Cycling shoe setup
jstc
instructions for mounting the hardware on them and the hardware that
came with the bike
( new bike , Trek 7500 ) has no instructions. I have tried several
search variations and have not found a web page on the subject. I have
tried the Trek, Wellgo & Specialized pages and I cant find a bit of
information.
TIA
Per Elmsäter
The instructions often come with the pedals. Because they decide what kind
of cleats? ( I can't remember what it's called in English ) are supposed to
be mounted on the shoes. These cleats? usually come with the pedals. What
you need to know is if your shoes are compatible with certain kind of
pedals. This should be clearly specified with the shoe ;)
--
Perre
I gave up on SPAM and redirected it to hotmail instead.
Mike Jacoubowsky
The shop that sold you the shoes & pedals would normally set them up for you
and help you learn how to use them. I would explore that option first, since
they'll have expertise with the particular shoe you purchased (and sometimes
there can be little things about the shoe setup, like perhaps the need to
remove a small amount of material from the sole so that it
engages/disengages more readily, that you only learn from experience).
But, in general, you'll find the shoe has two sets of mounting holes (fore &
aft), and on the shoes we sell (Shimano, Nike & Sidi), it usually works best
to use the aft (rear) set of holes, with the cleat slid as far forward as it
can go. This typically puts the ball of the foot over the pedal spindle. For
the angle, assuming the shoe was built correctly, set the cleat so it's
perpendicular to the slots.
On the pedals, make sure the tension screw is set low for learning process,
but don't back the screw out too far or it may come out and you won't be
able to reassemble it.
Oh, almost forgot. Make sure you grease the threads of the cleat screws, as
well as the underside of the screw's head (where it contacts the cleat) so
that it turns easily. This will make sure the cleats are actually tight, not
just jammed up.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
"jstc" <js...@cox.net> wrote in message news:42559DF4...@cox.net...
Fred Barney
Pedals come with cleats. The cleats bolt to the shoes. Not all
pedal/shoe/cleat combinations are compatible. But do yourself a favor
and take the shoes back while you still can and just use platforms. The
7500 is a hybrid, right? You need clipless pedals like you need a stone
around your neck.
Lou Holtman
"Fred Barney" <loco-m...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cbfdd24f...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
Nonsense. You can enjoy de benefits of clipless pedals on any kind of bike.
The only thing is that you need cycling shoes and sometimes that is to much
of a hassle and you HAVE to use platforms.
Lou
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Lou,
What are the benefits of clipless pedals?
Carl Fogel
Lou Holtman
<carl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:mkcc51lgrj4acsatd...@4ax.com...
Carl,
IMO secure attachement of your foot to the pedal which enables you to pull
and push in the most efficient way. Hey, there are few things you NEED in
life and clipless pedals are not one of them, I agree, but for me it makes
cycling a lot more fun. If I could I would use them even on my city bike.
Shoe swapping is holding me back...till now.
Lou
Peter Cole
I'm assuming you have SPD-style pedals (not straps). If so, there are
some "cleats" that come with the pedals that attach to the shoe
bottoms. You should see some threaded holes through some slots in the
soles. If you don't see them there may be a covering that needs to be
cut away. The covering usually has an oval shape.
The cleats mount with 2 bolts, the side of the cleat that goes against
the sole has "teeth" on it. There is a thin oval piece that goes under
the bolt heads and fits into a recess on the cleat. Grease the bolts
before assembling. Usually there are 3 rows of (2) holes. Try the
middle first, center the cleat, pointy end towards toe of shoe. Tighten
very snugly, bring an allen wrench on your first ride & check cleats
for loosening.
There are some allen heads on the outside of the pedal body. These are
for setting the release tension. There is usually some indicator for
tension level. For Wellgo pedals, it is usually where the cleat engages
the pedal. It is usually a good idea to set the tension low initially
and to rub some grease on the cleat to help release/engage until the
pedal wears in a bit.
After riding a bit, you may want to tweak the pedal setup. A common
thing to do is to move the cleats forward or back (usually forward)
and/or to change the angle (toe in/out). Practice clipping in/out in a
doorway or something before heading out (riding on grass might be
smart, too). Remember to unclip well before you stop until your
reflexes get trained.
Jeff Starr
>Dear Lou,
>
>What are the benefits of clipless pedals?
>
>Carl Fogel
Carl, how many times are you going to ask that question? I believe the
various benefits, advantages, and concerns about clipless pedals, has
been explained to you, many times.
You're an inquisitive sort of guy, why not try a set. Buy a pair of
cycling shoes, that you will be able to use, with or without cleats.
That way, if you are one of the rare few, who don't like clipless, the
shoes will still be worthwhile for their stiffness. The shoes you will
wan,t will be SPD compatible. The Shimano shoes that Jobst recommends,
would be, just what you need.
I'll be looking forward to your first report, maybe titled
"Carl Tries Clipless".
Life is Good!
Jeff
Peter Cole
The primary benefit of clipless pedals is safety. When riding hard, a
foot slip off the pedal can be dangerous. The conventional solution for
many years has been straps. Straps eliminate the threat, but can be
uncomfortable, a bit of a nuisance to get in & out of, and can trap the
foot in a crash.
There is a slight efficiency advantage to any foot retention method in
that it eliminates the need to keep pressure on the pedal at the bottom
of the stroke just to keep contact with the pedal.
Keeping feet on pedals is especially a problem while mountain biking, I
think it was the popularity of this form of cycling that really
advanced the use of clipless pedals. I disagree somwhat with a prior
poster's assertion that a hybrid bike, by nature, doesn't need
clipless. Hybrid bikes are designed to be ridden on unpaved surfaces,
and the newer models, being light and high geared, support fast riding.
That to me is a very appropriate place for clipless pedals.
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Jeff,
It could be that I'm hoping for better explanations.
Or I may enjoy reading replies like yours, which dodge the
question.
It's interesting that there's nothing about the advantages
of clipless pedals in the FAQ.
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
<peter...@comcast.net> wrote:
Dear Peter,
That's a clearer and more sensible answer than I usually
receive when I ask about clipless pedals. Maybe it's
obvious, but I don't recall anyone suggesting your point
that clipless is more helpful for mountain biking.
Two questions . . .
First, I notice lots of unhappy riders complaining of pain
just riding around, which they blame on their clipless
pedals, and occasional posts that mention broken legs and
ankles that they attribute to clipless pedals failing to
disengage in crashes.
Since almost all posters here use clipless pedals, it's hard
to guess how many of them would be complaining about their
feet slipping off without clipless pedals, but do you have
any idea how the problem rates might compare? That is, would
you expect the long-term joint-pain and accident-injury
attributed to clipless pedals to be less than what the same
riders would suffer if their pedals let their feet come off?
Second, concerning efficiency, did you mean the bottom or
the top of the stroke? And do you know of any link to data
or testing that shows the efficiency?
I really am curious about the advantages, so thanks for a
serious reply.
Carl Fogel
Peter Cole
> That's a clearer and more sensible answer than I usually
> receive when I ask about clipless pedals. Maybe it's
> obvious, but I don't recall anyone suggesting your point
> that clipless is more helpful for mountain biking.
>
> Two questions . . .
>
> First, I notice lots of unhappy riders complaining of pain
> just riding around, which they blame on their clipless
> pedals, and occasional posts that mention broken legs and
> ankles that they attribute to clipless pedals failing to
> disengage in crashes.
Some pedals constrain the toe-in angle of the foot, some allow some
degree of freedom (AKA float). Some riders seem to find that their foot
must be free to pivot during the stroke. This has not been my
experience, but I have found my feet have a natural angle and I will
get sore knees if I don't adjust the cleats for that angle.
I know of only one person who suspects that his injury may be from
pedal non-release. I have never had a foot trap in my many (off-road)
falls with clipless pedals, I have trapped a foot with straps, in one
case I felt that was responsible for broken ribs I received. I have
never had a road fall.
> Since almost all posters here use clipless pedals, it's hard
> to guess how many of them would be complaining about their
> feet slipping off without clipless pedals, but do you have
> any idea how the problem rates might compare? That is, would
> you expect the long-term joint-pain and accident-injury
> attributed to clipless pedals to be less than what the same
> riders would suffer if their pedals let their feet come off?
First, I think the "long-term problem rate" of clipless pedals is very
small. Second, I think the safety issue is dependent on the kind of
riding you do. Typical cross-country mountain biking would be harder
without them, but certainly possible, it depends how good your balance
is. I think road bike sprinting would be less secure, and riders would
be more vulnerable to loosing balance if an unseen bump bounced them
off the pedals. Other than that, just riding around, I don't think they
make much difference. It's been so long since I've ridden without some
form of foot restraint that it's hard to remember. Any mental
comparisons I do are between clipless and straps.
> Second, concerning efficiency, did you mean the bottom or
> the top of the stroke? And do you know of any link to data
> or testing that shows the efficiency?
Both. Anytime you're applying force that isn't driving the pedals
around, you're wasting energy. How much force you're actually applying
is complicated, pedaling is complicated, biomechanically. There's a
pedaling model at analyticcycling.com.
carl...@comcast.net
<peter...@comcast.net> wrote:
Dear Peter,
I was organizing my sprawling favorites folder just now, ran
across this site, and found myself admiring this diagram:
http://www.princeton.edu/~humcomp/bikes/hist/histo_27.htm
"When operating close to the 'impedence match' condition,
the pedal force provided by the rider has the form shown
below. Between locations 1 and 16 there is always a positive
force on the pedal. Under these conditions the foot is not
used to produce an upward force on the pedal. Only under
slow rotation conditions, such as during a hill climb, will
the rider tend to pull up on the pedal as well as push down
during the 'power' part of the stroke."
That "impedance match" may include considerable wiggle room,
but the text and diagram seem to suggest that there's
downward force on the pedal for about 290 degrees of
rotation (16/20 x 360) during all but very slow hill
climbing, beginning about 20 degrees past top dead center
and ending about 40 degrees before returning to it.
The reference is to Abbott & Wilson, "Human-Powered
Vehicles," Human Kinetics (1995), whatever that is.
Carl Fogel
Mike Jacoubowsky
> of clipless pedals in the FAQ.
>
> Carl Fogel
Carl: That's because you're reading the wrong FAQ!
http://www.chainreaction.com/pedalfaq.htm
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
<carl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:77ld51tomti5u4k7d...@4ax.com...
carl...@comcast.net
<Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote:
>> It's interesting that there's nothing about the advantages
>> of clipless pedals in the FAQ.
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
>Carl: That's because you're reading the wrong FAQ!
>
>http://www.chainreaction.com/pedalfaq.htm
>
>--Mike Jacoubowsky
>Chain Reaction Bicycles
>www.ChainReaction.com
>
>Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
Dear Mike,
Oops! Forgive my elitist thinking.
Now looking through the explanation in the right FAQ, I see
four reasons . . .
1) Without clipless pedals, your feet might slip off.
(But even the explanation seems to admit that this is
unlikely.)
2) Clipless pedals force your foot to stay in the "correct"
position on the pedal.
(What determines this "correct" position? Do feet not
constrained by clipless pedals tend to move to "incorrect"
positions? Given the frequent complaints on the newsgroup,
is there a fair chance that the cleats will instead force
feet to some "incorrect" position?)
3) Clipless pedals (or perhaps the shoes?) prevent your feet
from bending painfully around the pedals
(Given the same pedal width and shoe sole, how can a cleat
change the amount that your toes can curl around the pedal?)
4) Clipless pedals relieve you from the burden of thinking
about putting your feet on the pedals.
(Were people really furrowing their brows and concentrating
on keeping their feet on the pedals before clipless pedals
were invented? And doesn't the FAQ go on to discuss in some
detail how people must deal with the burden of remembering
to unclip from these devices?)
In any case, am I right in thinking that the right FAQ does
not argue that the chief advantage of clipless pedals is any
increase in power?
I'm really just curious about the reasons that people give
for using clipless, not arguing against them. It's
interesting that the explanations are hard to find and,
well, er . . . not exactly overwhelmingly convincing.
