[CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 3, Issue 89


From: "Stephen Barner" <steve@sburl.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <CATFOODWektquRxmbG700000e8e@catfood.nt.phred.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 23:10:14 -0500
Subject: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 3, Issue 89

I'm having a hard time understanding this thread, as it doesn't match my limited experience in track riding. The crankset never got remotely close to the track, as the only way I could stay on the banked section was to go fast enough that I was almost perpendicular to the surface of the track. I've seen photos of riders doing track stands on the bank, and there one might need to be more perpendicular to the ground, but that sure wouldn't have been on a track like Montreal's!

That bit about keeping the drivetrain closer to the center of the track sure sounds like voodoo physics to me. If there is indeed any difference, I can't believe it's measurable under real-life conditions. Most track racing isn't about who is the fastest, anyway. It's who uses the most effective tactics.

Steve Barner, Bolton, Vermont. 50 degrees, a foot of snow on the ground, and 4 miles of dirt road. Total mudpit.


----- Original Message -----


>

\r?\n> Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 17:39:25 -0500

\r?\n> From: Martin Needleman <mrndlmn@toad.net>

\r?\n> To: "Mark A. Perkins" <bicyclemark@juno.com>

\r?\n> Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

\r?\n> Subject: Re: [CR] Now Montreal 76 'drome and left hand drive

\r?\n> Message-ID: <3E74FD1D.61BF11C1@toad.net>

\r?\n> References: <20030316.125316.-133881.1.bicyclemark@juno.com>

\r?\n> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

\r?\n> MIME-Version: 1.0

\r?\n> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

\r?\n> Precedence: list

\r?\n> Message: 19

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Mark,

\r?\n>

\r?\n> You're correct. This _was_ one of Pino's arguments for left hand drive,

\r?\n> however, so I suspect that reversing the threads on the cog and lockring

\r?\n> was not all there was to it in terms of modification. His second

\r?\n> argument is true without doubt but there's a question in my mind as to

\r?\n> its significance. Argument two is that the chain, chainring, cog and

\r?\n> lockring being now closer to the center of the track, during the race

\r?\n> their weight is moved for a smaller distance than if they

\r?\n> were on the right side. Remember that Pino was the worlds biggest weight

\r?\n> weenie. The story is that he performed calculations for various

\r?\n> distances and concluded the "virtual" weight saved by left hand drive

\r?\n> could be significant over the long haul.

\r?\n>

\r?\n> Martin Needleman

\r?\n> Annapolis, Maryland

\r?\n>

\r?\n>

\r?\n> "Mark A. Perkins" wrote:

\r?\n> >

\r?\n> > On Sun, 16 Mar 2003 11:20:36 -0500 Martin Needleman <mrndlmn@toad.net>

\r?\n> > writes:

\r?\n> > >

\r?\n> > > Yes! This is exactly the reason that Pino Morroni was an impassioned

\r?\n> > > advocate of left hand drive for track bikes and produced a number of

\r?\n> > > such bikes fitted with his hand made reverse threaded left hand drive

\r?\n> > > wheels. His rationale was that since all track races in the world are

\r?\n> > > run counter clockwise, left hand drive allows the right crank to be

\r?\n> > > closer to the frame thus giving additional track clearance.

\r?\n> > >

\r?\n> > > Once again, years ahead of his time!

\r?\n> > >

\r?\n> > > Martin Needleman

\r?\n> > > Annapolis, Maryland

\r?\n> >

\r?\n> > Martin & all:

\r?\n> >

\r?\n> > I always thought that was cool too. But is it not true that both pedals

\r?\n> > are (should be) the same distance from the center plane of the frame and

\r?\n> > rims/tires? If so, the only component, other than the crank arms &

\r?\n> > pedals, that would be close to the track's banking, would be the

\r?\n> > chainring and the chain going around it. Which should be several inches

\r?\n> > farther from the banking than a pedal or crank arm.

\r?\n> >

\r?\n> > "Bicycle Mark" Perkins

\r?\n> > Fresno Cycling Club - Historian

\r?\n> > Fresno, California, U.S.A.