers on the clinchers, same clincher tire models on all four clincher wheels, basically similar tubular tires, basically similar all-steel cassettes on all rear wheels, so the wheels are consistent across types, meaning all the clinchers are similar and all the tubulars are similar.

In slower races (usually when it's raining), where I'd use clinchers, I'd use the Bastognes. The 2 lbs weight delta would make them seem more responsive than the Jets even with identical tires and tubes.

TPI (A segway but bear with me)

I wanted to put this out there because it helps visualize what TPI really means to you. TPI is "threads per inch", how many rows of thread fits in an inch. A 66 TPI tire has 66 threads every inch of tire. A 320 TPI tire has 320 threads every inch of tire.

What took a while to sink in is that this also applies to the thickness of the tire casing.

A 66 TPI tire has threads which are 1/66" thick, right? Because if you make it into a fabric you'll fit 66 threads in an inch. That's not that thick.

A 320 TPI tire has threads which are 1/320" thick. If 1/66" isn't that thick then 1/320" is really, really thin.

Thinner casings mean more supple casings. Supple casings deform easier on bumps. This means they absorb less energy flexing. Therefore they have lower rolling resistance on anything rougher than glass.

On the other hand if you have a really, really thing 1/320" thick tire casing, it's not really very resistant to getting cut or punctured by glass, nails, thorns, etc. You never hear of "yeah, this tank has armor 1/320 of an inch thick!" It's more like "With the Tiger 2 there was 7 inches of solid steel between the crew and incoming shells from the front".

Most tires layer the casing over itself so a 320 TPI casing with two layers would be 1/160" thick, twice as thick as 1/320". At that point you'd have 640 TPI if you looked at the casing through a light (two layers of 320 TPI), but it's just 320 TPI casing layered twice.

Still not that thick. That's why you don't want to wear your tires down to the casing, you really have very little left at that point between you and a flat.

Anyway, TPI explanation done...

Clincher Tire Rolling Resistance

The somewhat recent Velonews tire rolling resistance test sparked my interest. I realized that it might be that the tire rolling resistance is contributing to my dislike for the Jets.

Velonews found that the lower TPI tires, meaning those with thicker/stiff casings, had higher rolling resistance. This would be expected, based on the fact that deforming a tire over a bump takes energy, and the less energy you use doing that the less the tire will slow. Higher TPI tires rolled better in the test. The Velonews article did point out that one manufacturer counted the TPI of the double casing so Velonews halved it to keep the number consistent. TPI in the chart is TPI for one layer of casing.

Based on Velonews's findings a fast tire can save as much as 10-20 watts per tire at 40 kph / 25 mph, so 20-40 watts total. This means a rider can reduce total power required to maintain 40 kph / 25 mph from, say, 100 watts to just over 60 watts.

Rolling resistances at 40 kph:

•  Thicker/stiffer tires, 100w
•  Thinner/flexible tires, 65w

35 watts may not seem like a huge savings or huge wattage overall. However, consider that I've placed 3rd in a Cat 3 race averaging under 160w:

Average power for 58 minutes: 158w

Cat 3-4 result: 3rd place.

If I was using my 60 TPI (threads per inch) training tires I'd be using (Maxxis ReFuse, a solid, super reliable training tire), realistically, at least 120w simply overcoming rolling resistance. That would be a super optimistic number based on a "better" higher thread count (80 TPI) tire being rated as using 59w at 40kph. Factor in the ReFuse's tough as nails construction, a layer or two of puncture resistant material under the tread, and you end up with a really thick tire casing that doesn't flex at all. Still, though, I think 120w would be a very conservative estimate for the tires' energy consumption.

• Rolling resistance with my 60 TPI ReFuse tires: ~120w
• Rolling resistance with the nicest clinchers: 65w

If I went to one of the fastest tires in the Velonews test, which consumed 32-35w at the same speed, I'd save about 55w total in rolling resistance.

55 watts!

If I typically average 160-200w in a race, and I'm using 100-120w to overcome rolling resistance if I'm using my clinchers, then I'm really using say 60-80w to overcome air resistance. The rest of my power output, say 100-120w, is going towards overcoming rolling resistance. If I can reduce that by 60w, that's huge! I could almost double my power devoted to overcoming air resistance!

