LondonSkaters Speed Team - Speed Skating & Rollerblading Club in London

LondonSkaters Speed Team
Sponsor - Challow Network Design Specialists Limited
   FAQFAQ  SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Skates versus Bikes

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LondonSkaters Speed Team Forum Index -> General
Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Mikey-two-Names



Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 4108

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:04 pm    Subject: Skates versus Bikes Reply with quote

Karine raised some interesting points there.  Why are bikes faster than skates, and why are they more efficient too?

I'm definitely much faster on my recumbent than on my skates, by a significant margin.  I did very nearly the same speed on London to Southend on the bike as I did for Berlin on skates , and that was with atrocious tarmac, some hills, more than twice the distance, and no real drafting at all.

I think skates might have the advantage in two circumstances - the first 75m of a sprint from a standing start (and here I'd bet a runner would beat both the bike and skates), and on long steep downhills.  Eddy reckons he can go a few mph faster than upwrong bicycles on a big downhill in Berkley simply because of a lower tuck.  I'll bet no downhill skater will ever be as fast as a tandem or a sporty recumbent like mine though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fred_Paris
LSST Chairman


Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 1418
Location: Ealing Broadway

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:26 pm    Subject: Reply with quote

Do you think that as runners problem with skating is you have to carry most of the weight of your body? even if you carry less on skate than while running.

Biking look very confortable, and you don't have to carry your weight, so all the energy actually goes to the padling.

Might not be very clear or accurate, just the tought of the moment.


On short distance I'm definitely faster while running, the truth is I'm a runner more than a skater.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dan_b



Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 2428

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:02 pm    Subject: Re: Skates versus Bikes Reply with quote

ls_mike wrote:
Eddy reckons he can go a few mph faster than upwrong bicycles on a big downhill in Berkley simply because of a lower tuck.


The difference being that when he gets to the bottom his thighs will be burning, whereas the cyclist will be nicely rested ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mikey-two-Names



Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 4108

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:16 pm    Subject: Reply with quote

I think the biggest losses on skates come from these areas:

* I think the primary loss in efficiency is because of the way skates are propelled.  Some of the wheels are always scuffing during any turn, and each stride involves two turns of the skate.  You have huge losses every time you pivot, mostly in the heel carve since that is the most loaded one, but also in the pivot out from setdown.
* Secondly, skates have small wheels and don't deal with rough roads nearly as well as bikes.
* Plus having so many more bearings, there is more loss there as well.

Yup, tucks are good for thigh burn LOL.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Xia



Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 874
Location: Geneva (Suisse)

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 3:15 pm    Subject: Reply with quote

ls_mike wrote:

* Secondly, skates have small wheels and don't deal with rough roads nearly as well as bikes.

I have tested that more than once! I'm used to follow Cat on her bike, me on skate. We are pretty well matched at cruising speed, but while she keeps a steady pace, I'll go faster or slower than her depending on the smothness of the tarmac...

GPS wise, I have noticed that for the same power output, my speed can vary by 3-8Kph just from the surface. (rough surface 18kph / medium surface 21kph / smooth (ultra rare in UK) 24+kph)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mikey-two-Names



Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 4108

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 3:35 pm    Subject: Reply with quote

You have power cranks installed in your skates?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Xia



Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 874
Location: Geneva (Suisse)

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 4:17 pm    Subject: Reply with quote

ls_mike wrote:
You have power cranks installed in your skates?

define power cranks? didn't understood your post.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mikey-two-Names



Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 4108

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 4:51 pm    Subject: Reply with quote

Just wondering how you knew the power output was the same.  You seem awfully precise on the speed changes caused by the rough roads.  I'm just trying to judge what accuracy they are worth.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Rick



Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 5914

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:03 am    Subject: Reply with quote

Wa s silly program on Channel 4 called "No Girls Allowed" That had a race between a mountain bike, a race bike, a sprinter and Vinnie. it weas fdone in heats and was totally unscientific and over 100m in a straight line.

Vinnie went against the race bike and lost comprehensively though started much better.
Sprinter killed the mountain bike.
Sprinter false started in the final was was still just pipped by the race bike.

What lessons? legs accellerate fastest but have a limited top speed. Skates are legs with wheels and have a lower acceleration but a higher top speed. Race bikes are slower still off the line but have an even higher top speed.

What we didn't learn. Skates are faster on bends than bike as there is more acceleration and bikes are hard to pedal in bends.

