|Rotatioin weight (shoes/wheels)||Canidraftyou|
Jul 14, 2001 10:36 PM
|This is my first season to be involved with road Racing and Crits. One of the things I have heard from time to time, is about ratation weight, pertaining to the weight of the wheels and tires. If the ratation weight is that big of a factor, then the weight of the shoes should come into the equation also, RIGHT! What would be your favorite cycling shoes pertaining to weight? Ok, you can only make a pair of shoes so lite before the durability becomes a factor. Am I doing too much thinking on the matter? Any thoughts on this is welcomed.
|re: Rotatioin weight (shoes/wheels)||Bruno S|
Jul 15, 2001 1:49 PM
|When I went from my mtb shoes to my Diadoras Cosmos ($100) I really felt a difference. I've seen Nike and Shimano shoes with carbon fiber soles but they are pobably very expensive. Try the Diadoras, they are very stiff, compatible with all pedals and have three velcro bands. I do not know their weight but a road specific shoe is always lighter that a mtb shoe.|
|Physics 101||Kerry Irons|
Jul 15, 2001 4:00 PM
|Rotating weight is much more meaningful in wheels than for cranks or pedals/shoes, and even then it is only meaningful when you are constantly changing speed AND using the brakes (throwing away the energy you used to spin things up to speed). The kinetic energy of motion is 1/2*m*v^2 (one half of the mass times the square of the velocity). For a rotating body, it is just m*v^2, or 2X compared to non-rotating stuff. Shoes/pedals/cranks are rotating MUCH slower than wheels (1/5 the speed), and so have much lower KE (1/25 as much per gram as a wheel). The only time rotating mass means anything is when you accelerate - once you are up to speed, the weight of bike parts is pretty insignificant compared to your body weight. So look at pedal/shoe weight in the context of total system weight, not because of reducing rotating weight.|
Jul 15, 2001 10:15 PM
|I got the last line, thanks...LOL.