Clincher Tire Math

If I did a race on my clinchers:

• Current, super hard race for me, 200w avg.
• 60 TPI tires, about 120w/pair
• Leaves 80w for air resistance (and bearings and stuff)

What if I had some nicer clinchers?

• Current, super hard race for me, 200w avg.
• Nicer clinchers, approx 65w/pair
• Leaves 135w for air resistance (and bearings and stuff)

I'd be seeing an effective increase in available power of 55w. That may not seem like much until I put it a different way.

55w is 25% of my FTP when I upgraded to Cat 2.

Gratuitous picture of the Tsunami in its current color with the Stinger 7/9 set up.

Tubular Tires

I normally race on tubulars. Unfortunately there isn't really any data I could find other than an earlier Velonews test with tires I don't use.

Tubulars seem to use a bit more energy, 45-50w each, but there are so many variables that I can't really apply that test to my tubulars. I use different tires, different pressure, and there's the whole "how did you glue them" bit.

There were a couple constants though. First, a higher TPI led to lower rolling resistance. Second, the test found is that higher pressures in tubular tires really don't alter rolling resistance numbers. I think this is because a tubular tire doesn't rely on the rim for part of its shape, it's a shape unto itself. Therefore it really doesn't change shape much when you put more pressure in it.

Let's use a decent number, based on the description of the tires and casings. I'm going to say 45w for my tubulars. I use 23mm tires built with nice 320 TPI casing. The test had a 24mm tire with high TPI.

Tubular Tire Math

• Current super hard race for me, 200w avg.
• 320 TPI tubular tires, approx 90w/pair
• Leaves 110w for air resistance (and bearings and stuff)

At 200w average this is a 30w increase in power output for air resistance compared to the nice clincher number. With the clinchers I only have about 80w to devote to air resistance. With tubulars it's realistically 110w.

It makes sense that if I was close to the edge with tubulars I'd be well into the red with clinchers. 200w really is about as hard as I can go in a race. I've hit that a number of times in races. With clinchers, to go the same speed, I'd have to up my power output by 30 watts, blowing me up.

I'd be off the back with the clinchers.

This also explains a bit on how I can race a bit more effectively against riders that drop me quickly on training rides. I need that extra 30w of power to overcome air resistance but I don't have it with the training tires.

That's just based on rolling resistance! Keep in mind too that the clinchers are heavier, with the Jets being especially heavy. Doing those quarter pedal punches to close little gaps might be efficient with lighter tubulars, but with heavier clinchers I'd be putting down a bit more energy on each adjustment. Multiply that by numerous adjustments and the extra watts quickly add up. The Jets's excess weight may be pushing me over the edge.

Thoughts Going Forward

So it may be that the tires are a big part of the reason why I don't like the Jets. Unfortunately I don't have the option of buying tires right now, and the only set of extra tires I have are not one of those magic ones on the list - they're stiffer versions of a 46+ watt tire so it's probably a 50-55 watt tire.
<35w a="" are="" as="" bit="" change="" d="" experiment="" i="" large="" more="" obvious.="" p="" possible="" rather="" results="" so="" that="" the="" tires.="" with="">
I don't know how puncture resistant the Specialized tires are but the Conti GP4000S II have a good reputation for being bombproof clinchers. It might be that my next sets of clinchers will be a pair of those Contis.
<35w a="" are="" as="" bit="" change="" d="" experiment="" i="" large="" more="" obvious.="" p="" possible="" rather="" results="" so="" that="" the="" tires.="" with="">
<35w a="" are="" as="" bit="" change="" d="" experiment="" i="" large="" more="" obvious.="" p="" possible="" rather="" results="" so="" that="" the="" tires.="" with="">And then maybe I'll keep the Jets after all.

Training - Merry Christmas

Yesterday and today were family days. The Missus was home from work so the three of us (her, Junior, me) spent the day together. Yesterday Junior was a bit fussy, I was absolutely exhausted, and it ends up he was probably coming down with something; today he's been running a 100-102 degree fever pretty consistently. His normal "eat everything and then ask for seconds" became more of the "pour clementines from one bowl to another".

Nonetheless, with the weather a crazy 55+ degrees F, with sun supposed to come out, the Missus encouraged me to get out for a ride. It's really unusual for me to train outside in the winter but with March/April weather… well I had to get out.