Consider the safety claims. I estimate that 99% of the
regular posters on this newsgroup use clipless pedals
without even thinking about them, but that they would go
along with the somewhat vague safety theories. Now compare
that attitude to the arguments about helmets, where a large
number of the same regular posters disagree vehemently.
As for the power claims, I'd love to see some actual data,
as opposed to conjectures, but most people who address the
question seem to suggest that the improvement is slight, if
anything. On slow, dreadfully steep climbs, there seems to
be evidence that pulling up with our hind legs can help
briefly. But at anything but a slow cadence, I gather that
the evidence shows that we're fooling ourselves when we
think that we're pulling up on the back pedal.
This leaves comfort. A well-fitted clipless system might be
more comfortable, but I suspect that most people who believe
this didn't actually ride the same bicycles the same
distances without clipless pedals before switching to
clipless and finding impressive relief. And judging by posts
here, the chances seem fairly good that they will fiddle
around a good deal before they find a "correct" adjustment
of their clipless pedals that doesn't hurt.
I hope that yours feel fine--judging by your FAQ, you like
'em and that's fine with me. I'm just wondering how much is
fashion and how much is technical.
Carl Fogel
RonSonic
Which comparison interests you, the advantage over conventional clip and strap
or bare, non-binding pedals?
Ron
RonSonic
>On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 00:55:38 GMT, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
><Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote:
>
>>> It's interesting that there's nothing about the advantages
>>> of clipless pedals in the FAQ.
>>>
>>> Carl Fogel
>>
>>Carl: That's because you're reading the wrong FAQ!
>>
>>http://www.chainreaction.com/pedalfaq.htm
>>
>>--Mike Jacoubowsky
>>Chain Reaction Bicycles
>>www.ChainReaction.com
>>
>>Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>
>Dear Mike,
>
>Oops! Forgive my elitist thinking.
>
>Now looking through the explanation in the right FAQ, I see
>four reasons . . .
>
>1) Without clipless pedals, your feet might slip off.
>
>(But even the explanation seems to admit that this is
>unlikely.)
At least once in every day of mountain biking I feel myself being held to the
bike by one or more pedals. Doesn't happen often on the road, but sure makes
jumping a curb easier.
>2) Clipless pedals force your foot to stay in the "correct"
>position on the pedal.
>
>(What determines this "correct" position? Do feet not
>constrained by clipless pedals tend to move to "incorrect"
>positions? Given the frequent complaints on the newsgroup,
>is there a fair chance that the cleats will instead force
>feet to some "incorrect" position?)
You do have the opportunity to figure out at leisure where your foot belongs and
then see that it goes there. You can do this in consultation with a coach or
other expert and you can make changes later. I do believe that the number of
people who complain of their pedal/cleat fit is fewer than the number of people
who would suffer some other foot/pedal alignment problem.
>3) Clipless pedals (or perhaps the shoes?) prevent your feet
>from bending painfully around the pedals
>
>(Given the same pedal width and shoe sole, how can a cleat
>change the amount that your toes can curl around the pedal?)
A sufficiently rigid sole without some sort of catch, latch, slot or other
fitment would be a little precarious. It's impossible to mold a shoe sole that
will grip every pedal in a way that suits every rider.
>4) Clipless pedals relieve you from the burden of thinking
>about putting your feet on the pedals.
>
>(Were people really furrowing their brows and concentrating
>on keeping their feet on the pedals before clipless pedals
>were invented? And doesn't the FAQ go on to discuss in some
>detail how people must deal with the burden of remembering
>to unclip from these devices?)
Normal people very often get it wrong.
Forgetting to unclip, or more commonly neglecting to until it is too late, is at
worst an embarassment and rarely repeated. The same issue has existed with clip
and strap for near a hundred years.
>In any case, am I right in thinking that the right FAQ does
>not argue that the chief advantage of clipless pedals is any
>increase in power?
"Chief" advantage? Don't know. Won't know.
I can say that along with being less comfortable on the bike and having my
pedaling motion go to hell, power is lost without pedals that grab my shoes.
Relearning to ride without them would certainly get most of it back. I am
confident I wouldn't get it all back and am buggered if I can think of some
blind test for the principle.
>I'm really just curious about the reasons that people give
>for using clipless, not arguing against them. It's
>interesting that the explanations are hard to find and,
>well, er . . . not exactly overwhelmingly convincing.
I simply find them very comfortable, in the same way that belts and bucket seat
are comfortable in either a sports car or bumpy truck. I go against the stream
in that I don't consider clipless to be any enormous improvement over strap and
clip, both work fine for me.
>Consider the safety claims. I estimate that 99% of the
>regular posters on this newsgroup use clipless pedals
>without even thinking about them, but that they would go
>along with the somewhat vague safety theories. Now compare
>that attitude to the arguments about helmets, where a large
>number of the same regular posters disagree vehemently.
Carl, that right there should be telling you something. At some point it gets to
be like explaining that skinny saddle to someone who's only ridden cruisers. You
just say "it's better, you'll see." Maybe they will or not, but at some point it
just defies explanation.
>As for the power claims, I'd love to see some actual data,
>as opposed to conjectures, but most people who address the
>question seem to suggest that the improvement is slight, if
>anything. On slow, dreadfully steep climbs, there seems to
>be evidence that pulling up with our hind legs can help
>briefly. But at anything but a slow cadence, I gather that
>the evidence shows that we're fooling ourselves when we
>think that we're pulling up on the back pedal.
Don't your feet get all floaty and inconsistent on the pedals when you get close
to spun out? Wouldn't it be nice to stretch your achilles out? Jump over stuff?
Perform a lateral trackstand? Okay, leave off that last one. Every competitive
cyclist in memory and a large majority of tourists and sport riders insist on
binding shoe to pedal and nearly all feel they can ride stronger that way.
There's gotta be something to that.
>This leaves comfort. A well-fitted clipless system might be
>more comfortable, but I suspect that most people who believe
>this didn't actually ride the same bicycles the same
>distances without clipless pedals before switching to
>clipless and finding impressive relief. And judging by posts
>here, the chances seem fairly good that they will fiddle
>around a good deal before they find a "correct" adjustment
>of their clipless pedals that doesn't hurt.
Nah, all my cleat set ups have been painless and pretty quick. Usually the same
day. One set of SPD's with no float I nailed on the first adjustment. I've also
had some that involved a daily or more adjustment for a few days. The only ones
you read about here are the ones that go badly. As for giving a fair test by
riding the same bike with and without equal distances, nobody's going to do
that. We don't have to. I don't have to periodically test whether I prefer
sandals or wing-tips for lazing on the beach.
>I hope that yours feel fine--judging by your FAQ, you like
>'em and that's fine with me. I'm just wondering how much is
>fashion and how much is technical.
I'd say right there with the shorts.
Ron
Jim Smith
> I simply find them very comfortable, in the same way that belts and bucket seat
> are comfortable in either a sports car or bumpy truck. I go against the stream
> in that I don't consider clipless to be any enormous improvement over strap and
> clip, both work fine for me.
I agree with that. I first tried clipless pedals after using a
snowboard with clip in bindings instead of the old strap-in style. I
expected the same sort of dramatic improvement on the bike. I was
left underwhelmed and dissapointed. I eventually gave up on the spds
and now just use platform pedals with clips. Mostly because I like
being able to use any shoes and I don't notice any downside.
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Ron,
Cleats versus bare (nice phrase) is what interests me.
I think that the straps fell out of favor as soon the cleats
appeared (but I'd be happy to hear why--sometimes the
explanations for vanished equipment shed light on what's
new).
Carl Fogel
RonSonic
Okay, I picked that up in another post and blithered about the topic a bit.
>I think that the straps fell out of favor as soon the cleats
>appeared (but I'd be happy to hear why--sometimes the
>explanations for vanished equipment shed light on what's
>new).
That's actually a bit of a mystery to me. I haven't had a strap and clip setup
in many years so don't have a recent basis for comparison. Soon I'll have a
mountain bike set up with platforms and clips for commuting and erranding. But I
don't recall anything being wrong with the system. You did have to remember to
loosen a strap before stopping. Not a big deal.
Seems that as long you've got to start messing with silly shoes you might as
well go with clipless since the pedal's the less expensive part of the program.
Ron
Arthur Harris
> I think that the straps fell out of favor as soon the cleats
> appeared (but I'd be happy to hear why--sometimes the
> explanations for vanished equipment shed light on what's
> new).
Well first of all, cleats WERE used with straps. The old metal (sometimes
plastic) cleats had a slot that engaged the back edge of the pedal .
Normally, with the straps pulled tightly, you couldn't pull your foot free.
When preparing for a stop, you had to reach down and loosen the buckle on
the strap. In a panic stop or fall, you were locked in. Those cleats had no
friction pads for walking or "putting a foot down" and were a horror to walk
in.
As a kid, I started out riding in sneakers and no toe clips. Then I
progressed to sneakers with clips/straps (which at least prevented a foot
slipping off, and gave a more secure feel, especially when standing).
My only pedal related fall came when I was using sneakers with clips/straps.
On a steep climb, I cinched the straps real tight, and when two dogs charged
at me I forgot about the straps and stopped, only to fall slowly to the
ground while the dogs looked on in amusement.
Next, I switched to cycling shoes with cleats and clips/straps which allowed
applying power at both the top and bottom of the stroke. I usually left one
strap just loose enough to get a foot out in an emergency
In the early 90s, I switched to Look clipless which I consindered a huge
improvement in terms of ease of entry and disengagement. Finally, just this
year, I switched to SPD which has most of the advantages of Look, but also
allows normal walking.
For anything but short rides of a mile or less, I couldn't imagine riding
"bare" pedals with regular shoes. And I certainly wouldn't want to go back
to toe clips.
Art Harris
Fred Barney
> Dear Mike,
>
> Oops! Forgive my elitist thinking.
>
> Now looking through the explanation in the right FAQ, I see
> four reasons . . .
Carl, while your usual playfully argumentative style grates on my nerves
most of the time, it is, in this case, entirely appropriate. I
sometimes think that clipless pedals are only suitable for those who
care more about being competitive than those who just want to get some
outdoor fun and exercise on a bike. But, I have to admit, that after
having used a wide variety of them extensively, all pedal systems have
their shortcomings. I believe there can be an increase in power that is
inversely proportional to the rider's skill in 'spinning circles' rather
than 'pounding squares' regarding their pedalling technique. A good
spinner won't see much benefit going to clipless. I should clarify that
I am comparing clipless systems to platforms without toe clips. I
intensely dislike (OK, hate) toe clips and would never recommend them.
But platform pedals come in many styles, each with varying degrees of
grip and comfort. I enjoyed using big BMX style pegged platforms almost
exclusively for many years. The big platform is incredibly comfortable
and the grippy pegs make for almost a clipless level of connectedness to
the pedals. The big downside is that they are highly efficient at
removing large quantities of skin from your shins in the rare event that
you don't connect with them in the right way. The older style caged
platforms associated with toe clips are lighter and (somewhat) easier on
the shins, but far less grippy. Rubber platforms seen on casual bikes
like beach cruisers are reasonably safe for the shins, but can be very
slippery, and good quality specimens aren't common.
> 2) Clipless pedals force your foot to stay in the "correct"
> position on the pedal.
>
> (What determines this "correct" position? Do feet not
> constrained by clipless pedals tend to move to "incorrect"
> positions? Given the frequent complaints on the newsgroup,
> is there a fair chance that the cleats will instead force
> feet to some "incorrect" position?)
Strongly agree here. With platforms the rider has somewhat more freedom
to put his foot where it is most comfortable.
> 3) Clipless pedals (or perhaps the shoes?) prevent your feet
> from bending painfully around the pedals
>
> (Given the same pedal width and shoe sole, how can a cleat
> change the amount that your toes can curl around the pedal?)
