[SUX VR40 Rider]

Going to try riding bag/rackless when commuting. Up until today I was riding with a rear rack and saddle bags when I commute home. I do not commute to work, my wife brings me and I ride home. Today and tomorrow I am going to try something new. Bringing enough bike cloths to change into for the ride home and leave my regular clothing in the bag at my desk, once a week or so I will take my soiled laundry home to wash. The only thing I will have to carry home every day is my belt and shoes which will fit in my recumbent seat bag.

I am doing this for a few reasons. First is to streamline my preperation at getting ready to leave work. With the saddel bags it takes me about 20 to 25 min to fully prep to leave work. This will also streamline how long it takes me to get everything ready to come to work when I have to load my Jeep with the bags and bike. It is also to reduce the weight I carry on the bike which will hopefully make my commute time home faster. Right now I am at about an hour and 5 min. I'd like my 14.15 mile commute to be faster, with less weight that should happen.

 

[Industry_Hack]

Some days I have my wife bring my beanie helmet to work. I give her my 3/4 and my jacket to take home, and take a nice slow ride around the lake. Of course, that's not on a bicycle...

 

[SUX VR40 Rider]

Day one of going bag/rackless is in the books. I shaved about 5 minutes off of my prep time after work and 5 minutes off of the actual ride time. Today is day 2 of this, we'll see how it goes.

 

[TxCyclist]

Do you not carry a laptop with you?

I have to carry a laptop to work so I have to have a bag. I just use a messenger bag right now.

 

[SUX VR40 Rider]

Do you not carry a laptop with you?

I have to carry a laptop to work so I have to have a bag. I just use a messenger bag right now.

No. don't have to carry a laptop.

 

[Green]

It is also to reduce the weight I carry on the bike which will hopefully make my commute time home faster. Right now I am at about an hour and 5 min. I'd like my 14.15 mile commute to be faster, with less weight that should happen.

Not gonna happen!
So you are traveling around 12 to 13 miles an hour. Keeping that pace for 15 miles is an awesome workout and a great commute speed, what more could you want? Did you think that a 10 pound drop would equate proportionally to speed? I would wager you could drop 20 pounds from your riding gear and still not make a dent in your times worth being concerned about, I know because I have tried it!
I do not worry about weight anymore, at all, I can out-ride and think 90% of the paceline freaks I run into on the road and I do so daily.
Here is the ironic part, if you really want to get stronger and faster, INCREASE the weight! Given a fixed distance, fixed gear range, rolling resistance, air resistance and weight it does not matter what gear you are in, you will not burn any more calories traveling that distance, you can only change the time in which you travel it.
So if you want to get fast you must get stronger and push a bigger gear, the only way to get stronger is to increase the load on your muscles, i.e. more weight!
Arnold Schwartzenegger never once reduced the weight he was lifting to get stronger or to add mass, he only did it for warm ups and when he was tired!

 

[photosbymark]

Not if you are riding a recumbent. That bigger gear adds stress on that long chain and more wear and tear that can get expensive. IF you are bent, you need to turn rpm to avoid that. Even with a big gear, you need to spin or pay the mechanic.

 

[Green]

So you are claiming that recumbents are some sort of special case?
So the wear and tear on a recumbent chain is somehow exaggerated? exactly how? Turn rpm to avoid what exactly? You should be replacing that chain every couple of years anyway and cleaning and lubricating it at least once a month, at least...
I rode a Rans V-Rex for six years. Before that I rode a friends E-Bike for a summer. That V-Rex was the fastest bike I ever owned. I rode it nearly as loaded as I do my upwrong.. Recently I had the opportunity to ride a Trek Recumbent (didn't like it much).
Nope, sorry, you can think that recumbents are a special case but the fact is they are not, they are simply bicycles. You can also ignore the fact that in order to get faster on a light bike you have to train with a heavy bike, but that would just be living in a dream world.
Good luck with you quest.