I had a last little delay as Junior wanted to lay down and snuggle with his blankets. After holding him a bit he passed out. The Missus took over when I transferred him to his bed, shooing me away to go ride.

Because the weather was unusual I'm noting what I wore:
 - Bib knickers, "roubaix" material.
 - LS base layer
 - LS insulating base layer (not wicking)
 - LS jersey
 - wind vest
 - head thing
 - my Canari winter gloves
 - regular shoes, socks
 - Sidekick booties

Maybe a better way to do it:

Head: head sock thing
Neck: Turtleneck bit from a base layer
Torso: 3 x LS jerseys, wind vest
Legs: 1 x knickers
Feet: regular socks, regular shoes, booties
Hands: regular winter gloves

I was a bit warm since I felt warm when I started down the driveway. Realistically I could have gotten rid of one of the LS layers, maybe the insulating one, and replaced it with a SS jersey. I also could have used some "roubaix"/thermal shorts - I have a full "roubaix" long sleeve + shorts skinsuit and that would have been ideal with the LS base layer and the wind vest.

But I wore what I wore and with daylight rapidly fading I headed out.

I had been fiddling with my bike in the trainer room. My tape was a wreck, I wanted to mount a second bottle, I wanted to find a way to mount a frame pump, etc. I'm also reorganizing said bike room so I've been sorting through a lot of things.

Therefore I started full a pretty good load out, a pretty good set of supplies. A tube each for the 60 mm valve front and 80 mm valve rear, and an extender to let the 60 mm work in the rear. Spare dropout. Multi tool, two of them, including an 8 mm allen wrench and a chain tool. Spare KMC Missing Links. Some other stuff.

I also Strava'd the ride with the phone. I had my SRM going (and checked the slope thing a few times to make sure the weather didn't radically affect my numbers. Our unheated basement, at 64 degree or so, is pretty close to the 55 degrees or so outside, so the numbers weren't far off, just a few ticks.

Today I weighed in at an "off cycle" 167 lbs. I say "off cycle" when I'm at the heavier point of my weight. I was "on cycle" by the time I went for the ride, and after I weighed… I have to go weigh myself.

Ha. Exactly the same weight, down to the tenth. Haha.

Oh and when I set out I'd eaten about 1200 cal. With about 900 cal burned I'm at a net of under 300 cal for the day. Therefore I should be able to eat a bit tonight for dinner.

Compare that to the 175-179 lbs I weighed most of the summer and it's a dramatic difference, a good 10 lbs loss. I felt it immediately heading out of the complex. I have to climb a hill that's a good minute effort at 300-450 watts.

Today I peaked at 529w on that hill and did about 12 mph on the hill. It took me less than a minute and I slowed dramatically at the top just because.

Sept 27th I peaked at under 370 and struggled to go 9 mph. It took me about 1:20 to do the hill.

Aug 3rd I hit just under 390w and struggled to hit 10 mph. It took about 1:15 to do the hill.

There's another little hill I want to check but it's so short and in the middle of the loop so it's harder than checking the first few minutes of a given ride. On a great year, like 2010, I was flowing up the hill in a 53x14 at 25 mph. On tougher years it's hard for me to go 16-18 mph. I'm curious what today was like - I did it twice and both times it felt easier than any recent memory.

I hadn't been out in a while so I had some of the normal twinges from being able to ride in the saddle. They were gone by an hour into the ride but I was pretty aware of them, just in case they didn't go away.

I also learned, again, just how unaerodynamic it is to stand up. Given the choice I'll stay seated at speed, or stand while on the drops. However today, going along in a stream of traffic (I know, traffic on Christmas?), I stood while on the hoods for a short hill. It was like I hit a wall I slowed so much.

In a field, standing on the hoods is not a big deal.

Alone?

Big deal.

(Specialized did a simple wind tunnel test and it showed that for one rider - sample size was one - there was a significant savings aerodynamically in the draft by being on the drops versus being on the hoods. I thought about that today while I was on the hoods. The rider in question was a relatively tall woman based on the head tube size of the frame. I, of course, am a relatively short-legged guy so when I stand up I catch more wind proportionally speaking, so there's that.)

