 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
A case of NSS.. but why not use identical hubs and spokes but just a laced up 26 and 29 wheel ?
Are you sure?
Really?
Are you really sure?
Hmmm, I suspect you are questioning yourself aren't you.
Was intended to illustrate their hubs - they use a big flange but shorter spokes.
They needed to build a machine to point out the bleeding obvious?
I hope this is just a gimmick and not how they approach designing their products...
But in the video both wheels experience the same rolling resistance.......
I'll get my coat
Did they really have to build a rig to demonstrate inertia and conservation of momentum?
They seem to be missing the fact that in the real world you also have to consider the weight of the bike and rider, the effective lever length (radius) of the wheel and the affect on approach angle over imperfect terrain.
I'm beginning to see why E13 products are so overpriced.
To be honest, As the OP I don't give a s*** and I'm more interested in the fish pun thread
There's a nicer one of those in the Glasgow Science Centre.
Hopefully they don't really think this is an amazing scientific discovery.
Pretty sure the point was to make cyclists speak about E-13 products on forums...
There's a nicer one of those in the Glasgow Science Centre.Hopefully they don't really think this is an amazing scientific discovery.
I always remember the spinning chair at Jodrell Bank to show conservation of momentum when you extend and retract your arms and legs.
andyl - Member
Did they really have to build a rig to demonstrate inertia and conservation of momentum?They seem to be missing the fact that in the real world you also have to consider the weight of the bike and rider, the effective lever length (radius) of the wheel and the affect on approach angle over imperfect terrain.
I'm beginning to see why E13 products are so overpriced.
They didn't build it to demonstrate differences in wheel sizes - it's only PinkBike that are putting that slant on it.
It's to demonstrate how their giant-flanged hubs move mass to the centre of the wheel rather than the outside - so for the same size wheel, they reckon their hub design allows it to accelerate faster. And the rig demonstrates that in a small space - demonstrating it with the actual wheels would need a much longer rig to show a meaningful difference, 'cos the difference would be tiny.
From the article:
The past two World Cup XC races were won on mid-sized wheels, which further undermines the once solidly held belief that big wheels are destined to rule that category.
Translation:
Nino Schurter won the past two World Cup XC races, as virtually the only participant in the Men's Elite field on mid-sized wheels, which further proves he's a very very fast rider
Not intested in the article's 29er debate again but the "where you put the weight" angle is kind of interesting....I can't see / am too lazy to look up the hub details but....
Weight shifting?:
32 x DT comp 294mm = 208g (typcial 29er length)
32 x DT comp 264mm = 191g (typcial 26er length)
Weight difference = 17g. That would need a pretty big hub flange to make up the length difference, I expect it would weigh more than 17g extra, so be a heavier wheel overall. Even if it was the same, you moved a TINY bit of the weight a BIT nearer to the axle. Irrelevant compared with variations in tyre weight or 5ml more stans in your tyre...
The only real benefit of an enlarged hub flange that I can see would be a stronger / stiffer wheel.
26 inch wheels accelerate faster than larger wheels
I think that there needs to be more tests on a conveyor belt.
people with bigger, stronger legs accelerate faster.
What that E13 video does show is the conservation of momentum - the smaller one stops spinning virtually instantly at the end, whilst the bigger one takes noticeably longer to slow.
Which one made the steel track come alive?
I'd say far from proving anything in the 26/27.5/29 inch "Debate" it simply demonstrates the benefits of lighter Rims and tyres (Vs weight saved at the hubs), having less mass at the outer circumference of the wheel is better, this is already largely understood and accepted by most people isn't it?
E13 are flogging Carbon rims too these days, but I'd say LB and ENVE would probably benefit slightly more from this little bit of pop science...
It is a PB article though, TBH I'd not expect the target audience to really understand... Just tell 'em it means 29ers accelerate slower and they'll be happy...
What that E13 video does show is the conservation of momentum - the smaller one stops spinning virtually instantly at the end, whilst the bigger one takes noticeably longer to slow.
Carries speed better Vs taking more energy to decelerate (Brake)?
IRL the application will dictate how this might be "Better" or "Worse" A track bike with heavy Rims will "hold speed" slightly better, a DH bike with heavy Rims/tyres will be harder to slow down for corners...
(Dandy)horses for courses innit...
[i]Weight shifting?:
32 x DT comp 294mm = 208g (typcial 29er length)
32 x DT comp 264mm = 191g (typcial 26er length)
Weight difference = 17g. That would need a pretty big hub flange to make up the length difference, I expect it would weigh more than 17g extra, so be a heavier wheel overall.
[/i]
But you haven't shifted any weight at all in your example, all you've done is exchanged 30mm of spoke for 30mm of flange (fnaar).