Bike porn

any benefit in s-shaped tt?

None for the user, for the framebuilder it means he can use conventional lugs.

aha! good point :P

any benefit in s-shaped tt?

Besides looking badman?

None for the user, for the framebuilder it means he can use conventional lugs.

Wow, yeah, wouldn't have thought of that, very interesting. You truly are a gushing fountain of wisdom.

Absolutely lovely! and a nice picture too

from Currents...

..far from porn though!

I don't know...I've started fantasising about putting some money away regularly so that when I hit 40 I'll have a fund to use to go and buy a dream custom steel framed bike to see out my days. Consequently this sort of this is really yanking my crank at the minute.

1990 Match Sprint World Championships

Of course, the whole thing is based on the fiction that crank length matters...

edit, nvm found one

^^why I want hubners frame, awesome guy

please elaborate

For a range of crank lengths far wider than the narrow 165-180 range usually offered/used, there is no significant difference in biomechanical efficiency if gain ratio is held constant. See here for the most recent mainstream discussion of the matter.

^^Just coming to post that from CP - As an aside, it's only Athila's 4th post since joining in '09.

One of the best looking modern bikes I've ever seen, so much better than I expected from his preview shots the other day....

^^Just coming to post that from CP - As an aside, it's only Athila's 4th post since joining in '09.

I'm a bit shy.

One of the best looking modern bikes I've ever seen, so much better than I expected from his preview shots the other day....

Thanks man, makes me feel proud. I have really enjoyed thinking about the details on it.

I have really enjoyed thinking about the decals on it.

ftfy

but no mention of the tyre logo/vale misalignment faux pas! getting slack, guys.
(looks good, what are the wheels? sram s60s? needs white hoods imo)

but no mention of the tyre logo/vale misalignment faux pas! getting slack, guys.
(looks good, what are the wheels? sram s60s? needs white hoods imo)

Yep. I took the pictures during lunch time and I was disrupting the office too much. So I didn't pay attention to a lot fo things. :-(

Wheels are SRAM S60 indeed. I should had taken photos form the other side also, it is slightly different, the fork drop is black on the opposite side and the position of dots, triangles ad crosses are different also.

Possibly a repost but i believe leggings are still considered en vogue.

Possibly a repost

Possibly? It's been here more often than that *gorgeous baby blue*™ Тахион

-1 for repost, tagged photo and lack of LaserTits™

A thousands pardons...i was hopeful it would spark interest in those sunglasses - i've got a box full.

dibs

For a range of crank lengths far wider than the narrow 165-180 range usually offered/used, there is no significant difference in biomechanical efficiency if gain ratio is held constant. See here for the most recent mainstream discussion of the matter.

While I agree with your statement that the rider will get used to whatever crank length they have and there is no mechanical efficiency as long as gain ratio is constant I still believe there would be an optimum length for the rider based on how their body has been formed (muscles, height, leg length etc,.) and the different RPMs involved. Even if that optimum is just for comfort.

Again, probably so little difference that it is not an optimum worth trying to achieve with so many others factors to worry about.

I still believe there would be an optimum length for the rider based on how their body has been formed (muscles, height, leg length etc,.)

I reckon the major impact is simply going too long a crank that the upstroke is way too high when pedalling.

But that's it.