Feet will only bend around the pedal, whether platform or clipless, if
the sole is too flexible and/or the platform is too small. With BMX
style platforms, just about any shoe can be appropriate because the
large platform provides all the needed support. Clipless systems
require good quality specialty shoes with stiff soles. If the soles are
too flexible, the dreaded 'hot foot' may develop, especially with small
MTB style cleats.
> 4) Clipless pedals relieve you from the burden of thinking
> about putting your feet on the pedals.
This really only applies to off-road cycling. But is in turn
compensated for by the burden of worrying about what will happen if you
start going south off the trail without the ability to do a quick bail-
out.
> Consider the safety claims. I estimate that 99% of the
> regular posters on this newsgroup use clipless pedals
> without even thinking about them, but that they would go
> along with the somewhat vague safety theories. Now compare
> that attitude to the arguments about helmets, where a large
> number of the same regular posters disagree vehemently.
The safety claims sound like weak rationalizations to me. Feet could be
rattled off the pedals, but then the ability to rapidly get off the
pedals is often a safety advantage too.
> This leaves comfort. A well-fitted clipless system might be
> more comfortable, but I suspect that most people who believe
> this didn't actually ride the same bicycles the same
> distances without clipless pedals before switching to
> clipless and finding impressive relief. And judging by posts
> here, the chances seem fairly good that they will fiddle
> around a good deal before they find a "correct" adjustment
> of their clipless pedals that doesn't hurt.
>
> I hope that yours feel fine--judging by your FAQ, you like
> 'em and that's fine with me. I'm just wondering how much is
> fashion and how much is technical.
>
> Carl Fogel
In my opinion, it is mostly fashion and a belief by the inexperienced
that they need to have them. Then let's not ignore the fact that bike
dealers make extra lucrative sales by selling shoes and pedals, instead
of pedals alone. I know that some of them will hate me for saying that,
but I think we should talk about the elephant that is sitting in the
living room. Same with helmets. Ever meet a bike dealer that wasn't
pushing helmets as the only way for little children to avoid a grisly
death? I haven't. Shields up, Captain!
Fred Barney
The question is how WILL it be ridden? A person who intends to ride
hard and often isn't likely to choose a hybrid. I think you are making
the mistake that what is appropriate for you is appropriate for
everybody. I just think that given his level of experience, he
shouldn't burden himself with a clipless system just yet.
dusto...@aol.com
> Cleats versus bare (nice phrase) is what interests me.
>
> I think that the straps fell out of favor as soon the cleats
> appeared (but I'd be happy to hear why--sometimes the
> explanations for vanished equipment shed light on what's
> new).
Bare feet would probably almost always hurt a lot more than shod feet
(any "shod",including even those SPD sandals). Especially, you know, on
those pedals with "teeth" meant to grip shoes? Ever tried that? Ow!
Really hurts, and right away, too (thank you, Carl).
Clips/straps v. clip/strapless? To keep a clip/strap shoe from pulling
out, the strap has to be at least snug, and pretty tight if the cleat
is worn or has a shallow engagement slot in the first place. Not
comfortable for many riders. The clipless style cleat will stay
attached to the pedal (given working parts not worn excessively) even
with the shoe laced/velcroed/ratcheted "loose". Much, much more
comfortable than the "old way" IME.
The big advantage of cycling shoes (v. "street") for me is that the
bike shoe soles are usually pretty stiff. The old feet not being what
they used to be, bending them under load (tested while moving the
household goods to a new residence, for instance) produces pain and
soreness, especially where I had a bone spur removed at the base of a
big toe (my million-dollar wound). I can't begin to tolerate tight toe
straps anymore but I can ride for hours using Sidi Genius shoes, which,
although regarded as "soft" by some, do have very limited sole flex
compared to running shoes, for instance. FWIW, I keep the two lower
velcro straps loose, and use the ratcheting ankle strap to contol the
location of the foot-- so no banging the big toe against the inside end
of the shoe, or binding the foot around the instep or toes to keep the
foot in the shoe. "Works for me"; if it didn't, I couldn't ride, even
on platforms. Well, I do occasionally take my son out, me on mom's
comfort bike (platform pedals, no clips/straps)with him riding the
attached trailer bike, but the effort involved is nothing like the
usual group or solo ride on a road bike, either for duration or force,
and I take care with my foot motion or pay the price. "Doesn't work for
me", IOW, at least not very well.
Pedal release? After the usual rookie tipover or two, including an
embarrassing multibike pileup with other wheel-overlapped rookies at a
stoplight (rookies), I learned to pattern a reponse by practicing the
motion that got my foot out the quickest, this with both clip/strap and
later, clipless types (good return on that over the years, btw). With
Look or Campy clipless cleat systems, I've found the simple twisting
motion required for release (similar if not quite the same with those
two types) to be a little more straightforward (quicker, perhaps) than
the "roll out of the cleat slot, snap the foot backwards" motion
required from clip/strap types-- esp. the old Sidi white cleat blocks,
which could be pretty sticky when new and were deeper than most other
cleats. And so far, even while running worn clipless cleats, I've never
pulled a foot out-- of course, the strap was something of a backup for
that occurrence with the clip/strap style pedal/shoe system. And yes,
early in the days of clipless, while making a U-turn in a racing pack,
the two guys ahead of me managed to release their outside foot from
clipless pedals when they stood to jam out of the corner, and right at
the same time, too. Looked like the Rockettes (little exaggeration) but
can't say I enjoyed the show much from behind. Funnier later, of
course. --TP
Peter Cole
carl...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> Cleats versus bare (nice phrase) is what interests me.
>
> I think that the straps fell out of favor as soon the cleats
> appeared (but I'd be happy to hear why--sometimes the
> explanations for vanished equipment shed light on what's
> new).
I think the interesting question is why clips & straps were used. After
all, "clipless" is just an improvement over that old system. I started
mountain biking with straps, which is a pretty bad idea. You often need
assistance keeping your feet on the pedals when bouncing over roots,
rocks and logs, but straps are dicey in a fall.
I never used clips and straps in my early street cycling days, although
my more committed friends did. I don't care for the feeling of bare
pedals now, though. It feels less safe. Mountain bikers go through a
similar conversion. Most will unclip in difficult sections when they
first start riding with clipless, but after a while realize that they
have much better control, hence safety, clipped in.
carl...@comcast.net
<n2...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
>My only pedal related fall came when I was using sneakers with clips/straps.
>On a steep climb, I cinched the straps real tight, and when two dogs charged
>at me I forgot about the straps . . .
Dear Art,
I'm sorry, but I had to stop reading your post at that point
because I began laughing uncontrollably.
I had a vision of a rider forgetting that his feet were
attached to the pedals and trying to kick the dogs and
executing a violent bunnyhop or even somersault.
I did read the rest and understand that this wasn't what
happened to you:
> . . . and stopped, only to fall slowly to the
>ground while the dogs looked on in amusement.
But I'm still laughing with the dogs, not about pedals in
particular, but because that general kind of forgetful
fiasco is so embarrassingly familiar:
"Er, that keyboard isn't connected to this computer."
"Maybe you'd have better luck if you took the safety off?"
"It's harder to drop the key into a modern gas tank."
"That part will last longer right-side up."
Thanks for a happy morning,
Carl Fogel
Jeff Starr
<loco-m...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>In my opinion, it is mostly fashion and a belief by the inexperienced
>that they need to have them. Then let's not ignore the fact that bike
>dealers make extra lucrative sales by selling shoes and pedals, instead
>of pedals alone. I know that some of them will hate me for saying that,
>but I think we should talk about the elephant that is sitting in the
>living room. Same with helmets. Ever meet a bike dealer that wasn't
>pushing helmets as the only way for little children to avoid a grisly
>death? I haven't. Shields up, Captain!
Fashion may get people to try clipless pedals, but the benefits keep
us using them.
Life is Good!
Jeff
Steve Caddel
I agree. I just acquired a new Bianchi road bike. This was my first
experience with clipless pedals. I love them. I now want to convert my
Gary Fisher MTB to clipless. Any good suggestions.
And just why do they call the pedals you clip into "clipless"?
Just wondering.
Arthur Harris
> And just why do they call the pedals you clip into "clipless"?
Because they don't require toe clips.
Art Harris
RonSonic
I bought up a couple pairs of Shimano M525 from Nashbar for like $30 and have
been extremely gruntled. The Shimanos are on sale often enough and cheap enough
I wouldn't mess with the copy brands.
What GF have you got?
Ron
RonSonic
Ahh, but they are themselves clips, what they lack are straps.
Carl should note that the concept of binding pedal to shoe is so universal among
serious cyclists that the name "clipless" could actually be understood to mean
what it does rather than refer to some plain pedal.
Ron
Steve Caddel
Thanks for the input. I assume by gruntled you mean happy. I will look
for them. I have a Gary Fisher Marlin, which I love. I got it in 2000.
But since I'm riding in the MS 150 here in Colorado, I felt compelled
to get a road bike. I got a 2003 Bianchi Giro that had been in a LBS
for a while. Now I don't have time enough to ride both bikes. What a
shame.
--
Steve "Fat Boy Biker" Caddel
To use my email, please remove the SPAM.OFF
"Life is like riding a bicycle on a windy day.
No matter which direction you turn
the wind is always in your face."
Fred Barney
> Fashion may get people to try clipless pedals, but the benefits keep
> us using them.
>
>
> Life is Good!
> Jeff
I use clipless, but I like to keep it real and point out their serious
shortcomings. And there is a vast population of casual riders who just
don't need them and would have more fun if they never bothered with
them. Yesterday was yet another clipless headache for me. I'm out on a
country road six miles from home and I find that it has become almost
impossible to unclip my right foot. Do I pull over, sit and stand in
the dirt and gravel with one shoe off while I fish for the right allen
wrench in my pack, or just suffer with it until I get home and leave my
right foot glued to the pedal? It's not all wine and roses with
clipless. I use them mainly because if I use them at all, I feel I
should use them all the time, so that I always know that I have to
unclip.
RonSonic
<steve....@SPAM.OFF.adelphia.net> wrote:
Yea, I sometimes insist on using words that don't otherwise exist. I don't know
if the 525s are still available, but I'd be comfortable with any of the Shimano
SPDs.
The Fishers are such very cool bikes. Really like 'em. Maybe a little too much
even.
Ron
Robin Hubert
Gee Fred, you can't blame the cleat bolts for loosening. I had a cleat
bolt come loose ... once. Since then, I have never had a problem, in 7
or 8 years. Lube the bolts and tighten adequately. What most people
don't realize is that the cleat (SPD cleats, anyway) has serrations and
such and it will "bed in" to the sole of the shoe. That's why you often
hear the admonishment to retighten your cleats after the first ride or
two. Not necessary if you just do it right the first time.
Robin Hubert
Jeff Starr
What you are describing as serious shortcomings, are more likely
problems caused by your negligence. If your cleat is coming loose or
your pedal is seizing up, these are maintenance problems. Not to
mention, who's fault is it, that you have to fish for a tool?
I just don't think that you can be sure of who needs them or whether
they would have more fun. I think it is fine to state your opinion,
with your reasons, but I don't think you or I can make asumptions on
who should or shouldn't use clipless pedals. Let them decide.
Life is Good!
Jeff
Peter Cole
> I bought up a couple pairs of Shimano M525 from Nashbar for like $30
and have
> been extremely gruntled. The Shimanos are on sale often enough and
cheap enough
> I wouldn't mess with the copy brands.
It should be pointed out that these are pretty ancient pedals that
Nashbar found a stash of somewhere. They're not bad, but pretty heavy &
clunky. There are better pedals around, occasionally better deals, too.
Peter Cole
> I use clipless, but I like to keep it real and point out their
serious
> shortcomings. And there is a vast population of casual riders who
just
> don't need them and would have more fun if they never bothered with
> them. Yesterday was yet another clipless headache for me.
Perhaps you should take your own advice, or perhaps you should let the
LBS do the installation work.