I did a loop and a half of my normal Quarry Road loop, trying to get my favorite right turn in (10/202 to 315) so I could do a big jump. The first lap I did an half hearted jump, deciding to make the effort only after I was clear of the turn. The effort ended up a 1000w peak, 600w for 10 second kind of effort. Definitely subpar, but fun and invigorating for a late December ride.

I figured I'd do it for real on the next loop.

Unfortunately the light turned red just before I got to the light the second time so I didn't do the second jump. I thought about it but instead decided to save it and see how the final half mile hill went. Ultimately it went about normal, based on Strava's "recent effort" comparison. I went significantly faster once this year, significantly slower twice, and within a 10 second window the other 5 times.

Yes I've only done the Quarry Road loop 9 times this year.

Nine.

It's my normal outside training ride and I used to do it 1-2-3x a week. I guess I haven't felt the need to ride outside much the past few years.

So with that I headed in. I wanted to get one last picture of the bike, in its current iteration, before the deep freeze sets in.

After the ride, Christmas Day.

Photo taken with my LG G2 phone camera in "dynamic mode"

Thoughts on the current iteration of the bike.

The bottle placement accentuates the length of the bike. I kind of like it. With the pump, the taillights, the bag, the bike has a very rear mass bias look and I like it. All the stuff is grouped around the seat tube, leaving the front end of the bike a bit bare and way out in front.

I've been working on the downtube bottle cage - I think I'm going to put in new rivnuts instead of trying to file the current cage, as I want them a good 1 cm further up the tube. Instead of trying to get it done for the ride today I just used the seat tube cage.

For the record I never touched the bottle during the ride.

I combined the two Blackburn mini pumps (one carbon bodied, one regular plastic) into one "best condition" carbon one. That's the pump peeking out from behind the seat tube.

Both blinkie lights have full strength rechargeable batteries.

The saddle bag has all my training ride stuff in it. It's short the third tube so it's a bit baggy looking. With a third tube it looks like something out of a catalog, perfectly formed.

Equipment - Bike Weight (Red Tsunami)

After reading some stuff about bike weights online I got curious about my own bike's weight. For the EVEN Hotel Fun Ride I brought a bunch of bike mechanic stuff to the hotel that I don't normally touch. This included packing the bike tool box (which has my big digital scale in it, meaning the scale for weighing stuff over 1000 grams) as well as the repair stand (which is perfect for holding the previously mentioned scale). After the ride I unloaded the stuff into the garage and it hasn't moved since. My race wheels sit there as well.

I realized that I had everything I needed to weigh my bike in its various iterations.

So I did.

My main focus was to see the delta in the weights for the wheels. I mean, okay, the ultimate weight is nice to see, but I wanted to see if there was any objective data to back up my very subjective opinions and such. I didn't put the SRM PCV (computer head) on the bike, it's about the only thing missing in terms of "always on the bike". The tail lights (I use two), saddle bag full of stuff, and pump, they go on for training rides but not for races. Bottle - since I usually ditch my bottle before the finish I figured keeping it off was fine.

My bike, after the Nutmeg State Games 2014. Stinger 7/9 wheels.

Weight = 16.2 lbs without bottle and SRM head.

The results below:

Red Tsunami bike, no pump, no bottle, no SRM head, no tail lights, no saddle bag with stuff in it. I train on the bike with the Jets right now.

Bike with Jet 6 front and Jet 9 rear wheels: 8.62 kg, 18.98 lbs.

Note that all the HED wheels, except the Stinger 7/9 combo, use the same model hubs and spokes. Even the Stinger 7/9 use very similar weight hubs. Therefore the majority of the weight differences are in the tire/tubes, rims, cassette, and a minor difference due to small variations in spoke count.

On the clinchers I'm using Maxxis ReFuse training tires, Bontrager tubes, and Velox rim strips. On the tubulars I have either Vittoria EVO tires (one of them is a Tech rain tire and the rest are regular CXs) or the Bontrager XXXLite tires. Weights for the tubular tires are virtually identical.