I don't know how well recumbants accellerate compared to uprights. They have a better aerodynamic profile than uprights so they have a higher top speed but the power comes from leg muscles whereas much of the power in an upright is generated by bodyweight. It is possible to use muscles too when pedals are attached to feet to I would suspect that an upright would be first off the line but I have no real idea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rick



Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 5914

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:21 am    Subject: Reply with quote

ls_mike wrote:
* Plus having so many more bearings, there is more loss there as well.

Not sure I buy that one. Obviously I agree they have more bearings but more friction? The bearings are different so comparing quantity means nothing as the quality is completely different. The number of rotations in the bearing is significantly higher with skates too so by that analogy there should be an overwhelming amount of friction in the bearings compared to a bike. 100mm diameter compared to 700mm means 7 times more rotation for the same distance. Also to dispell the number of bearings theory I am faster gliding downhill on 5*80 than 4*80.

I have no observed speed comparisons for me gliding on skates and gliding on a bike on the same hill from a standing start and not pedalling/pushing and not tucking on either to take body drag out of the equation. It might be interesting. I suspect that on a steep hill, the bike would be faster as stability becomes an issue with skates before it does on a bike but on a shallow slope, I am not so sure. Another comparison would be for a bike and a skater to travel together at the same speed then stop pedalling/pushing at the same time and see who glides a measured distance the fastest. I bet the skater would glide further at a lower speed as stability for the bike becomes a problem but at a higher speed I think the bike would slow down less and so cover the distance more easily.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rick



Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 5914

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:28 am    Subject: Reply with quote

As this is a speed of skates versus bikes thread, it's horses for courses. If we take away ideal conditions, where you can just keep going at top speed with nothing in the way, such as in heavy slow moving traffic like we have in central London, skates are faster than all other forms of transport over a mile or so. They make better use of the available space as they are simply easier to get between vehicles and can hop on and off pavements, etc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Xia



Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 874
Location: Geneva (Suisse)

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:46 am    Subject: Reply with quote

ls_mike wrote:
Just wondering how you knew the power output was the same.  You seem awfully precise on the speed changes caused by the rough roads.  I'm just trying to judge what accuracy they are worth.


oh, its think its easy, I monitor/listen to my heart rate and breath, I know roughly when I'm pushing to hard to sustain a certain speed.
Nonethe less, there is a small effect of 'placebo', that is when I reach a really smooth surface, I tend to go a bit faster just because its so good.

The gps is really precise in speed variation (not sure about real speed, I only once cheked the reading inside the car at 60mph and it was spot on using distance markers but never tested at skating speed). Distance on the other hand can be wrong by a few percentage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mikey-two-Names



Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 4108

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:01 am    Subject: Reply with quote

Well, I think you're probably right that rough surfaces make you slower, but I very much doubt the specific speed differences since you're only guessing your own power output.  You're being very precise about speed vs power for which you have poor accuracy.

I'd be amazed if the speed differences really were as big as that.  I would expect a small difference from the rough surfaces, and a much bigger effect to come from your loss of technique on rough surfaces.  Someone else's loss of speed through technique would likely be greater or smaller, depending on their ability as a skater.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Xia



Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Posts: 874
Location: Geneva (Suisse)

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:48 am    Subject: Reply with quote

There might be a loss of technique but really there is that much difference from surface to surface.

Bad surface: tarmac with loads of embedded chipstone usually found on A road. Gliding on it is just not possible.

Normal surface: tarmac with no 'protuding bit', mostly everywhere in UK

Good surface: Smooth tarmac equivalent to marble (yes it does exist). Its usually shiny and really slippery when wet, ultra rare in Uk, a bit more comon in France everywhere in Italian town that I know off (unless its cobble in old towns).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KarineM



Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 40
Location: Paris (No longer Lille)

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 2:03 pm    Subject: Reply with quote

Ah yes cobbles slow me down too, which is very bad, because the only way to get past them is to keep my speed up. And it's not cobbles that are in short supply around here in Paris-Roubaix territory Wink

Seriously, bad surfaces are a killer for my speed. I don't know if bigger wheels, being a better skater or just being stronger would help, but I don't doubt the differences quoted.

Karine

PS. All the good skaters overtake me when the going gets tough  Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LondonSkaters Speed Team Forum Index -> General All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Site design by Etienne.B - Power-ed by : php-BB © 2001, 2002 php-BB - Group