> I'm out on a
> country road six miles from home and I find that it has become almost
> impossible to unclip my right foot. Do I pull over, sit and stand in
> the dirt and gravel with one shoe off while I fish for the right
allen
> wrench in my pack, or just suffer with it until I get home and leave
my
> right foot glued to the pedal?
"Suffer" for 6 whole miles? What's next for you, the Iditerod?
RonSonic
Very true.
That's why I'm so comfortable recommending anything Shimano wants to sell as an
SPD. As good as the old primitive, cheap ones are...
Ron
Booker C. Bense
In article <ihbe5156leilfg43a...@4ax.com>,
<carl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>This leaves comfort. A well-fitted clipless system might be
>more comfortable, but I suspect that most people who believe
>this didn't actually ride the same bicycles the same
>distances without clipless pedals before switching to
>clipless and finding impressive relief. And judging by posts
>here, the chances seem fairly good that they will fiddle
>around a good deal before they find a "correct" adjustment
>of their clipless pedals that doesn't hurt.
>
>I hope that yours feel fine--judging by your FAQ, you like
>'em and that's fine with me. I'm just wondering how much is
>fashion and how much is technical.
>
_ Well, I've ridden the same bike in 1977 and 2004 for
roughly the same distances and I think of all the changes
in the last 30 years, clipless pedals with a reasonable
amount of float are IHMO by far the thing where there has been
actual real technical improvement that increases comfort
for the average rider, not just fashionable imitations of
racers. That and Hyperglide cogs are the two things I would
recommend to everyone coming back to the sport.
_ Now in 1977, I rode with campy pedals, adias shoes with
nail on cleats, leather straps and metal clips. Intersections
were a pain since I could never master a track stand on a
bike with a freewheel. The straps would require constant
fiddling on really long rides to avoid constricting the
feet and walking with those cleats was both uncomfortable
and expensive in cleats.
_ So if you think constrained feet improves your riding, there is
no debate all between clipless and clips and straps. Getting
nail-on cleats in the right position was far more work than with
today's simple cleats and since there was far less tolerance than
even the "no float" cleats of today, much more potentially
ruinous to your knees.
_ I don't know of anybody that has actually tried clipless
pedals long enough to master the learning curve that would
go back for any other reason than you need special shoes.
Either we're all dupes of the vast marketing conspiracy,
or they make riding faster, easier and more comfortable.
_ Booker C. Bense
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBQlrUJWTWTAjn5N/lAQGzIwP/XvoW96wYp9c7o8yufQkPFYgzCWP001HL
Hi+oqhXW1pexx/WmacgRsiXh+y8TQws2/umkn/JMm/jJ5nEIGRBYSWfGo3tBIEYK
sUSX0uWAwtY8aoy+3req43XS57b2lg7DyS3awPoIFzdtoWA2Y82XGNDBbjjugmFX
PWZCEj6jNPE=
=LKAU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
davek
> I use them mainly because if I use them at all, I feel I
> should use them all the time, so that I always know that I have to
> unclip.
I use dual-sided pedals with SPD one side, platforms the other, and
shoes with recessed cleats, so I can choose to ride clipped-in or not
according to whim.
Most of the time I prefer to be clipped-in - I don't know why, it just
/feels/ better - except in very heavy stop-start traffic.
d.
davek
> _ So if you think constrained feet improves your riding, there is
> no debate all between clipless and clips and straps. Getting
> nail-on cleats in the right position was far more work than with
> today's simple cleats and since there was far less tolerance than
> even the "no float" cleats of today, much more potentially
> ruinous to your knees.
The float thing is important - I always hated toestraps because they
felt far too constricted, and it put me off going to clipless for a long
time because I assumed the same applied.
Clipless pedals with float took a while to get used to (it felt like ice
skating at first) but the advantages were so immediately apparent that I
wasn't put off, and now there is no way I would ever go back to platforms.
d.
davek
> I think that the straps fell out of favor as soon the cleats
> appeared (but I'd be happy to hear why--sometimes the
> explanations for vanished equipment shed light on what's
> new).
AFAIK, straps are still popular among track cyclists (where a tight
binding that allows no foot movement may be an advantage). Among road
cyclists, a degree of movement is useful, so cleated shoes that allow
some "float" are a great improvement over straps.
d.
davek
> First, I notice lots of unhappy riders complaining of pain
> just riding around, which they blame on their clipless
> pedals,
With an uncleated shoe, your foot can find its "natural" position
without restriction. With a cleated shoe, if the cleat does not
correspond to your foot's "natural" position on the pedal then it will
soon become very uncomfortable, and possibly seriously damaging to the
knees.
So, perhaps it's not the clipless pedals per se that are at fault but
the incorrect set-up of the shoe. Not an insurmountable problem.
>and occasional posts that mention broken legs and
> ankles that they attribute to clipless pedals failing to
> disengage in crashes.
Hmmm. It's possible, I suppose, if the pedal retention mechanism is set
too tight. Again, not an insurmountable problem. I've fallen off a few
times and my feet always become detached during the fall.
I've also had a couple of instances of falls being caused by being
unable to detach, but I put those down to momentary panic causing me to
forget to push down rather than pull up while twisting the foot. It
comes with practice.
Fortunately, I have never suffered any broken bones from falling off my
bike and it's a great shame that anyone does, but when people do suffer
breaks it is usually down to a combination of circumstances and can't
realistically be attributed to a single cause, such as clipless pedals
(otherwise /everyone/ who uses clipless pedals would break bones /every
time/ they fell off).
> Since almost all posters here use clipless pedals, it's hard
> to guess how many of them would be complaining about their
> feet slipping off without clipless pedals,
Purely anecdotal, I know, but it used to happen to me a fair bit on
bumpy roads.
> Second, concerning efficiency, did you mean the bottom or
> the top of the stroke? And do you know of any link to data
> or testing that shows the efficiency?
I can't give you any technical data, but here's how I understand it,
based on how it "feels" to me...
With your foot attached to the pedal, any foot movement is going to
result in pedal movement. So, if you move your foot in a smooth circle,
the pedal will go with it, and you will be transmitting power for the
full 360 degrees. Not only that, but both feet are working all the time,
so the workload is shared.
With your foot unattached, you can only move the pedal by pushing down
on it, which gives you at best something like 120 degrees of power
transmission, and only one foot is working at a time, so it has to do
more work compared to the clipless foot.
At the bottom of the stroke, when it reaches the point where it starts
to turn up again, there is no reason for your unattached foot to be on
the pedal except that both foot and pedal are heading back in the same
direction for the start of the next stroke. Effectively, the unattached
foot loses meaningful contact with the pedal at the bottom of the
stroke, while the clipless foot continues to work all the way round.
I don't suppose any of that will help convince you at all but that's the
best I can offer.
d.
Sheldon Brown
> carl...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> I think that the straps fell out of favor as soon the cleats
>> appeared (but I'd be happy to hear why--sometimes the
>> explanations for vanished equipment shed light on what's
>> new).
>
My theory is that it's because they're so much more comfortable. We
didn't realize how uncomfortable the straps were until they went away.
>
> AFAIK, straps are still popular among track cyclists (where a tight
> binding that allows no foot movement may be an advantage). Among road
> cyclists, a degree of movement is useful, so cleated shoes that allow
> some "float" are a great improvement over straps.
Track events are generally quite short, so comfort is rarely an issue in
any aspect of track racing.
Sheldon "SPDs" Brown
+---------------------------------+
| Is ambivalence a bad thing? |
| Well, yes and no. |
| -- Garrison Keillor |
+---------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
Track riders do that because when pulling up hard at a standstill or
low speed obscures foot rotation, the means by which cleats disengage.
It's not that they are so strong, but that controlling twist in such a
condition is difficult. If you have tried it and popped out, you can
understand the problem better. SPD cleats do cannot be pulled out,
but the twist out nicely.
davek
> Track events are generally quite short, so comfort is rarely an issue in
> any aspect of track racing.
Sounds a plausible explanation. I have no experience of track cycling so
any comment I might make is pure supposition.
I did notice, however, at the recent World Championships in Manchester
that some riders were using clipless, so maybe fashion is catching up
there too.
d.
davek
> Only under
> slow rotation conditions, such as during a hill climb, will
> the rider tend to pull up on the pedal as well as push down
> during the 'power' part of the stroke."
On the other hand, if you are "spinning" at optimum cadence in optimum
gear, there is no sensation of pushing or pulling at any point in the
stroke - you are simply turning your foot in a circular movement and
taking the pedal with it.
I find this "optimum" situation usually occurs on the flat (preferably
with a tailwind) while pedalling at a high-ish cadence (100rpm).
Perhaps the physics would prove me wrong, but that's how it feels.
d.
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>> This leaves comfort. A well-fitted clipless system might be more
>> comfortable, but I suspect that most people who believe this didn't
>> actually ride the same bicycles the same distances without clipless
>> pedals before switching to clipless and finding impressive relief.
>> And judging by posts here, the chances seem fairly good that they
>> will fiddle around a good deal before they find a "correct"
>> adjustment of their clipless pedals that doesn't hurt.
>> I hope that yours feel fine--judging by your FAQ, you like 'em and
>> that's fine with me. I'm just wondering how much is fashion and
>> how much is technical.
> Well, I've ridden the same bike in 1977 and 2004 for roughly the
> same distances and I think of all the changes in the last 30 years,
> clipless pedals with a reasonable amount of float are IHMO by far
> the thing where there has been actual real technical improvement
> that increases comfort for the average rider, not just fashionable
> imitations of racers. That and Hyperglide cogs are the two things I
> would recommend to everyone coming back to the sport.
Gear shifting has been one of the major improvements that attracted
new riders to bicycling. Not only are there enough gears to clear
away the excuse that the range wasn't adequate, but the ease of
shifting also took the "stunt rider" requirement away so that shifting
can be done without letting go of the handlebars.
> Now in 1977, I rode with Campagnolo pedals, adidas shoes with nail on
> cleats, leather straps and metal clips. Intersections were a pain
> since I could never master a track stand on a bike with a freewheel.
> The straps would require constant fiddling on really long rides to
> avoid constricting the feet and walking with those cleats was both
> uncomfortable and expensive in cleats.
The step-in pedal got rid of the misplaced cleat and stunt rider
requirement of reaching down to the foot to tighten and loosen straps,
quite aside from the emergency disconnect on a stalled bicycle. Tight
straps were required to keep the cleat effective and at the same time
cut off circulation to the feet... uncomfortably. On the other hand,
there was hardly a strap that would stay tight for any reasonable
mileage. Besides, toe clips often failed and straps stretched, hence
Binda Extra with a Kevlar anti-stretch core. What a pain.
> So if you think constrained feet improves your riding, there is no
> debate all between clipless and clips and straps. Getting nail-on
> cleats in the right position was far more work than with today's
> simple cleats and since there was far less tolerance than even the
> "no float" cleats of today, much more potentially ruinous to your
> knees.
For those who don't have bad knees, ones that articulate parallel with
the direction of travel, no-float cleats are also available, so we
have the best of conditions.
> I don't know of anybody that has actually tried clipless pedals long
> enough to master the learning curve that would go back for any other
> reason than you need special shoes. Either we're all dupes of the
> vast marketing conspiracy, or they make riding faster, easier and
> more comfortable.
I think that time is gone by. I recall seeing fairly experienced
riders lying on the road after stopping, having forgotten to push
outward with the heel to dismount instead of pulling back out of the
straps. I haven't seen a ride do that lately, mainly because there
are no more who have learned on toe clips and straps and changed.
However, I think you could add the threadless steertube as one of the
great advances in bicycling and it came to us via the MTB:
carl...@comcast.net
<bbense+rec.bicycl...@telemark.slac.stanford.edu>
wrote:
[snip]
>
>_ I don't know of anybody that has actually tried clipless
>pedals long enough to master the learning curve that would
>go back for any other reason than you need special shoes.
>Either we're all dupes of the vast marketing conspiracy,
>or they make riding faster, easier and more comfortable.
>
>_ Booker C. Bense
Dear Booker,
Any data or estimates on how much faster you ride due to
clipless pedals?