2010 HED Jet aero clinchers (with stock HED front skewer and trainer rear skewer)

Jet 6 front wheel, 1.71 kg / 3.77 lbs
Jet 9 rear wheel, 1.97 kg / 4.33 lbs (with 11-25 steel Campy Centaur? cassette)

2010 HED Bastogne clinchers (with stock HED front skewer and trainer rear skewer)

Bastogne front wheel, 1.16 kg / 2.55 lbs
Bastogne rear wheel, 1.62 kg / 3.57 lbs (with 11-25 steel Miche or BBB cassette)

2011-2012 HED Stinger 7/9 aero tubulars (with stock HED skewers)

Stinger 7 front wheel, 1.10 kg / 2.42 lbs
Stinger 9 rear wheel, 1.31 kg / 2.88 lbs (with 11-23 steel Miche or BBB cassette)

2010 HED Stinger 6 aero tubulars  (with stock HED skewers)

Stinger 6 front wheel, 0.95 kg / 2.09 lbs
Stinger 6 rear wheel, 1.31 kg / 2.88 lbs (with 11-21 ti/steel Campy Record cassette)

Bike weights with clinchers

With Bastognes, 7.72 kg / 17.0 lbs
With Jets, 8.62 kg / 18.98 lbs

Bike weights with tubulars

With the Stinger 7/9 setup weighs 7.35 kg or 16.19 lbs.
With the Stinger 6 wheels weighs 7.20 kg or 15.85 lbs.

Thoughts

The first thing is that I thought my bike was much heavier when set up for training. 19 pounds is not a lot for a bike, and to me the bike feels like a tank with the Jet wheels fitted. If I were to guess I'd have said my bike weighed 20-22 pounds so to have a 19 pound bike is pretty surprising. When I started racing a 19 pound bike was super light, and 20-21 pounds was about normal for a race bike. I've taken spins on 12 pound bikes in parking lots and they feel like they're made from styrofoam, they're so light, and my bike is nowhere near that.

Second I knew the Jets were heavy but to weigh about 8 pounds for the pair of wheels (with tires etc) is pretty substantial. The Jets give away about 1.5 kg or over THREE pounds to my tubulars. The front clincher wheels, which are identically set up in terms of hub/spokes/tire/tube/rimstrip, are about half a kilo apart so that's a full pound or more in just the rim. Let me repeat that in bold. The rims make for a full pound difference! The only difference between the two front wheels is the rim so that's where the weight is, directly in the rim area. This is why the wheels feel so hard to spin up, the rims weigh twice as much. They are more aero but I use so much energy getting them up to speed that I'm pretty much exploded by the time I'm able to substantially use the aero benefits.

Third, I was shocked to see that the Stinger 9 and the Stinger 6 rear wheels weigh the same. The 9 even has a heavier cassette and a marginally heavier tire. To see that it weighed the same means that basically it'll be my standard rear racing wheel. The 6 no longer has a function. It's not lighter, a tall rear wheel is always usable, and I'll have a higher top speed for a given power in a sprint. Since the Stinger 6 rim is cracked I may build it out as another 9.

The final thought is that I figured my bike was heavier in general. To be so close to the UCI minimum weight of 6.8 kg / 15 lbs surprised me. My Cannondale 2.8 was, at best, about 17 pounds with extremely light tubular wheels (280g rims, 28H, hubs similar to modern day hubs). This was on a spring-type scale (a fish scale sold through a bike distributor) so the accuracy was questionable at best, but it was a pretty light bike. The Cannondale SystemSix, with the Reynolds tubular DV46 wheels, came in at about 15.5 pounds, on the same digital scale I used to record all the above weights. The Tsunami only gives away a third of a pound compared to the very sweet System Six. It's virtually the same build kit so it's the wheels, the saddle (my carbon railed SLR is light), the fork (my current ENVE 2.0 is light), and the (probably heavier) Steelman stem and FSA Wing bar that are different.

Going Forward

I suppose I could cut some weight off by swapping cassettes between the Stinger 6 and Stinger 9 - the 11-23 ti/steel cassette is noticeably lighter than the 11-23 steel cassette. However the overall result wouldn't be significant. I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two, separated by 50 or whatever grams, or 0.05 kg.

I don't have any weight weenie parts per se. Thomson seatpost (the regular one), FSA Wing Compact bar (aluminum), Campy Skeleton brakes (Athena? I bought them used), Crank Bros headset, Specialized Rib Cage bottle cage. I even left two Planet Bike blinky light mounts on, and the bike had the SRM mount (but not the actual computer head).

