Any question answered...

I ignore all bad news answers.

Oh well.

Thanks.

Not really.

Everything is going to be alright.

Is it worth getting Armadillos? Im about to buy an Allez to use for commute to work (120ish miles a week). Ive heard good stuff about reducing punctures but then some negatives about weight and handling in the wet.

There are many alternatives if you cast your net wider than the Specialized catalogue, have a look at Schwalbe, Continental and Bontrager.

The tyres that my Allez came with were absolute p_nctr magnets- crap, basically.

I'd ask the shop to change them to something decent before you pick it up.

There are many alternatives if you cast your net wider than the Specialized catalogue, have a look at Schwalbe, Continental and Bontrager.

I got the Armadillo suggestions as im buying the bike from a Specialized store, are the others better? How expensive are they? The guy in the store said hed fit Armadillos for an extra £10 which seems alright.

OK, get the Armadillos, worst case you've wasted a tenner if you don't like them, chances are you won't even notice them anyway.

Ok cheers.

One other question, ive just noticed the 2011 Allez comes with Shimano 2300 which have the thumb downshift? Ive heard terrible things about it, would it be difficult to replace for a normal style shifter?

I'm not familiar with 2300, but my Allez had Tiagra (it was the entry level model) which had the same shift layout- i.e. a Campag style thumb control for shifting into a higher gear.

In terms of reliability it was 100%, in terms of ergonomics I did not get on with it.

That aside I'd really advise trying to get 105 as a minimum as it's a ten speed group, and you can then interchange 10 speed parts.

I looked at upgrading my Allez, but as it was 9 speed it would have meant upgrading too many different bits to make it economically viable, so I flogged it and bought a bike with Ultegra

To what extent does weight of a rider and bike affect the speed of a descending rider?
(If at all, thinking of Galileo's balls experiment)

Terminal speed would be dependent on aerodynamic drag, and friction.

I reckon that weight would effect acceleration though, the heavier bike and rider would accelerate faster (this may be hopelessly wrong)

On a road a lot depends on the rider, not his build but how he rides the road. If a rider is nice and relaxed and soaks up all the bumps then he's going to be faster. Tyre choice and pressure would also effect it.

Anyone know if Tesco's stocks Bostick all purpose glue?

I thought you'd go faster (like egbnog downhilling on the dunwich dynamo on a boris bike was super fast) and a mate reminded me that galileo proved that 2 balls of different weight reached the ground at the same time when dropped.
try the experiment
I suppose if the rider is fat there'll be more air resistance

What is it with everyone's obsession with economic inflation?

I reckon that weight would effect acceleration though, the heavier bike and rider would accelerate faster (this may be hopelessly wrong)

You're right, it is hopelessly wrong. From a standing start, with no resistance (all resistance to bicycle motion is zero at zero velocity), initial acceleration is the same for any mass of rider/bike.

If the hill goes on forever, you eventually reach the equilibrium velocity where the power input, which is the g times total mass times the rate of vertical descent equals the power output, which is the sum of aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance, of which the former is dominant at speeds over about 5m/s. Equilibrium velocity increases with mass but decreases with CdA. Since people all have roughly the same Cd, if they adopt the same position, and A rises as the square of height but mass rises as the cube, big blokes tend to get to higher speeds on long descents.

Thought I'd be wrong.

Why does a heavy car roll faster than a light one on the same slope, at a speed too low for aero to play a part though?

I had assumed that it was mass overwhelming the friction of the tyres/hubs etc.

EDIT that's probably in your answer, but may as well be encrypted to a thicko like me

It's all about magnets then.

What is it with everyone's obsession with economic inflation?

As long as we use Fiat Money, it's the best measure of what a bunch of cunts we have in power. By that measure, Robert Mugabe is about the biggest cunt in the world, a finding which agrees well with other ways of measuring.

Having a billion pound note would be pretty funny. But only if it bought me more than a loaf of bread

I've been there. Used to make 200.000 a month as a TV news journalist in 1993.

It was roughly an equivalent of £450 back then.

Ok cheers.

One other question, ive just noticed the 2011 Allez comes with Shimano 2300 which have the thumb downshift? Ive heard terrible things about it, would it be difficult to replace for a normal style shifter?

I've got Sora shifters on one of my bikes which are essentially the same - It's fine if you spend most of your time on the hoods, as it's not really possible to drop down gears whilst in the drops.

I'd avoid 2300 like the plague tbh, it's cheap and nasty, still has square taper cranks instead of the hollowtech like the sora. I'm with dammit on the 105 suggestion, if theres any possibility of stretching to that (there will be some good deals over the next few months as the 2012 models start appearing) The quality is much better, and your more future proofed.

The 2012 Tiagra will be 10 speeds and apparenty have matching hood shifter to 105 and up.

The 2011 Allez with 2300 is about £500, to get a 2011 Allez Comp 105 will be at least twice as much. That's a pretty big budget stretch. Of course, most of us wouldn't be looking at any kind of Allez for commuting, but that's a separate discussion.

You're right, it is hopelessly wrong. From a standing start, with no resistance (all resistance to bicycle motion is zero at zero velocity), initial acceleration is the same for any mass of rider/bike.

If the hill goes on forever, you eventually reach the equilibrium velocity where the power input, which is the g times total mass times the rate of vertical descent equals the power output, which is the sum of aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance, of which the former is dominant at speeds over about 5m/s. Equilibrium velocity increases with mass but decreases with CdA. Since people all have roughly the same Cd, if they adopt the same position, and A rises as the square of height but mass rises as the cube, big blokes tend to get to higher speeds on long descents.

had a horrible school flashback reading that shudders

in terms of speed/velocity/acceleration argument... I'm a heavy lad right, and when snowboarding I absolutely shit on everyone in terms of topspeed, as in people just can't keep up, even in a straight line.

please, show me the science.

(this is also accross a selection of boards)