(the steel bike still had modern componentry in it, the cranks, yet still it was slower. Probably would have been slower with time correct straps and clips and shoes.)
Are they trying to say something like "but, if the steel bike was lighter then it would be faster"?
But yeah the fit issue seems genuine but hard to quantify the effect on speeds & power.
The funny thing is all those steel is real ads after the article :), the magazine (checked their website) doesn't seem any less biased than some magazine hyping new carbon fibre bikes.
on overall the whole article the article seems a little sad. I don't really think they genuinely belive right sized pinarello would have done any better. Every pro tour rider is choosing new carbon because they are little twats advertising new carbon fibre bikes because companies wanna sell more bikes?
(the steel bike still had modern componentry in it, the cranks, yet still it was slower. Probably would have been slower with time correct straps and clips and shoes.)
Are they trying to say something like "but, if the steel bike was lighter then it would be faster"?
But yeah the fit issue seems genuine but hard to quantify the effect on speeds & power.
The funny thing is all those steel is real ads after the article :), the magazine (checked their website) doesn't seem any less biased than some magazine hyping new carbon fibre bikes.
on overall the whole article the article seems a little sad. I don't really think they genuinely belive right sized pinarello would have done any better. Every pro tour rider is choosing new carbon because they are little twats advertising new carbon fibre bikes because companies wanna sell more bikes?