The light stuff I have on the bike includes the ENVE 2.0 fork, the carbon railed SLR saddle, and… I think that's it. Both are long term items, not wear items. I plan on having them for a long time. I bought some lighter weight tubes (60g vs 90g) but, again, realistically I'm not going to notice that as much as if I move from one wheel set to another. Plus they're thinner and slightly less durable so I'll stick with training on regular tubes for now.

Steelman Bikes stem, it's not light. 257.4 grams unpainted, so 0.57 pounds by itself. I think a typical stem is in the 100-120g range. That's a substantial difference relatively speaking, to double the weight of a part. However fit is absolutely critical so I can't nitpick the weight of the stem.

Tsunami frame, alone, is about 1300g with paint, binder clamp, and barrel adjusters. Unpainted it was 1210g. My frame and fork should weight in the 1650g range (with a 350-ish gram fork). The Cannondale was supposed to be 1150g for the 56 cm so a bit less for the 52 cm I rode. Again fit is first so a little bit of weight is a normal sacrifice for a custom fit, sub-$800 frame.

I do have a light crankset, the Cannondale SI SRM, which is about 675g total, with bottom bracket. I think I've weighed it but I don't know if I ever put the pictures up, and looking through about 20k pictures doesn't appeal to me right now. A typical crankset (Campy Record aluminum with Record BB) will weight 900g or more.

However, for basically no carbon except the rims and the saddle rails, the bike isn't heavy at all.

Realistically it would be easy to drop a little weight in the training wheels, but that's not my goal. In fact I want to keep the bike heavy for training.

For racing I might be able to shed a few grams here and there. However, with my own body weight something like 9000 g / 20 pounds higher than in 2010, spending money to save 40 or 50 grams seems ludicrous. Therefore I'm not going to do anything to the bike.

Training - Clearing the Lungs Out

So for the past week and a half I've had a pretty bad cold. Junior had it too, before me, and I think the combination of staying up much of the night while holding him closely has made it only natural that I get the cold also.

I've been pretty fatigued as well, with four or five wake up calls sort of common. Usually I get a couple hours of straight sleep but often I've been up a number of times during the night.

To top it off my back has been pretty tweaked. I think it started when I sat through much of the night holding Junior in my arms. I did this before, when he was an infant, and my back really went out, to the point that the Missus shoveled the walk a number of times. Fatigue makes my back worse so all the interrupted nights haven't helped much.

At any rate I really haven't been able to do much of anything. With such a runny nose I did manage to go through a couple boxes of tissues and even a few rolls of TP (which is much less expensive than tissues). Sunday, when the temps were supposed to hit about 80, the Missus asked if I wanted to go ride. Initially I thought no, but later, as the sun really came out, I changed my mind.

This would be the first training ride outside in forever so I had to gather my "training kit". I decided to use the Jet 6/9 set of wheels simply because they have fresher tires on them. Just as a note I ran 100 psi front and rear, in 23c tires.

I also thought that I'd put a 60 mm valve tube and an 80 mm valve tube in my spare kit, from the rides down in Florida. When I finally found them (basically where I put them after returning from Florida) I took a picture for posterity sake. I also checked to make sure everything was still in there, since the bag has been in "Junior" territory for half a year (i.e. Junior can reach it, even if I think he hasn't).

What I carry, from the left, going clockwise.

Saddle bag

SRM computer

Planet Bike Super Flash (2)

Tube (80 mm valve)

Spare rear dropout (on top of tube)

Multi tool including 8mm Allen (for pedals)

Spoke wrench, black (for most higher end exposed spoke nipples)

Two tire levers

Tube (under the tire levers, 60mm valve)

Multi tool including chain tool

I realize now that the KMC Missing Link is, well, missing. That's the easiest way to connect a broken chain. You still need the chain tool, to remove any damaged links (like if you twisted your chain); the Missing Link then lets you connect the chain without having to carry an assortment of master pins.

All packed away, except the tail lights, SRM computer, and that tube box on the right.

I actually carried an extra tube, an extra metal-core tire lever, money, driver's license, some money, and cardboard (tube box, for booting a slashed tire). You can see it to the right in the picture above. I did this "just because".

I although brought some food, my phone (for Strava), and one bottle on the bike.

