Cycling myths or common-knowledge you'd like to see dispelled

TempleDancer

Active Member
I'm sure it's common of most sports, but cycling does seem to have it's fair share to utter tosh repeated ad-inifnitum and accepted as gospel because 'the man faster than me in the group ride said so'.

I'll go first with (the likely to be contentious) vertical compliance in frame design. I don't beleive it exists to any user appreciable way. Anything you are feeling is a function of tyres, seatpost and contact points on the bike. It doesn't matter if you are riding a 20 year old clunker made of gas-pipe or expensive carbon fresh out of the mould, the deflection in a rigid truss is barely worth measuring compared to that of the tyres it is rolling on and the saddle you are perched on.

But there is not a cycling-press review that doesn't have something to say about the relative compliance of one frame versus another. Unless they tested them on the same tyres, at the same pressure with the same saddles and seatpost then it's comparatively meaningless to me.
 
Last edited:

biggs682

Smile a mile bike provider
Location
Northamptonshire
The myth that you have to wear lycra to be a cyclist :laugh:
 
Location
London
The myth that you have to wear lycra to be a cyclist :laugh:
yes, though as you are an inveterate/respected fettler I would be interested in your views on the "feel", "compliance" or whatever sexual-congress suggestive term folk favour for various frame materials. As a non techie I tend to think there is something in it though way less than some folk would have us believe.
 
Last edited:
Location
London
Over the last 20 years, along with a pretty much accepted serious climate issue, nights have been getting darker darker very much darker so lights front and back have had to get brighter brighter brighter. And thankfully those nice manufacturers have responded to peddling humanity in its hours of need. By peddling stuff. And what's more, as is clear to all but the near blind, it's been getting darker during the day. By 2027 there will be no difference between day and night.
 

SpokeyDokey

64 and a little bit.
Moderator
Over the last 20 years, along with a pretty much accepted serious climate issue, nights have been getting darker darker very much darker so lights front and back have had to get brighter brighter brighter. And thankfully those nice manufacturers have responded to peddling humanity in its hours of need. By peddling stuff. And what's more, as is clear to all but the near blind, it's been getting darker during the day. By 2027 there will be no difference between day and night.
Phew! Thanks for that.

I've been worried I've had a degenerative rods and cones issue for the last couple of decades.

^_^
 
I'm sure it's common of most sports, but cycling does seem to have it's fair share to utter tosh repeated ad-inifnitum and accepted as gospel because 'the man faster than me in the group ride said so'.

I'll go first with (the likely to be contentious) vertical compliance in frame design. I don't beleive it exists to any user appreciable way. Anything you are feeling is a function of tyres, seatpost and contact points on the bike. It doesn't matter if you are riding a 20 year old clunker made of gas-pipe or expensive carbon fresh out of the mould, the deflection in a rigid truss is barely worth measuring compared to that of the tyres it is rolling on and the saddle you are perched on.

But there is not a cycling-press review that doesn't have something to say about the relative compliance of one frame versus another. Unless they tested them on the same tyres, at the same pressure with the same saddles and seatpost then it's comparatively meaningless to me.
Quite apart from the tyres, there's a lot of "vertical compliance" (whatever that means exactly) in the forks - you can see them flexing right enough. A mm or whatever in the frame proper is negligible in comparison.

I can believe that difference frame materials transmit vibration differently though, but that said, I've only owned steel framed bikes, but they certainly differed from each other in "feel". Uncannily the more expensive bikes did genuinely feel nicer - and I don't think it was just psychology, though it could have been fit as much as superior materials or construction
 

matticus

Über Member
Over the last 20 years, along with a pretty much accepted serious climate issue, nights have been getting darker darker very much darker so lights front and back have had to get brighter brighter brighter. And thankfully those nice manufacturers have responded to peddling humanity in its hours of need. By peddling stuff. And what's more, as is clear to all but the near blind, it's been getting darker during the day. By 2027 there will be no difference between day and night.
If you're saying that lots of bike lights are now often too bright (which is fair comment), I think I should also point out that

*car* lights have gotten a lot brighter too. Just to be balanced, like Auntie Beeb teaches us :P
 
Location
London
If you take the various bits off your superslim very expensive bike (lights, various gubbins you need to carry, tools, spare bits of clothing, snacks, power stuff etc etc) and put it in a dirty big sack on your back this weight disappears thanks to the pull of the planets so you can skip off your bike like a crippled hunchback with a shoot streak up its back and invite lesser cyclists to marvel at your featherlight bike.
 
Top Bottom