Ask Josh Anything #009

You have said several times including this episode that because the UCI weight limits exist and because technology has advanced to the point where aero bikes and climbing bikes essentially weigh the same in competition, that you should almost always choose aero. However, when out of competition, a regular cyclist at home does have a choice between a lighter bike and a more aero bike. outside of someone that can afford their dream bike, us regular folk will always be choosing between different options: e.g., more for aero frame design but frame materials that are heavier or eg aero frame design but heavier nonaero wheels, etc. so, how do we think about the decision thresholds where weight would trump aero? e.g., is it at 1 lb heavier or 3 lb heavier that you cross over to one is a net penalty? In other words, what should tbe priority list then be in making these determinations assuming you can’t get everything the way pros can?

A question for Josh:

Thank you for one the most interesting and entertaining podcasts (not only about cycling)!

It seems to be common understanding that riding out of the saddle – uphill or in a sprint – should involve rocking the bike from side to side. From a mechanical point of view, this sounds rather pointless, unless the rocking motion primarily adjusts the direction of the crank motion according to frame flex (otherwise it would probably just bend the crank a bit more?) – and a study also suggests otherwise (see https://cyclingtips.com/2018/06/what-you-should-know-about-riding-out-of-the-saddle/ for a reference)

Is this just another traditionalist myth? And if so – what about Contador?

Greetings from Germany,

Ulrich

Hello, I’m struggling with this bicycle related questionn.

I’m a 22 years old cyclist from Belgium. I race on amateur level, I don’t have the results and the ambition to go pro, cycling is just a hobby for me.

I’m looking if I should upgrade to a new bike. Now I’m racing on a Ridley noah RS from 2013. The bike has af few scratches here and there, because I hit the ground a few times with it. But after all, I still like the bike and it gives me a good feeling to ride on it. Last summer I upgrade from the original Ultegra 6600 (10s) to the new Ultegra R8000, because I thought the shifting of the bike has became worn. It has improved the bike a lot.

So I have some questions about a new bike.

- Will a newer bike be (marginally) better, faster … ?

- Can a bike frame wear out? (I have a friend who is saying that the frame is becoming less stiff, is that true?)

- I would like to buy the Canyon aeroad, but it’s frame design hasn’t changed sinds 2014, would it be better to wait for a new generation of the Aeroad? Or wouldn’t there be a significant difference between the older and the newer model?

Thanks a lot!

I really love the show

Lars Van Coppenolle

(If some aspects of my questions aren’t clear, I would be happy to explain them furtermore!)

Hi Josh,

Loving the podcast – it really combines my passion for cycling with my education as an engineer.

In the quest for higher volume tires, where does rim geometry come into play? There has been a clear trend for the width of rims to steadily increase over the years which increases the total air volume, and this has got me thinking about the internal rim depth (the center channel the runs along the circumference of the rim). Is there a limit to how deep that center channel can be? Im sure at a certain point it will have an effect on mounting and removing tires, but could this be an unexplored avenue to effectively increase the volume of the tire without necessarily playing with width? In the world of cyclocross where there is a hard <=33 mm tire width rule, a tubeless rim option with deep internal center channel seems like a viable option to run lower pressures. What am I missing here?

Thanks a lot!

Mike

Loving the podcast – it really combines my passion for cycling with my education as an engineer.

In the quest for higher volume tires, where does rim geometry come into play? There has been a clear trend for the width of rims to steadily increase over the years which increases the total air volume, and this has got me thinking about the internal rim depth (the center channel that runs along the circumference of the rim). Is there a limit to how deep that center channel can be? Im sure at a certain point it will have an effect on mounting and removing tires, but could this be an unexplored avenue to effectively increase the volume of the tire without necessarily playing with width? In the world of cyclocross where there is a hard <=33 mm tire width rule, a tubeless rim option with deep internal center channel seems like a viable option to run lower pressures. What am I missing here?

Thanks a lot!