Curiously,
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Dave,
Most measurements show that, no matter how it feels, we keep
pressing down on the pedal (not pulling up) as it passes
bottom dead center and climbs back up on the back half of
the pedal cycle, almost to the top.
Here's what seems to be a typical result of testing:
http://www.princeton.edu/~humcomp/bikes/hist/histo_27.htm
The rider is still pushing down, not pulling up, for over
half of a normal-speed backstroke.
Maybe training would change this, but I'm still waiting for
someone to come up with something showing an actual power
increase over bare pedals or toe-clips for steady riding, as
opposed to very slow, very steep, very short climbs. (I'm
kind of surprised that no one is pointing me to some kind of
power testing.)
I'm also waiting for something other than obvious attempts
to make theory justify preference concerning safety.
But I do appreciate your main point, which is that your
pedals feel more comfortable (smoother?) to you. I don't
doubt that we all feel that one kind of pedal feels better
than another. I'm just wondering whether there's anything
more than feel to it.
For fun, browse through this thread and replace "clipless"
with "tie-and-solder" or "tread pattern".
Carl Fogel
Jeff Starr
>
>
>I'm also waiting for something other than obvious attempts
>to make theory justify preference concerning safety.
>
>But I do appreciate your main point, which is that your
>pedals feel more comfortable (smoother?) to you. I don't
>doubt that we all feel that one kind of pedal feels better
>than another. I'm just wondering whether there's anything
>more than feel to it.
>
>For fun, browse through this thread and replace "clipless"
>with "tie-and-solder" or "tread pattern".
>
>Carl Fogel
Carl, why won't you just try a set of clipless pedals? All the
theorys, experience, and opinions don't seem to answer any questions
you have.
For once, why don't you do your own research? If you can't afford
them, then say so. Maybe we could come up with a set of pedals and a
pair of shoes for you. I say it's time to quit talking about clipless
and time to try a set.
Or, wait, are you afraid to try them? If so, just say so, at least
then I'll understand this endless dance.
Life is Good!
Jeff
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Jeff,
Since you persist, I'll remark that I'm familiar with bare,
toe-clip, and clipless pedals.
I noticed no staggering or even noticeable improvements in
safety or power in bare versus clipless. If someone has
technical comments, I'm interested in reading them. I'd hate
to try to tell a skeptical pack of high school physics
students that one kind of pedal must be unquestionably
superior to another because it "feels" better.
I'll go along with the comment that the toe-clip and strap
approach requiring the rider to reach down to release his
feet was unsafe for ordinary riding.
You haven't offered any data, testing, or links yet. You
just keep repeating that anyone who tries what you like will
understand what you can't express and that the majority
opinion cannot possibly be mistaken. The same arguments were
used for treaded tires and tying and soldering.
Do you have any links to testing showing significant
improvements in power, safety, or anything but "feel"?
I understand that you believe that the comfort and feeling
of clipless pedals is unrivalled
You needn't be so defensive when an obvious technical
question is raised. If you're right, surely you can come up
with better arguments and support--something that an
objective audience could appreciate.
Carl Fogel
davek
> The rider is still pushing down, not pulling up, for over
> half of a normal-speed backstroke.
That's interesting. I guess the physics does prove me wrong. But does
that diagram account for the effect of having two diametrically
opposite pedals? I wonder if the downforce from the foot to the pedal
on the upwards part of the stroke might in fact be caused by the
downwards force on the pedal from the other foot, ie whatever upwards
force you are pulling through the 'back' foot is outweighed by the
downward force through the front foot, creating the impression of
downforce, even when you are pulling up. (So in fact there is
downforce, but less than there might be.)
But that's just a wild pie-in-the-sky theory...
> Maybe training would change this
Lance Armstrong's spinning technique would seem to confirm this.
> I'm just wondering whether there's anything
> more than feel to it.
Maybe, maybe not. Feel is a pretty important consideration, though,
especially if you are going to spend a long time on the bike.
> For fun, browse through this thread and replace "clipless"
> with "tie-and-solder" or "tread pattern".
Pffft!
d.
Peter Cole
carl...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> Here's what seems to be a typical result of testing:
>
> http://www.princeton.edu/~humcomp/bikes/hist/histo_27.htm
>
> The rider is still pushing down, not pulling up, for over
> half of a normal-speed backstroke.
Yes, and the magnitude is even more important to notice in this diagram
than the direction. The "pulling up" or "pedaling circles"
justification for clipless or straps just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
> Maybe training would change this, but I'm still waiting for
> someone to come up with something showing an actual power
> increase over bare pedals or toe-clips for steady riding, as
> opposed to very slow, very steep, very short climbs. (I'm
> kind of surprised that no one is pointing me to some kind of
> power testing.)
You won't find it. Power is aerobic anyway (VO2Max & all that), what
you're talking about is force. Force can be improved by pulling up on
one leg while pressing the other, but it's a useless technique other
than in a brief sprint.
Jeff Starr
Carl, the first time you asked me about clipless pedals, I told you
what I felt were the benefits for me. I hadposted on my experiences
with clipless pedals. That was my original point, we have gone over
this before.
If you personally rode with clipless pedals, for a reasonasble length
of time, then my guess is that your riding style doesn't benefit from
them.
For me, it seems like at least once or twice per ride, my feet would
have bounced off the pedals, from hitting unexpected bumps. I am a
special case, in that my right leg is artificial and clipping in was
one of the best things I ever did, in that regard. But, I know my
other foot would be dislodged on occasion, usually when I am riding
balls out.
I don' focus on pulling up, but when I do, I can get an immediate
speed increase.
I'm not trying to defend clipless, if someone asks, I'll share what I
think are the benefits. Maybe because I generally don't follow the
wheelbuilding threads, or most other threads that you seem to post in
again and again, so I don't know if you do this with other topics. It
isn't right, but I must admit that it bugs me, that you continue to
ask the same questions, and up until now, have offered no personal
experience. I trust my experiences, I trust my ears, I don't need to
see a bunch of tests, tables, and stats, to decide what works for me.
Back to your experiences, what kind of pedals, how long did you use
them, what bike [please tell me it wasn't on your walmart special],
are you an agressive rider, or do you just kind of putter along at
10-12mph?
What you should tell those physics students, is go do their own
research, when it comes to clipless pedals. This is one situation
where data, testing, and links, just isn't necessary.
My guess is is you would rather dance around in circles, on this, and
maybe other topics, than go out and do some riding. That is what this
is really about, enhancing the riding experience. I'm here to learn,
benefit, have a connection with others who like to ride. Not to play
academic games.
Life is Good!
Jeff
Luns Tee
<carl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>I was organizing my sprawling favorites folder just now, ran
>across this site, and found myself admiring this diagram:
>
>http://www.princeton.edu/~humcomp/bikes/hist/histo_27.htm
....
>That "impedance match" may include considerable wiggle room,
>but the text and diagram seem to suggest that there's
>downward force on the pedal for about 290 degrees of
>rotation (16/20 x 360) during all but very slow hill
>climbing, beginning about 20 degrees past top dead center
>and ending about 40 degrees before returning to it.
If you look at that diagram and think carefully, I think it's
reasonable to conclude that this pedal stroke isn't possible with some
sort of pedal attachment, be it clipless or clip/strap. Look around
15,16, and the angle between the force applied and the angle of the
shoe/pedal interface. The force is at an oblique angle which would
slip off the pedal if not for tread on the shoe catching the pedal
cage or some other such chance engagement.
-Luns
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>> I don't know of anybody that has actually tried clipless pedals
>> long enough to master the learning curve that would go back for any
>> other reason than you need special shoes. Either we're all dupes
>> of the vast marketing conspiracy, or they make riding faster,
>> easier and more comfortable.
> Any data or estimates on how much faster you ride due to clipless
> pedals?
That's like asking how much faster you can ride with a newer
derailleur or shift lever. There also, I doubt that anyone would
gladly switch to a Simplex derailleur of the 1960's.
I for one am glad to not ground pedals when cornering (road), to not
have broken toe clips, to not have loose straps, or for that matter
too tight straps just after pulling them up. Riding with street shoes
to the store is also nice without dragging toeclips.
Quite aside from that, I can climb steep hills and sprint without
having to worry about how to keep the feet attached to the pedal. Oh
and yes, how about attaching cleats to leather soled bicycle shoes?
Do you remember Duegi wooden soled shoes? I've go a few pair
collecting dust.
Booker C. Bense
In article <JJE6e.14194$m31.1...@typhoon.sonic.net>,
<jobst....@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
>
>However, I think you could add the threadless steertube as one of the
>great advances in bicycling and it came to us via the MTB:
_ How does it make riding easier or simpler other than by
simplifying maintenance?
>
>http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/threadless-headset.html
>
_ So did SPD style clipless pedals. MTB is basically the only
market large enough to drive "convenience" in gear vs. speed/light
weight. I've seen similar effects in skiing where the ease of use
and competition of snowboarding drove manufacturers to focus on
skis that average skiers could have fun on in less than perfect
conditions, whereas in the past they had just more or less made
copies of what the World cup racers were using.
_ 15 years ago, copies of racing skis inappropriate for most
skiers filled the shops and any kind of off track ski was
difficult to find. Now the situation is exactly reversed.
_ Booker C. Bense
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBQlwVJmTWTAjn5N/lAQGUuAQAkA/R3QvCQ/QdQj9md/iLHdWj8fEBajkQ
+9+4lU7cQ93VTe3sogbzCNLtCRtMEWjq3irSWZqsTj5HuU6cA/7vB/LPQTrkw+wj
WABd/fitD+0Ji2d3Pqynfw/id9NjJK+jkjE1+4pEqGb2tclxIccjFrGZIqklG6bH
+cP1N203bjM=
=pMgQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> Most measurements show that, no matter how it feels, we keep
> pressing down on the pedal (not pulling up) as it passes bottom dead
> center and climbs back up on the back half of the pedal cycle,
> almost to the top.
> Here's what seems to be a typical result of testing:
http://www.princeton.edu/~humcomp/bikes/hist/histo_27.htm
> The rider is still pushing down, not pulling up, for over half of a
> normal-speed backstroke.
I think the assessment of what constitutes "pressing down" and dead
weight is confused here. The best way of returning the foot (and leg)
to the top of the next stroke is to let it ride balanced with the
downward weight of the other foot. It seems that every analysis I see
ignores that two feet on pedals, chain removed, are balanced and
require no force to rotate other than a light bias on the downward
foot. Ignoring the counterbalance of the other foot confuses this
issue endlessly.
> Maybe training would change this, but I'm still waiting for someone
> to come up with something showing an actual power increase over bare
> pedals or toe-clips for steady riding, as opposed to very slow, very
> steep, very short climbs. (I'm kind of surprised that no one is
> pointing me to some kind of power testing.)
Yes, I'm all for this. Train researchers to collect all the data and
we might get a better picture.
> I'm also waiting for something other than obvious attempts to make
> theory justify preference concerning safety.
I mentioned in a previous response that mechanically, clips and straps
were a patch for a shoe to pedal attachment. Cinelli first put that
to a test in production, with his track shoes that were manually
locked to the pedals. These things are not done as idle exercises.
If you ski you may recall the Kandahar binding that preceded Look
step-in bindings. The way you present these advances, I guess you
would ski with leg breaking Kandahar bindings (somethng they often
did).
> But I do appreciate your main point, which is that your pedals feel
> more comfortable (smoother?) to you. I don't doubt that we all feel
> that one kind of pedal feels better than another. I'm just wondering
> whether there's anything more than feel to it.
Oh pshaw! I rode enough with clips and straps to never think of going
back to them and it's not just for comfort.
> For fun, browse through this thread and replace "clipless" with
> "tie-and-solder" or "tread pattern".
That's far fetched. Just the same those items have been technically
proven to have no use. You could also go back to bias ply car tires.
Booker C. Bense
In article <4tbm51pebbut9npiq...@4ax.com>,
<carl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>Dear Booker,
>
>Any data or estimates on how much faster you ride due to
>clipless pedals?
