|not a spoiler. McEwen on a Ghisallo||legs|
Jul 11, 2002 7:23 AM
|McEwen rides a Ghisallo.. so he is winning sprints on a bike most deem to be too flexy and not liked by the squad..
I think it is possible that there is more to a bike than bottom bracket deflection and criticism based on maketing and what a friend of a friend says...
there is so much misinformation about bikes on this site and in the comments we make...
so often i read.. "well i have never actually ridden this frame but a friend of a friend says....."
can we take a week and only offer opinions that can be sited to a published piece of information or that are based on direct experience?
because it seems to me that anything other than that lacks crediblity... and is misleading...
|Yeah but the friend of the friend...||Wayne|
Jul 11, 2002 7:41 AM
|said McEwen liked his and he's a short fella so presumably he's on a small bike which would be less likely to be flexy.
If it really bothers you that SOME of the Lotto guys might not like their Litespeeds email me and I'll give you the guys name and maybe he can put you in touch with some of them and you can disavow them of their opinions (or maybe that will turn out not even to be their opinion which would be even better for you!)
Actually I don't know what people get all uptight about this for, is there really any $3000+ bike that isn't a good bike? Maybe there are certain features of the bike any given individual might not like, but objectively any top-end bike is going to be good ride relative to your el cheapo bike.
|Yeah but the friend of the friend...||legs|
Jul 11, 2002 8:10 AM
|personally i am not a lightspeed fan...
so no need to convince me...
it doesnt matter to me who likes what...
that is not the jist of what i am saying...
I am speaking to the tendency to offer opnions that are based beyound any reality of direct experience....
as in.. so and so rides a blank... and therefore blank is a great bike.. when in fact.. they arent even riding that partcular frame..
I guess i am talking about crediblity...
and the responsibility inherent to offering one's opinion...
opinions are powerful.. especially in print...
there a few posters here that are really good at that and a few that are really perpetuating nonesense...
I am just venting the nonesense...
my assumption is that different people on the same team like and dislike different things and that this is a commentary on both the quality of the object and their subjective desires that are relative only to personal preference... and not a representation of quality..
I dont want to disavow anyone of their opinion.. i just want people to take a second and offer a credible opinion...
because frankly.. it gives this forum more wieght and a better bang...
like you.. it hink sometimes people fixate on things that are farily unimportant when instead they should just clip in and turn the pedals.. they forget to ride.. um, which is what i need to do right now.. i have a quick 5 hours to burn.. wish me luck..
its about riding...
|probably a custom Ghisallo as well (nm)||ColnagoFE|
Jul 11, 2002 8:13 AM
|published piece of information???||biknben|
Jul 11, 2002 7:43 AM
|The problem is that there are no published facts. Where do you go for that kind of stuff? The manufacturers hype whatever they are selling. The mags can't be more vague. Are you going to hang out in the college labs to find scientific tests?
Don't take what you read here as fact. Very few people here can prove anything they write. Most are rediculously biased towards whatever works for them right now. Some have no idea what they are talking about. What you read here should be used for informational purposes only.
Everyone likes to think their opinion is fact. In reality, there are very few facts.
|published piece of information???||legs|
Jul 11, 2002 7:54 AM
|your are very correct.. and did i say site when i meant cite?
I suppose that i am making a point.. that too many opinions are being stated as fact.. and although even articles are not the mot substantial way to disseminate info.. at least it helps in terms of crediblity..
quality is subjective...
and yes.. this is a forum about subjective experience..
and that is valuable.. but there are too many comments that are littered with inventions and not experience...
this was inspired regarding lazywriter's exhaltation of (his) Vortex under McEwen.. and the numinous comments that followed...
god.. i can't spell today...
there are a few posters here that really are excellent with the ratio of opinion to reality to experience.. i like reading them.. and then there are these incredibly ungrounded sentiments... that just are kind of maddening...
because they become confused with fact once read...
ok i feel all better now (excuuuuse me)
|my feelings toward BB flex||Tig|
Jul 11, 2002 7:57 AM
|I think bottom bracket flex is more of an observed sensation than a performance problem. I love the instant reaction a stiff bike has when you apply power out of a corner, up a hill, or the first explosive blast of a sprint. It feels as if your energy is not wasted, but put directly into forward acceleration. A flexy feeling BB takes away some of that sensation from the rider.