 

[photosbymark]

Yes they are a bicycle. The longer chain though does change the stresses at which the components must endure, and this comes from a bike mechanic that has more time on a recumbent than most ever will. As a matter of fact he sold Rans. You do need to spin a recumbent more, and most rookies (myself included on the Bent side) don't turn enough rpm. Yes a recumbent can be fast, or not so much just depending on the bike. If fact bikes are a lot like cars. Each have things they can do better than others. I can do thing in my suv I could never do in my sports car. They are both cars, but they need to be operated very differently. With bikes the differences are not usually that great, but their are differences.

 

[Green]

Yes they are a bicycle. The longer chain though does change the stresses at which the components must endure,

Why? How? and most importantly, how much?

and this comes from a bike mechanic that has more time on a recumbent than most ever will. As a matter of fact he sold Rans.

This, is what is called an appeal to authority and a red herring rolled into one.

You do need to spin a recumbent more, and most rookies (myself included on the Bent side) don't turn enough rpm.
Yes a recumbent can be fast, or not so much just depending on the bike. If fact bikes are a lot like cars. Each have things they can do better than others. I can do thing in my suv I could never do in my sports car. They are both cars, but they need to be operated very differently. With bikes the differences are not usually that great, but their are differences.

What is your point exactly? Specifically?

 

[photosbymark]

The stress with a lever changes the longer the lever is and the longer the chain the greater the arm and the more stress you are putting on a drive train for the same effort. It's your crank, rear end and bottom bracket that will wear prematurely if you ride at too low of an rpm. It's your bike though and your repair bill and you are free to ride it as you see fit. The mechanic I mention has changed enough and been paid enough, but is also a reputable dealer trying to help customers avoid problems rather than to get paid to fix them. He won't mind taking your money, but if he knows a way to avoid it he has been very willing to share his knowledge.

Not only does he ride a recumbent daily and has for many years and more miles than most, his shop and his dealership catered to recumbents. You don't just get a Rans dealership without some knowledge, and Rans wasn't his only recumbent line. You can choose to believe or not. That's up to you. You may or may not want to post in the bent group about needing to spin faster on a bent than a diamond frame and see if they think wear can result from spinning a bent too slowly.

No two bikes ride the same. Riders have to adapt. How many times have you seen someone stand up in a recumbent climbing a hill or been behind the saddle on a road bike the way you would on a mountain bike at times. Some bikes may be smoking fast, but totally worthless on a tour. IF you choose not to adapt, you are either making it harder on yourself than necessary, not getting the most out of the bike, putting yourself at risk for various types of injury at times, and maybe risking damage to the bike.

I have said my piece and will make no further comments on the matter.

 

[Green]

The stress with a lever changes the longer the lever is and the longer the chain the greater the arm and the more stress you are putting on a drive train for the same effort. It's your crank, rear end and bottom bracket that will wear prematurely if you ride at too low of an rpm.

This is COMPLETE hogwash. I mean an absolutely perfect example of pseudo-scientific nonsense. I you actually had a working knowledge of Stress (forces working over a moment) or strain (the amount of deflection or deformation over the moment) you would understand component life curve and you would understand why what you just wrote is wrong, and wrong on the face of it!

It's your bike though and your repair bill and you are free to ride it as you see fit.

A non-sequitur and a red herring. None of these statements have a single thing to do with the discussion at hand, absolutely nothing.

The mechanic I mention has changed enough and been paid enough, but is also a reputable dealer trying to help customers avoid problems rather than to get paid to fix them. He won't mind taking your money, but if he knows a way to avoid it he has been very willing to share his knowledge. Not only does he ride a recumbent daily and has for many years and more miles than most, his shop and his dealership catered to recumbents.

Again an appeal to authority, non-sequiturs and red herrings.

You don't just get a Rans dealership without some knowledge, and Rans wasn't his only recumbent line.

ABSURD in the extreme. The only way you get a Rans dealership is to have the MONEY. Rans does not pay for any one person’s prestige, including your superman.

You can choose to believe or not. That's up to you. You may or may not want to post in the bent group about needing to spin faster on a bent than a diamond frame and see if they think wear can result from spinning a bent too slowly. No two bikes ride the same. Riders have to adapt. How many times have you seen someone stand up in a recumbent climbing a hill or been behind the saddle on a road bike the way you would on a mountain bike at times. Some bikes may be smoking fast, but totally worthless on a tour. IF you choose not to adapt, you are either making it harder on yourself than necessary, not getting the most out of the bike, putting yourself at risk for various types of injury at times, and maybe risking damage to the bike.

Again, all of this has absolutely nothing to do with what we were discussing, and what is more, does not bolster anything you claim. In fact, all of what you have written has been a textbook example of off topic logical fallacies and pseudoscientific crap.

I have said my piece and will make no further comments on the matter.

And yet you have changed absolutely nothing.

 

[Green]

Reposting to be absolutely clear....

So you are traveling around 12 to 13 miles an hour. Keeping that pace for 15 miles is an awesome workout and a great commute speed, what more could you want? Did you think that a 10 pound drop would equate proportionally to speed? I would wager you could drop 20 pounds from your riding gear and still not make a dent in your times worth being concerned about, I know because I have tried it!
I do not worry about weight anymore, at all, I can out-ride and think 90% of the paceline freaks I run into on the road and I do so daily.
Here is the ironic part, if you really want to get stronger and faster, INCREASE the weight! Given a fixed distance, fixed gear range, rolling resistance, air resistance and weight it does not matter what gear you are in, you will not burn any more calories traveling that distance, you can only change the time in which you travel it.
So if you want to get fast you must get stronger and push a bigger gear, the only way to get stronger is to increase the load on your muscles, i.e. more weight!
Arnold Schwartzenegger never once reduced the weight he was lifting to get stronger or to add mass, he only did it for warm ups and when he was tired!

So to sum up.....

1 - I do not think that dropping 20 pound of weight will have a significant effect on transit times given the same amount of effort. (My personal opinion based on years of observation, trail and error and education)
2 - Athletes know that resistance/weight training builds the muscles necessary to improve performance, without increased resistance/weight a body cannot develop the muscles needed to do the job, much less improve performance. (a commonly understood and accepted set of facts)

I will not run away from my comments and I am willing to stand by my comments and claims and I am willing to discuss them further at any time... AND most importantly, I am willing to change my mind and position, and correct the errors in my statements when shown the error in my logic...

 

[Green]

Torque from a rider applying pressure to the pedals to rotate the crank set and transfer energy through the chain ring into the chain, which transfers that energy to the drive sprockets and to the back wheel, which accelerates the bike. This is the process that propels us down the road blissfully riding our favorite bicycle, regardless of frame style.
If we establish all things being equal between frame styles i.e., frame weight, gearing, crank length, rider weight and conditioning, there are only a few things that can significantly change the strain on the driveline of the bicycle in such a system. One is obviously weight of the unit because we know that, F=ma (Force=mass*acceleration), so it follows that if we increase the mass of a bike, or increase acceleration of a bike, we necessarily increase wear on a drive train via increased forces experienced in the rotating components.
We can also multiply force and reduce force by gearing. This is achieved by obtaining a mechanical advantage from one rotating component to the other through the chain ring and the rear sprocket cassette, wheel size, and crank length.
Unfortunately these are the only items that significantly alter the amount of energy in the system at any one time, what is more, the amount of force introduced into the system is dependent on crank length and muscle mass (recumbent) or weight and muscle mass (all up right frames). So if we know the input energy is the same, gearing is the same and rider and gear weight are all the same from testing frame style to frame style the fact that a V-Rex has twice the chain length as a Silkroad means nothing as far as driveline wear is concerned, except of course for the added intrinsic wear of additional chain but even this would be attenuated by fewer bending cycle per link per revolution.
Bottom line an increase in length of a chain on a bicycle does not in any way translate to increased forces on a driveline in any significant amount.

To prove it to your self, simply do a quick thought experiment. A chain drive on a bicycle is similar to lifting a load with a pulley and rope, something like this drawing here.

If chain length significantly increased forces experienced in the driveline then rope length in this experiment would change the forces experienced while lifting the box as the rope shortens during the pull. If this were true, the weight of the box would be less at the bottom of the pull than at the top because the rope gets shorter as the load is lifted… Have you ever known this to be the case?


The effects of chain length in determining torque applied to the system is miniscule to the point of being irrelevant. Strain on the “crank, rear end and bottom bracket” must be orders of magnitude less. This would be the case for ANY bicycle.