>
_ I guess I save at least 15 seconds at every stop sign
over clips and straps. I go a bit faster in traffic since
I don't have to be as concerned about getting my feet out
in event of emergency. I haven't ridden without some
kind of foot attachment since I got my first ten speed
in 1972 and given that I tend to drop my heels a lot
I have a lot of trouble now trying to ride fast without
some kind of attachment.
_ Maybe next time I'm stuck on the bicyles at the gym I'll
try some experiments.
_ Booker C. Bense
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBQlwYBGTWTAjn5N/lAQH62AQAhYpAJyUvinTbjF1YKJv3Y0XfVQHT0lBR
abBJxnBl/61yUsOQYXVIDc0QsjiKzcEIfiiUw//qZntk5oFP/tJs2NsYQp2ChhVi
H51kneenay1+YEWYlufBmB8mmzyfQDQRCW6MifKLiVHF7o3fG+HmePCuS0bcd3BV
UFeAX19+1/I=
=ov/o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Art Harris
> Do you remember Duegi wooden soled shoes? I've go a few pair
> collecting dust.
Hey, I've got a pair of those gathering dust too. Talk about difficult
to walk in! They used to hurt my feet when just standing around for a
few minutes.
Art Harris
carl...@comcast.net
<bbense+rec.bicycl...@telemark.slac.stanford.edu>
wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>In article <4tbm51pebbut9npiq...@4ax.com>,
> <carl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>Dear Booker,
>>
>>Any data or estimates on how much faster you ride due to
>>clipless pedals?
>>
>
>_ I guess I save at least 15 seconds at every stop sign
>over clips and straps. I go a bit faster in traffic since
>I don't have to be as concerned about getting my feet out
>in event of emergency. I haven't ridden without some
>kind of foot attachment since I got my first ten speed
>in 1972 and given that I tend to drop my heels a lot
>I have a lot of trouble now trying to ride fast without
>some kind of attachment.
>
>_ Maybe next time I'm stuck on the bicyles at the gym I'll
>try some experiments.
>
>_ Booker C. Bense
Dear Booker,
I'm sorry--my question wasn't clear.
Any data or estimates on how much faster you ride due to
clipless pedals versus bare pedals (not toe-clips)?
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Jobst,
Sorry, but I don't see anything beyond how you feel--not
data, testing, times, forces, or anything technical.
If it's just comfort, fine.
But there are usually claims about clipless pedals offering
improved safety and speed under general conditions, not just
for a few moments during sprints or for very short climbs up
very steep hills.
It's odd that something claimed to be so unquestionably
superior keeps coming up with little more than "feel" as an
explanation.
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Luns,
I think that the test itself implies that the shoe was
attached to the pedal--the text explains that they were
looking into whether a rider could "pull up" on the pedal.
Since few riders find rubber-soled shoes sliding off bare,
serrated pedals, I expect that you're right and that the
tread on the shoe would catch the pedal.
Carl Fogel
davek
> Ignoring the counterbalance of the other foot confuses this
> issue endlessly.
That's what I was trying to say, only much more elegantly put.
But I don't think we're ever going to satisfy Carl unless we get our
measuring equipment out and give him some hard data. Trouble is, I
wouldn't know what measuring equipment to use, nor how to use it, so I'm
stuck with what I "feel". But that's fine - it suits me. Sorry, Carl!
d.
Benjamin Lewis
> Carl Fogel writes:
>
>>> I don't know of anybody that has actually tried clipless pedals
>>> long enough to master the learning curve that would go back for any
>>> other reason than you need special shoes. Either we're all dupes
>>> of the vast marketing conspiracy, or they make riding faster,
>>> easier and more comfortable.
>
>> Any data or estimates on how much faster you ride due to clipless
>> pedals?
>
> That's like asking how much faster you can ride with a newer
> derailleur or shift lever. There also, I doubt that anyone would
> gladly switch to a Simplex derailleur of the 1960's.
I didn't see Carl challenge the claims that clipless pedals make riding
easier or more comfortable. Aren't these good enough reasons without
throwing in "faster"?
--
Benjamin Lewis
Evelyn the dog, having undergone further modification, pondered the
significance of short-person behavior in pedal-depressed panchromatic
resonance and other highly ambient domains... "Arf", she said.
Sandy
news:3c2r2oF...@individual.net...
Carl was getting to bore me, too. So, in the past couple of days, I noted,
on very short trips to the grocery and bakery, speeds over a very short 1.5
km course. Weather the same all the time. Bike the same. Footwear, Sidi
Energy or Nike running shoes, with Time RXE pedals. No stop lights, and no
stop signs. No traffic.
Average speed (5 trips) 26.1 km/h with the Sidis ; 20.2 (4 trips) km/h with
the sneakers. There are two 90 degree turns, and they are taken faster (and
much more securely) with the Sidis. I was not trying to do anything
different, and there was no urgency to any of the trips. What other factors
will you bring up to demonstrate that this was only a feeling, a bad guess,
prevailing winds, weight of parcels carried, pretty women to distract me,
the poor tread pattern of the Nike shoes, the foot-to-sock-to-shoe-to-pedal
interactions ?
The only more controlled comparison I can think of would be single sided SPD
pedals with the same shoes. Since they must all be on close-out, perhaps
you want to invest in this experiment ?
No, Carl, I won't be taking trips of 120 km without the cleated shoes ; not
for the sake of your silly question. A silly one, because you apparently
aren't willing, yourself, to take a few trips to satisfy your overwhelming
curiosity. Or is that the pride in your Fury Roadmaster showing ?
Now that I offered something in reply, will you tell us what pedal systems
you have used over a long time, over long courses or short ? Do you own
solid soled cycling shoes ? Do you have anything to say at all about this
subject, other than to kibbitz about activities unknown to you ? What has
been offered by other writers is really very common knowledge, some of which
it is time you acquired.
--
Bonne route,
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
Luns Tee
<carl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>I think that the test itself implies that the shoe was
>attached to the pedal--the text explains that they were
>looking into whether a rider could "pull up" on the pedal.
>
>Since few riders find rubber-soled shoes sliding off bare,
>serrated pedals, I expect that you're right and that the
>tread on the shoe would catch the pedal.
I think it's more that the unattached-shoe rider rides with a
different pedal stroke from what one uses when attached. I think too
much attention has been on pulling up on the upstroke, and not enough on
pulling back at the bottom. Pulling through the bottom is something
one does quite naturally when clipped in and able to do so, even
though nothing forces you to do it - a pedal stroke suitable for
unattached feet works just fine with the feet attached too, but my own
experience is that the body gravitates towards a different stroke when
given the option.
For sustained moderate to high power, being able to pull
around the bottom and up the back is helpful. I won't argue whether
it's any more efficient, but I find that for sustained efforts -
especially when your legs are tired - being able to switch from
primarily mashing down, to concentrating on pulling up, or other
variations can be helpful: you can shift the work over to less tired
muscles and keep going longer. It's not unlike changing your grip on
the handlebars to keep your hands from going numb.
The other advantage to being attached is the obvious
improvement in maximum force you can exert for a sprint or when you
run out of gears. It might not be relevant most of the time you're
riding, but the times that it does become relevant, it's liberating to
not have to consider the ceiling of putting all your weight on one
pedal and how far you have to hold back from that to not have the
other foot slip, and instead only be limited only by your own strength.
You can back away from this with lower gearing and a higher
cadence, but at the other end of that spectrum, feet like to fly off of
pedals at high cadences too, when you have less time to coordinate what
all your muscles are doing. Foot attachment relieves you from having to
give this any thought at all.
-Luns
carl...@comcast.net
wrote:
>"davek" <dwke...@btopenworld.com> a écrit dans le message de :
>news:3c2r2oF...@individual.net...
>> jobst brandt wrote:
>>> Ignoring the counterbalance of the other foot confuses this
>>> issue endlessly.
>>
>> That's what I was trying to say, only much more elegantly put.
>>
>> But I don't think we're ever going to satisfy Carl unless we get our
>> measuring equipment out and give him some hard data. Trouble is, I
>> wouldn't know what measuring equipment to use, nor how to use it, so I'm
>> stuck with what I "feel". But that's fine - it suits me. Sorry, Carl!
>
>Carl was getting to bore me, too. So, in the past couple of days, I noted,
>on very short trips to the grocery and bakery, speeds over a very short 1.5
>km course. Weather the same all the time. Bike the same. Footwear, Sidi
>Energy or Nike running shoes, with Time RXE pedals. No stop lights, and no
>stop signs. No traffic.
>
>Average speed (5 trips) 26.1 km/h with the Sidis ; 20.2 (4 trips) km/h with
>the sneakers. There are two 90 degree turns, and they are taken faster (and
>much more securely) with the Sidis. I was not trying to do anything
>different, and there was no urgency to any of the trips. What other factors
>will you bring up to demonstrate that this was only a feeling, a bad guess,
>prevailing winds, weight of parcels carried, pretty women to distract me,
>the poor tread pattern of the Nike shoes, the foot-to-sock-to-shoe-to-pedal
>interactions ?
[snip]
Dear Sandy,
You seem to be saying that using clipless pedals instead of
plain shoes increased your speed from 20.0 to 26.1 km/h over
a 1.5 kilometer course.
Do you feel that a 30% speed increase is typical? That
Armstrong, for example, would average only 19 mph instead of
25 mph in the Tour de France?
It's short enough that you may actually be sprinting and
pulling up impressively, but are you really arguing that
people are wearing clipless pedals for 1.5 km sprints? Or
that anyone needs to pull up and sprint to average 16 mph
for 1.5 km?
After all, 20.0 km/h is only about 12.5 mph. You mention "no
urgency" and yet speak of taking corners faster and
safer--at speeds averaging 12 versus 16 mph over a very
short course (less than a mile).
A typical calculator predicts that on flat ground, a steady
20 km/h on the drops for the defaults requires only 58
watts, while 26.1 km/h takes 104 watts:
http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
Can you see why I'm a bit skeptical? You mention no hill,
say there was no urgency, and pedal less than a mile, but
you're doing only 12 mph on a bicycle and talking about
improved cornering speeds? Many high-school runners would
have passed you on foot.
I'll be fascinated to see if others confirm your theory that
it was your pedals that slowed you down so impressively.
Carl Fogel
RonSonic
We'll never know because, and this is the important fact, Lance won't go further
than the corner store without 'em. Just like the rest of us.
>It's short enough that you may actually be sprinting and
>pulling up impressively, but are you really arguing that
>people are wearing clipless pedals for 1.5 km sprints? Or
>that anyone needs to pull up and sprint to average 16 mph
>for 1.5 km?
>
>After all, 20.0 km/h is only about 12.5 mph. You mention "no
>urgency" and yet speak of taking corners faster and
>safer--at speeds averaging 12 versus 16 mph over a very
>short course (less than a mile).
>
>A typical calculator predicts that on flat ground, a steady
>20 km/h on the drops for the defaults requires only 58
>watts, while 26.1 km/h takes 104 watts:
>
>http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
>
>Can you see why I'm a bit skeptical? You mention no hill,
>say there was no urgency, and pedal less than a mile, but
>you're doing only 12 mph on a bicycle and talking about
>improved cornering speeds? Many high-school runners would
>have passed you on foot.
>
>I'll be fascinated to see if others confirm your theory that
>it was your pedals that slowed you down so impressively.
You're asking why we have bucket seats and harnesses instead of milk crates and
lap belts and demanding lap times to demonstrate the utility.
Ron
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>> Do you remember Duegi wooden soled shoes? I've go a few pair
>> collecting dust.
> Hey, I've got a pair of those gathering dust too. Talk about
> difficult to walk in! They used to hurt my feet when just standing
> around for a few minutes.
Yes, but why did we do that. That's the question and my answer is
that shoes and cleats were so poor in use that this was a rigid sole
that allowed standing on pedals without flex and hot spots at the
cleat... and they cleats didn't come loose. In those days riders
exchanged secrets of how to screw cleats onto leather soled bicycle
shoes and the like.