Does this mean a flexy bottom bracket robs power or is inefficient? I don't think so. What flexes laterally will soon snap back, and usually during the opposite side's power stroke. This might help feed further flex on that opposite's power stroke though, but I don't think the transmitted power from your feet to the chain is actually decreased enough to be of concern for even the most elite rider. I think it just feels inefficient.
I could be wrong, but I'm just going by personal observation and limited understanding. A little flex is fine as long as it doesn't cause shifting problems or distracts from riding.
|everything could be true||ET|
Jul 11, 2002 8:28 AM
|He won, they don't like it, it does flex.
Concerning he won, let's remember, on the easier stages the pack stays together just about the whole way till the last several hundred yards, and then they go on an all out-sprint. So even for a flexy bike, given a great rider on any given Sunday...
I could believe the riders don't like it. I could believe it.
Concerning flex, the Ghisallo was tested in the Christmas '01 issue of Cycling Plus and it got poor reviews for handling: floating sensation and marked flex on the downhills, slightly unnerving especially to heavier riders, bike hyper-responsive to road surface undulations requiring early braking and hence lost time. It got better marks on the flats. Not hearsay, just the published results of a test ride. Overall, the bike got a lowly (for that price) 7 out of 10.
|everything could be true||legs|
Jul 11, 2002 8:38 AM
|very true indeed..
I was refferring to the post that exclaimed McEwen won on a Vortex as a statement affirming the quality of a vortex..
it bugged me because a) that he won says everything about him and nothing about the frame and 2) he wasnt even on a vortex...
I am not making a remark about LS as a frame..
frankly i ride a different maker (at a similar price point)
|You people are just plain||Lazywriter|
Jul 11, 2002 3:29 PM
|silly. My post that he won on a Litespeed was simply to display the fact that they are good enough to win on at the highest level. Contrary to the bashing that goes on here all the time, it is just proof of the fact that they are a world class bike.
The team USUALLY rides Vortexes, but they have pick of whatever frame they want to use for a particular stage. It was brought to my attention and confirmed be the videotape that McEwen was actually on a LS Ultimate when he won the other day. Carbon rear stays were evident and LS advertised that he won the stage on their website on the Ultimate.
The Vortex though is the usual weapon of choice. Regardless, they are all Litespeeds and they are awesome rides. Even when Lance had a choice, he rode a rebadged Litespeed Blade in the TT in 1999. Watch the Road to Paris video when he first tries out the bike Trek built him and he exclaims "this bike is really different". He did not look pleased at the time. LOL
|You people are just plain||legs|
Jul 11, 2002 7:45 PM
|i thought i posted this so if this comes out twice forgive me...
I think life is a lot easier if you dont need to validate the thngs you like. if you like litespeed .. i believe you.. i dont need to see anyone paid to ride it winning a race to affect my opinion or to justify yours.. if it is a great bike for you .. i believe you...
your opinion is enough proof for you...
Jul 11, 2002 5:38 PM
|By chance, I read that article. Looking at English cycling magazines in general, it seems to me, they haven't quite gotten over the loss of the colonies yet. Looks like every American bike gets a somewhat negative review. As a matter of fact, the only semi-positive test was in one of the latest issues of "procycling". And that was a caad 7 tested by Chris Boardman, who was surprised not to be riding on a complete p.o.s..
Also, our friends across the pond don't seem to be too smitten with titanium in the first place. No matter the bike, always too flexy for the palefaces from the island of major torque and wattage...
Jul 11, 2002 7:41 PM
|There's some truth to what you say. But Cycling Plus did give a great rating to the (American) Caad7, I believe calling it the best alu bike they had ever tested. Titanium? They seem to be in love with (don't laugh) Airborne. Maybe those full-page ads for Airborne on the back cover helped them fall in love with it. :-)|| |