|
5/25 |
2007/5/14-16 [Transportation/Bicycle] UID:46629 Activity:nil |
5/14 I've started getting into biking recently and started looking around at the types of bikes out their in the market. One thing I've noticed was that there were these super-expensive high-end bikes like Look and Cervelo that looked pretty advanced and would empty out your wallet in no time. Many of them had the triathlon geometry. Why is it that people like Lance Armstrong opt for more conventional bikes like Trek road bikes. It seems like someone with so much riding on the line would go for something ridiculously expensive but his bike isn't even a time-trial bike. \_ 1) doesn't Lance have different bikes for different stages? 2) Lance opts for Trek because Trek pays Lance and makes whatever he tells them to make (at least for geometry etc) \_ Tri bikes are set up to be aerodynamic and use different muscle groups. They aren't the best for hills or manueverability. Same goes for trial bikes. -scottyg | \_ Professional cyclists at that level are constrained in their choice of equipment by their governing body, Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI). They're allowed to use more aerodynamic bikes in time trials than they are in massed start road races. The bikes used in time trials use similar setups to those used by triathletes, while those used in massed start road races are what you're probably thinking of. UCI has a long history of changing the rules about what's legal (or not) to suit the desires of its sponsors (the big companies in the bike industry). Bikes used in triathlons are governed by ITU rules, which aren't as backward, but maintain a similarly narrow definition of what constitutes a bicycle. If you're not planning on racing, then get whatever you enjoy riding (for me, that's a recumbent -- banned by UCI since 1934). --alawrenc |
5/25 |
|