Those were the days and I hope not to revisit the equipment.
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> Sorry, but I don't see anything beyond how you feel--not data,
> testing, times, forces, or anything technical.
> If it's just comfort, fine.
> But there are usually claims about clipless pedals offering improved
> safety and speed under general conditions, not just for a few
> moments during sprints or for very short climbs up very steep hills.
> It's odd that something claimed to be so unquestionably superior
> keeps coming up with little more than "feel" as an explanation.
That may be your interpretation of what has been said on the subject
but that isn't what I and others wrote. I explained what the features
are and what benefits they have, but you choose to interpret that as
"feel"... followed by the usual insinuations and leading questions.
How about posting something that you understand and know instead of
sneaking around posing obtuse questions.
Booker C. Bense
In article <0tao51ttoqfq85ddj...@4ax.com>,
<carl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>Dear Booker,
>
>I'm sorry--my question wasn't clear.
_ Actually your question was perfectly clear. I was being
obstinate.
>
>Any data or estimates on how much faster you ride due to
>clipless pedals versus bare pedals (not toe-clips)?
>
_ 50 percent. When I ride my cruiser bike without straps, I'm
pretty happy to do 12 mph. Generally I do about 18 mph on flat
ground with my other bikes. That's about the best answer you'll
get because it's a pointless question. It's like asking
"How much faster do you run when you walk?"
_ Clipless pedals are just a tool and won't magically make you go
faster. If you use that tool to transform your pedaling style you
might go faster and longer or not, but it's 100% guaranteed that
you won't go much if any faster just by switching to clipless
pedals. For me the big difference is cadence, there is just no
way I can ride 80-90 rpm for hours at a stretch without some kind
of foot attachment.
_ If you think about it, it's impossible to ride a bike without
some kind of lateral force holding the foot to the pedal. You can
either create that force with friction or with a mechanical
catch. If you use friction based methods, you have to keep at
least a minimal downward normal force on the pedal all the way
around the stroke to keep your feet on the pedals. Pushing down
on the upstroke doesn't make the bike go any faster.
_ Booker C. Bense
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBQlxzY2TWTAjn5N/lAQF8UgQAjRwZrhmuKWoLSqEZpskyBSIdFGHFax6/
P8UPO1u91AfoyVHsPW/rjXeVgPpQKJcVI+xB0AOdJG8c7Cafg4u27xcb9tKTS3RU
uvG4HfFdqeAq2eAgy6M5pXN6z5PoYLqCfHu8VpYMS3j4t+/HIvMh/JB7geh1fraq
+w/HxIO6Ets=
=f3K+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
Don't be misled, measurements and date would not change anything.
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Ron,
Do you think that the efficiency of clipless pedals alone
over bare pedals will raise a rider's average speed for
Sandy's non-urgent mile 30% from 12 mph to 16 mph?
Or do you think that there might be a more likely
explanation?
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
<bbense+rec.bicycl...@telemark.slac.stanford.edu>
wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>In article <0tao51ttoqfq85ddj...@4ax.com>,
> <carl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>Dear Booker,
[snip]
>>Any data or estimates on how much faster you ride due to
>>clipless pedals versus bare pedals (not toe-clips)?
>
>_ 50 percent. When I ride my cruiser bike without straps, I'm
>pretty happy to do 12 mph. Generally I do about 18 mph on flat
>ground with my other bikes.
[snip]
Dear Booker,
Hmmm . . . Sandy only claims a 30% speed increase from 12
mph due to clipless pedals, but you get 50%.
So the pedals on your cruiser bike are what slow you down
33% (from 18 mph to 12 mph) compared to your other bikes?
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Dave,
With Sandy claiming easily measured 30% speed increases in
mild riding due to clipless pedals, it's a puzzle why such
an advantage can't be measured by numerous other posters.
It's fun to compare some of the claims coming up now in this
thread about the advantages of clipless pedals with what the
same posters had to say about Power Cranks and Rotor Cranks.
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Jobst,
Got any believable measurements or data showing significant
increases in efficiency in normal riding for clipless pedals
versus bare pedals?
If you do, they'd change my mind.
Do you consider Sandy's claim of a 30% average speed
increase from 12 to 16 mph due to clipless pedals for a
non-urgent 1-mile ride to be credible?
Or Booker's claim of a 50% speed increase from 12 to 18 mph
due to clipless pedals?
Carl Fogel
RonSonic
If he were accustomed to driving while sitting atop a milk crate it might not
slow him down that much. But I'm sure he's been spoilt by the comfort and secure
feeling of bucket seats.
Perhaps we should perfome a series of ergonomic experiments upon Sandy and see
if the effect of changing other aspects of the bike has as great an effect as
that of using an inferior pedaling system. We could turn the saddle around and
marvel at how much slower he goes even over a short distance where comfort
shouldn't be an issue. Perhaps install his cranks at 90 degrees instead of 180.
Surely it couldn't be _that_ big a deal. How about if we turn his fork around
and reinstall the handlbars so he has shopping cart trail. Would that slow him
this much.
Unfortunately, you are not going to get a lot of actual measurements on this for
want of anyone willing to subject themselves to the test. Perhaps you need to
see about a grant to study this.
Ron
RonSonic
Those are entirely credible. They aren't the result of a scientific test of the
effectiveness of clipless pedals, but they are very probable observations. My
mountain bike was similarly slower before I installed the pedals.
Face it. If you want numbers on this one you'll have to get them yourself. This
is the kind of conversation I've had about narrow road bike saddles with people
who've never spent enough time on one to understand. Clips and straps cost
peanuts and are worth 96% of the benefits try 'em and tell us.
Ron
carl...@comcast.net
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Ron,
So you find claims of 30% speed increases in ordinary riding
due to using clipless pedals to be credible?
Carl Fogel
Jeff Starr
>
>
>It's fun to compare some of the claims coming up now in this
>thread about the advantages of clipless pedals with what the
>same posters had to say about Power Cranks and Rotor Cranks.
>
>Carl Fogel
Hey Carl, I asked you a series of questions, about your experiences
with clipless pedals. Why won't you answer my questions? I see that
since I posted those questions, you have found time to ask both Ron
and Jobst, if they agree with Sandy's findings.
You are starting to remind me of a little kid, who keeps asking "why?"
Just so you don't have to look for my other post, here are the
questions again:
>Back to your experiences, what kind of pedals, how long did you use
>them, what bike [please tell me it wasn't on your walmart special],
>are you an agressive rider, or do you just kind of putter along at
>10-12mph?
1- what kind of pedals?
2- how long did you use them?
3- what bike?
4- are you an agressive rider, or do you just kind of putter along at
10-12mph?
And to add to the above questions, what kind of tests, research, and
evaluation have you done to decide that there are no benefits to
clipless pedals? Where is the link to your data?
I look forward to your answers.
Life is Good!
Jeff
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> Do you think that the efficiency of clipless pedals alone over bare
> pedals will raise a rider's average speed for Sandy's non-urgent
> mile 30% from 12 mph to 16 mph?
Questions... questions... questions...
Why don't you try it. I can say for sure that I get a 50% increase in
speed from my house to the store in the downtown where I live. It is
a bike messenger scene with traffic lights at every corner over a net
diagonal course with left and right turns in congested traffic. With
street shoes I can't do many of the dodges and weaves that I can with
my SPD shoes nor can I accelerate worth a damn.
The way you ask, it sounds as though you don't have a bicycle on which
to assess these things, or at least don't ride it with aplomb. Do it!
and report back... and don't wear out the "?" key on you KBD.
Andy Heninger
> So you find claims of 30% speed increases in ordinary riding
> due to using clipless pedals to be credible?
I keep an older road bike at my office with pedals that are clipless on
one side and plain - not sure of the right term, but just a serrated
frame for street shoes - on the other.
I regularly ride it both ways.
Overall speed differences are, for me, negligible. I can easily run my
self out of wind with or without being clipped in. Subjectively, effort
for a given speed doesn't noticeably vary. No big difference that I can
see either in occasional short (around a mile) impromptu chases with a
coworker coming back from lunch.
Accelerating from a stop in a relatively high gear is easier while
attached - you can pull up. I'm sure any kind of a sprint is faster
while attached. But this doesn't have much of any effect on any sort of
normal riding, or any effort that lasts for more than about 15 seconds.
I do like the clipless pedals (this is confusing, both sides are
"clipless") as opposed to being unattached, better, though. With no
chance of bouncing a foot off the pedal, it seems like my legs and feet
stay more relaxed. You can pull up if you want - I don't normally, but
it's handy when starting out from a stop. I like being able to stand up
without first checking that my feet are still halfway reasonably
centered on the pedals. I like being able to pull the pedal up while
stopped by just lifting my foot.
-- Andy Heninger
an...@barbwired.com
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Jeff,
What I ride and have ridden is immaterial to the original
question "What are the benefits of clipless pedals?"
I've never claimed any benefits for them. Usually, it's up
to the people who claim that things are perfectly obvious to
back their claims up.
So far, I'm still waiting.
At this point, the only specific claims made in support of
the advantages of clipless pedals are from Booker and Sandy,
who state that they go 30%-50% faster at their ordinary
speeds due to clipless pedals (12 mph with plain pedals,
16-18 mph with clipless).
Is this what you consider credible support?
I'm doing the "research" by asking if anyone has any
evidence other than the seat of their pants and prior
convictions.
Some people feel that clipless pedals are more comfortable
than plain. Fine with me--de gustibus non est disputandum.
Some people claim that clipless pedals are safer than plain,
but I've yet to see anything beyond "feel" and theory in
support of this claim.
Some people claim that clipless pedals might have a slight
increase in efficiency (I recall Peter Cole's sensible post
on the matter). But if it's too slight to measure, then it's
just a theory little better than Rotor Cranks or Power
Cranks.
If it takes special circumstances (wild sprinting or
extremely steep, short climbs), then something is odd when
people like Sandy and Booker, just cruising along at 16-18
mph, claim that they're going 30-50% faster due to their
pedals.
Please don't repeat your usual claims to have answered
everything--take a line or two and tell us if you think that
clipless versus plain pedals are responsible for 12 versus
16-18 mph as Sandy and Booker believe.
If you expect even more from clipless pedals, feel free to
give some details--do they double a rider's speed?
If you expect less than the fascinating 30-50% speed
increases, I sympathize, but no one is trying to hold you
responsible for the advantages that others claim.
What other kind of physical effect is so obvious,
unquestionable, and so amazingly hard to support?
Do any bicycle speed calculators on the internet even
mention pedal type?
I'm willing to be convinced that there are advantages, but
address the question. Ad hominem attacks, physics by
popularity and custom, and an unwillingness to address
specifically claimed speed increases aren't convincing.
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Jobst,
So you feel that there's a 50% increase in speed when you
use clipless pedals in heavy stop-and-go traffic due to
acceleration and cornering?
You say that you "can say this for sure"--any actual times
comparing plain pedals on the same bike versus clipless?
No offence is intended, but when did you last "do it" with
plain pedals on the same bike and time yourself on a
familiar route?
You do make more sense that some recent posts from others in
that you're specifying a frequent acceleration from a stop
or near stop, where pulling up might help, and adding
considerable dodging and weaving (drat, sorry, couldn't help
that).
But do you consider this heavy-traffic stop-and-go riding
typical of your last 200,000 miles? My impression was that
most of your riding is ordinary touring, not playing bicycle
messenger to get to the store.
Carl Fogel
Sandy
news:oclo51144t2tp3sc8...@4ax.com...
> Dear Sandy,
>
> Can you see why I'm a bit skeptical?
No. Not about me. But the swell of opinion directs lots of doubt in your
direction. For a guy who asks these questions, do you really want us to
believe you have rolled down a 2 mile incline at 54 miles an hour ? Or was
that off a cliff ? Or only imaginary. Frankly, directly, I don't believe
you.