I carry all this not necessarily for me but because a lot of other riders don't carry stuff. I've used my own stuff, of course, but often I end up using my emergency supplies on other riders' bikes.

Jet 9 with 80mm valve tube.

Jet 6 with 60 mm valve tube.

Just as a note I prefer to have my valves extend just past the rim. This way I can close the valve nib but it doesn't stick out further than necessary. I use a valve extender (strapped to the frame) to pump up the tires and put it back on the frame when I'm done.

After gathering everything I finally got out the door. I decided to bring the mini Blackburn pump instead of the full size Park frame pump simply because I didn't want to spend any time looking for the straps to hold the pump on the frame.

The ride itself wasn't very notable. After the initial half mile descent I spent much of the first 45 minutes in the 44x23 or the 44x21.

I've been trying to see what sort of rpm I do when I'm just tooling around. In a headwind low effort spin state it seems that I'm in the 96-98 rpm range much of the time. In a tailwind low effort spin it's a bit higher, like 104-108 rpm. When I go "slow" after a mile or two of the faster rpm I'm at 90-100 rpm, so about 4-8 rpm lower than when I'm pedaling sort of fast.

At 115 rpm I felt like it was inefficiently fast.

I could barely breathe at first - it felt like I was trying to breathe while someone poured water over my head.

I spent a lot of time blowing stuff out of my nose.

I coughed a lot.

After about an hour I ran out of stuff in my nose and my lungs, and for the first time in eons I felt like I could breathe sort of normally. I could feel air stream into my nose.

This brought me to the end of a lap of my Quarry Road loop. I wanted to keep going so I decided to do a half loop extra.

My head started getting clogged again.

I ran into a local rider that I've run into a few times this year. My main memories of him are when he slaughtered me at Bethel one year, when he killed it at the Nutmeg State Games another year, and then when he crashed with me in the Big One. He and his son were sitting by the side of the MUP (Rails to Trails, or Multi Use Path, or MUP). I stopped, noticed the prevalence of poison ivy right there, pointed it out to them, and after a brief chat we went our separate ways.

Father and son rest stop.

The yellow spots are poison ivy that I highlighted.

Most of the shoulder, that I could see, was about as densely afflicted with the evil weed.

I put some test spots on the road, but there's no poison ivy there.

I headed back home, a pleasant easy ride done. I wasn't spinning quite as freely, now using the 44x19 or 17, but still, no real pressure on the pedals. Ultimately I'd average 143 watts (one moderate effort netted me a bit over 800 watts so it was pretty minor), 155 bpm (which is actually close to race pace for me - 160-165 bpm is about my limit - so I think my lungs were more clogged than I thought), and 83 rpm (indicating my pedaling really slowed down at the end).

Bike Friendly Community sign.

I didn't know it but after I got home my head and lungs would get congested again, my back would become almost useless (the Missus had to pick up Junior for much of the rest of the day).

I'll see how things go with my back and my breathing passages in the upcoming days. If I'm feeling slightly better I'll give the CCAP Tuesday Night Race a shot.

Training - A Warm November Day

Today I went out for a training ride, a rarity for me. The last time I trained outside was on the 17th of October, just about a month ago. I did the same loop, the one I call the Quarry Road loop.

I didn't try to ride that hard but I found myself complete out of breath by the time I got to the top of the hill leading out of the complex where I live. After that I tried to ride steady.

My two rides are as follows:
October 17th

Some major milestones of that ride - it took me 58:30 to do the ride. It took me about 3:03 to climb the "hill" to get home.

November 16th

Some major milestones of today's ride - it took me 1:01:08 to do that ride, so about 2:40 longer to do the exact same loop. I did a little jump in town but didn't do a proper jump at the last right turn. This led me to be much fresher for the hill to the house and I did it in 2:32, 30 seconds quicker than in October.

I made one major change on the bike for this ride - I switched wheels to the Jet 6/9 front/rear combo. I haven't ridden the Jet 6 front since I think 2010 and the Jet 9 since sometime last year. The heavy wheels really affected me, and whether the effect was actual or purely psychological the result told the story - I basically got shelled every time I rode with this setup on my bike.

I preferred the much lighter Bastognes, wheels that brought me a silver in the Nutmeg State Games, a win of sorts in a rain abbreviated TuesdayTheRent, and much less shelling overall.

However, with the off season being the off season I decided to give the wheels a shot. Plus they look cool.

Off season staring.

I have to admit that I still stare at racing ads and pictures. Not many of them - a very few of them. The one above is one of my favorite pictures. I love the big aero wheels, the compact bars, the casual fitness of the rider (he happens to be Viviani, a bonus since I didn't know who he was when I first saw the picture).

Except for the fact that he's a contender in field sprints in huge ProTour races he could be a very fit rider you see at the weekend crit or, more likely, at some big group ride.

Part of it is the "scene" - it's a group ride, literally, not a "beyond my abilities" field sprint or TT or climb. The group ride thing makes the rider more real.

So having been staring at that picture regularly for a month or so I decided that I'd put those heavy wheels on my bike.

Because they just scream the undefinable essence of bike racing life.

I put the Jets on the bike the day before to check them out. A short ride on the trainer, running through the gears, and the bike seemed okay. It shifted fine, as it should since the Jets and Bastognes share hub models, and I didn't experience any gear skips. I decided to give the bike a passing grade.

Bike as I rode it; the Jets have the same model tires as the Bastognes.

Not as sexy as the group ride picture.

I double checked the brakes (okay), tightened up the blinky tail light, and slipped in a 60mm valve tube and an 80mm valve tube. Also, although it's virtually impossible to see, there's a valve extender tucked in under that velcro strap wrapped around the down tube. The valves barely stick out of the rims, just enough to tighten them down, so I need the extender if I need to use the pump.

My now-standard frame pump mounting point.

Speaking of which I almost forgot my pump, literally walking back into the house to get it. I mount it to the left side of the bike, a good spot that has worked out well so far.

Big aero wheels look great when dreaming about bike racing but the reality is that they weigh more, especially my clincher variety. I mentally tortured myself before I even got going - wheeling the bike out of the office was hard work, the extra weight in the wheels noticeable when swinging the bike around.

My start wasn't too auspicious either - by the time I got to the top of the hill leading out of the complex I was so out of breath I actually put a foot down. I fiddled with the helmet cam but the reality was that I could have done it while rolling along slowly. I made the choice to stop because, frankly, I needed to stop.

I rolled along at a moderate pace. The big wheels rolled a bit more consistently, resisting changes in speed. That included accelerations but it also included the slight slowing when I did a more aggressive pedal stroke.

I found that if I didn't emphasize the downstroke as much that the bike seemed to roll better - this worked well on the slight upgrades or if I was just standing to power the pedals a bit.

I spent most of the ride in a praying mantis position, both hands holding the center of the bar, covering the stem and the SRM. On the hills I'd move to the hoods, and every now and then I'd go to the drops to remind myself they were still there.

As noted before I really don't like the shape of the drops on these bars. Since I expect to have a better drop position in a bit I decided not to torture myself and ride in the weird angle/shape drops more than I have to.

Plus, as I pointed out before, this is the off season.

I did one push about 3/4 of the way around the loop, nothing major if it was the summer, but today it really wrecked me. I had to ease and actually had to encourage myself to keep going just to finish one loop.

Five minutes later I still felt mentally defeated. With a schedule to hold I decided against pushing my luck and trying to do a second loop faster than the first. I headed home instead.

I practiced my "rolling stand thing" where I try and pedal a bit more evenly while standing, versus the stamping motion I tend to do. Since I hadn't gone very hard during the loop I could push on pretty well up the last hill on my ride.

Compared to my pretty fast ride last month I climbed the hill 30 seconds faster. Not bad for having much heavier wheels. I actually felt pleased that I did the hill a bit faster. The anti-Strava folks will shake their heads and wait for me to blow a red light or something but I find the Strava segments a nice way of checking my own status. I wouldn't even call it "progress", it's just a check to see where I sit within my realm of possibility.

Of course I think I was going much faster toward the end of 2010, when one day the Missus passed me going up the hill. I got home a minute or two after she did and she actually commented on my speed up the hill, her eyes wide with surprise.

"You were going really fast up that hill!"

Normally she doesn't say much about my riding when she sees me, other than saying stuff like, "I saw you on 10/202", so to have her comment on my speed on the hill, that meant something.

Unfortunately that hasn't happened since then.

My goal is to try and elicit that spontaneous response again.