> You mention no hill,
> say there was no urgency, and pedal less than a mile, but
> you're doing only 12 mph on a bicycle and talking about
> improved cornering speeds? Many high-school runners would
> have passed you on foot.
You fail to belittle me. Nice try - not.
> I'll be fascinated to see if others confirm your theory that
> it was your pedals that slowed you down so impressively.
You get no rise from me, with this puerile sarcasm. And who said pedals ?
I'm actually surprised at your lack of reading skill. As usual, you are
unable to do much more than be snitty. Mr Brandt suggests you get on a
bike. I second that. Have you ever answered the questions put to you ?
No. Do you have any *proof* to offer that you ever got on a bike ? Not
really. Is all the blather you write your perverse interpretation of Walter
Mitty the pseudo-journalist ? Were you stumped by the facts, needing to
attack them sideways and inelegantly ?
Your shoes ? Or do you just latch on with untrimmed toenails ? Give it up.
You have plunged well beyond the bounds of believability.
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Andy,
I agree that the terms are prone to misunderstanding--I'm
using bare for no-connection, presumably serrated pedals,
clips for toe-clip-and-strap, and clipless for what most
people use, the twist-in-and-out cleats.
Some of the fuss elsewhere in this thread may be due to
emphasis, which you address. While you see little difference
in general results, other riders are now explaining in more
detail that they feel that the advantages of clipless in
pull-up acceleration and handling contribute to much greater
messenger-bike style riding in heavy traffic. Jobst is
saying that he's sure that he goes 50% faster clipless--but
he specifies this somewhat special messenger-bike
heavy-traffic situation, not ordinary touring.
You find clipless more comfortable, and I see no reason to
question that. What's particularly interesting is that you
use both methods fairly often on the same bike--your
experience makes the best argument for comfort that I've
seen.
I do like two minor points that you make. Maybe they've been
made before, but I don't remember when.
First, your point about pull-up helping when trying to
accelerate in a high gear. Seems reasonable.
Second, your point about being able to pull the pedal up a
little more easily when stopped. I doubt that plain pedal
riders have little trouble doing the same thing, but I can
see what you're thinking--the pedal must follow the foot
backward without any fuss whatsoever.
Thanks,
Carl Fogel
davek
> With Sandy claiming easily measured 30% speed increases in
> mild riding due to clipless pedals, it's a puzzle why such
> an advantage can't be measured by numerous other posters.
OK, in those rough terms it's not hard to work out vague measurements,
but I thought you were after something more scientific.
So, how's this for you: I knocked something like five minutes off my
average time for my six mile commute to work when I fitted clipless
pedals - down from around 30 minutes to around 25 minutes. What's that
as an improvement in percentage terms - around 17%? Will that do for
you?
That's on an urban journey, not pushing hard, stopping at traffic
lights, a few upward gradients but no real hills to speak of. Maybe
there are other factors in the improvement that I haven't accounted
for, but if you are telling me that I don't get to work faster since I
fitted clipless pedals, you are just plain wrong.
d.
Jeff Starr
Carl, you stated that you have tried clipless and found no benefits.
Many of us are of the belief that the benefits, go with out saying.
You are in the minority here, telling us they have no measurable
benefits[that you are aware of]. The original question, in this thread
was how to mount the pedal hardware. These threads evolve, I think you
should just answer my questions. Or, am I to assume that you don't
have any experience with clipless. You like facts, give me some facts
on your experiences.
I believe bicycle performance calculators don't bother with pedal
info, because the use of a pedal retension system is a given. Do you
know of anyone who raced in the TdF, who didn't use a clipless pedal?
When people point out benefits for climbing or short sprints, you poo
poo that as not being normal riding. Every ride I go on, involves some
balls out riding. To me it is normal.
It seems to me that you are basing your experiences as proof that they
have no benefits. As I said before, YOU are in the minority here, most
people who try clipless and learn to use them, like them. They find
the hassles of special shoes and adjustments, worth it. That says
something, right there.
Don't you trust your own findings? Just answer my questions and we can
move on.
To quote you "So far, I'm still waiting."
Life is Good!
Jeff
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>>> Do you think that the efficiency of clipless pedals alone over
>>> bare pedals will raise a rider's average speed for Sandy's
>>> non-urgent mile 30% from 12 mph to 16 mph?
>> Questions... questions... questions...
>> Why don't you try it. I can say for sure that I get a 50% increase
>> in speed from my house to the store in the downtown where I live.
>> It is a bike messenger scene with traffic lights at every corner
>> over a net diagonal course with left and right turns in congested
>> traffic. With street shoes I can't do many of the dodges and
>> weaves that I can with my SPD shoes nor can I accelerate worth a
>> damn.
>> The way you ask, it sounds as though you don't have a bicycle on
>> which to assess these things, or at least don't ride it with
>> aplomb. Do it! and report back... and don't wear out the "?" key
>> on you KBD.
> So you feel that there's a 50% increase in speed when you use
> clipless pedals in heavy stop-and-go traffic due to acceleration and
> cornering?
> You say that you "can say this for sure"--any actual times comparing
> plain pedals on the same bike versus clipless?
> No offence is intended, but when did you last "do it" with plain
> pedals on the same bike and time yourself on a familiar route?
As I said, I jump on the bicycle with street shoes on occasion when
I'm not in a hurry and ride to the store a mile away. The times are
obvious and speeds as well. I don't use a stop but the difference is
striking in missed traffic lights and stalls.
> You do make more sense that some recent posts from others in that
> you're specifying a frequent acceleration from a stop or near stop,
> where pulling up might help, and adding considerable dodging and
> weaving (drat, sorry, couldn't help that).
> But do you consider this heavy-traffic stop-and-go riding typical of
> your last 200,000 miles? My impression was that most of your riding
> is ordinary touring, not playing bicycle messenger to get to the
> store.
So? What does that have to do with the subject at hand? You asked
whether I believe that another rider got a 30% increase in speed. I
do. Now what?
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>>> Do you think that the efficiency of clipless pedals alone over
>>> bare pedals will raise a rider's average speed for Sandy's
>>> non-urgent mile 30% from 12 mph to 16 mph?
>> Questions... questions... questions...
>> Why don't you try it. I can say for sure that I get a 50% increase
>> in speed from my house to the store in the downtown where I live.
>> It is a bike messenger scene with traffic lights at every corner
>> over a net diagonal course with left and right turns in congested
>> traffic. With street shoes I can't do many of the dodges and
>> weaves that I can with my SPD shoes nor can I accelerate worth a
>> damn.
>> The way you ask, it sounds as though you don't have a bicycle on
>> which to assess these things, or at least don't ride it with
>> aplomb. Do it! and report back... and don't wear out the "?" key
>> on you KBD.
> So you feel that there's a 50% increase in speed when you use
> clipless pedals in heavy stop-and-go traffic due to acceleration and
> cornering?
> You say that you "can say this for sure"--any actual times comparing
> plain pedals on the same bike versus clipless?
> No offence is intended, but when did you last "do it" with plain
> pedals on the same bike and time yourself on a familiar route?
As I said, I jump on the bicycle with street shoes on occasion when
I'm not in a hurry and ride to the store a mile away. The times are
obvious and speeds as well. I don't use a stopwatch but the
difference is striking in missed traffic lights and stalls.
> You do make more sense that some recent posts from others in that
> you're specifying a frequent acceleration from a stop or near stop,
> where pulling up might help, and adding considerable dodging and
> weaving (drat, sorry, couldn't help that).
> But do you consider this heavy-traffic stop-and-go riding typical of
> your last 200,000 miles? My impression was that most of your riding
> is ordinary touring, not playing bicycle messenger to get to the
> store.
So? What does that have to do with the subject at hand? You asked
Sheldon Brown
>
>> Track events are generally quite short, so comfort is rarely an issue
>> in any aspect of track racing.
>
davek responded:
>
> Sounds a plausible explanation. I have no experience of track cycling so
> any comment I might make is pure supposition.
>
> I did notice, however, at the recent World Championships in Manchester
> that some riders were using clipless, so maybe fashion is catching up
> there too.
There is quite a variety of different "track" events, so it's sometimes
dangerous to generalize...
The most _popular_ track events are sprints. These typically involve
explosive accelleration from a very low speed. Sprints put more stress
on bicycles than any other type of activity done on a smooth surface.
Sprinters typically _do_ pull up on the down pedal, at least in the
early part of the surge, and are at relatively high risk for yanking a
foot off of a pedal.
However, other track events, such as time trials and pursuits are about
sustained, steady-state power at high speed. These events have no more
risk of cleat disengagement than any road event, and they also are
longer than sprints. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see
clipless pedals used for this sort of event.
Sheldon "All Generalizations Are False" Brown
+---------------------------------------------------+
| The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
| Curiosity has its own reason for existing. |
| --Albert Einstein |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
Mike Latondresse
news:h4vo51pgak7mtd4bn...@4ax.com:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 01:18:00 GMT,
> jobst....@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>
>>Dave Kenning writes:
>>
>>>> Ignoring the counterbalance of the other foot confuses this
>>>> issue endlessly.
>>
>>> That's what I was trying to say, only much more elegantly put.
>>
>>> But I don't think we're ever going to satisfy Carl unless we get
>>> our measuring equipment out and give him some hard data.
>>> Trouble is, I wouldn't know what measuring equipment to use, nor
>>> how to use it, so I'm stuck with what I "feel". But that's fine
>>> - it suits me. Sorry, Carl!
>>
>>Don't be misled, measurements and date would not change anything.
>>
>>Jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>
> Dear Jobst,
>
> Got any believable measurements or data showing significant
> increases in efficiency in normal riding for clipless pedals
> versus bare pedals?
>
> If you do, they'd change my mind.
>
Carl, who wants you to change your mind specially if doing so
involves this much (and more) effort. Just ride what you are happy
with.
Benjamin Lewis
> Carl, you stated that you have tried clipless and found no benefits.
> Many of us are of the belief that the benefits, go with out saying.
> You are in the minority here, telling us they have no measurable
> benefits[that you are aware of].
That seems reasonable to me -- I haven't seen any measurements either.
I also think these claims of 30%-50% speed increases are exaggerated at
best, although perhaps for some riding conditions they could be true
(e.g. with traffic lights, small changes in acceleration can make large
changes in average speed depending on light timing).
Personally, I don't care if clipless pedals are faster, because I'm not
going back to plain pedals either way, and because maximizing speed is not
my primary goal.
--
Benjamin Lewis
Evelyn the dog, having undergone further modification, pondered the
significance of short-person behavior in pedal-depressed panchromatic
resonance and other highly ambient domains... "Arf", she said.
Benjamin Lewis
> <carl...@comcast.net>a écrit dans le message de :
>
>> Dear Sandy,
>>
>> Can you see why I'm a bit skeptical?
>
> No. Not about me. But the swell of opinion directs lots of doubt in
> your direction. For a guy who asks these questions, do you really want
> us to believe you have rolled down a 2 mile incline at 54 miles an hour ?
> Or was that off a cliff ? Or only imaginary. Frankly, directly, I don't
> believe you.
I don't see where he says this, but I don't find it hard to believe at
all. I've reached speeds over 57 MPH coasting down a hill just a little
longer than this of approximately 8% grade. (This may have involved a
tail wind).
Lou Holtman
> Sandy wrote:
>
>
>><carl...@comcast.net>a écrit dans le message de :
>>
>>
>>>Dear Sandy,
>>>
>>>Can you see why I'm a bit skeptical?
>>
>>No. Not about me. But the swell of opinion directs lots of doubt in
>>your direction. For a guy who asks these questions, do you really want
>>us to believe you have rolled down a 2 mile incline at 54 miles an hour ?
>>Or was that off a cliff ? Or only imaginary. Frankly, directly, I don't
>>believe you.
>
>
> I don't see where he says this, but I don't find it hard to believe at
> all. I've reached speeds over 57 MPH coasting down a hill just a little
> longer than this of approximately 8% grade. (This may have involved a
> tail wind).
>
I find that very hard to believe..
Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu