Armstrong wants more power, less speed?

That's what I think I read: Armstrong is not necessarily looking for the position that will make the bike the fastest. "It has to be a perfect mix between position and power. If I am five percent slower due to the position, but have 25 percent more power, than that will be better."

Now he may be misquoted. He may be confused, or quoted out of context. Or he's being silly. Perhaps he meant that the 'fastest' position wasn't necessarily the most comfortable and sustainable, which is fine. Perhaps he meant that the most aerodynamic position wasn't necessarily the best overall, for whatever reason. But why the heck say that he'd compromise speed for 'more power'? Wouldn't less power and more speed be even better than the reverse? What use is the extra power if it doesn't increase his speed?

Please explain!

Peter Milostic snatches Peter McDonald's ATTA NSW record

Worth posting in full, this is a significant local TT record for Sydney and Central Coast riders... from the Impact Cycling forum: Peter Milostic snatches Peter McDonald’s ATTA NSW record On the first Sunday of every month, ATTA NSW conducts Time Trials at the famous Calga circuit. On the 4th of November Peter Milostic turned up to attack Peter McDonald’s impressive sub 1 hour record for the undulating 43km course. Unfortunately the gods of time trialing did not smile on the Penrith rider as he punctured in the last 5km and limped in with a notably impressive time of 1hour 1min and 33 seconds. One month later on the first Sunday of December Milostic returned, determined to crack the seemingly unbreakable record. This time he left nothing to chance bringing his wife with spare wheels, spare bike and his coach Mick Chapman, with laptop and lactate testing kits. Peter signed on as number 58 giving him over an hour of warm up which he did on the rollers. Many of the ATTA regulars heads were turning as the high pitched whirr of yet another of Peter’s intensive intervals echoed over the otherwise relaxed start area. For many years (2003- 2007) the ATTA 43km record has been the domain of three Sydney riders Adam Conquest (Randwick Botany CC), David Rae (Marconi CC) and Tom Brooks (Parramatta CC). The trio regularly upped each other, collecting the ATTA $100 prize for any new record. That was until May 2007 when Peter McDonald (FRF NSWIS) turned up to Calga fresh off an impressive ride in the Canberra tour where he came 2nd in the TT and wore the leader’s jersey for one day. Peter smashed Adam Conquest’s record time of 1hr 02 min 11 sec by 2 minutes 17 seconds setting the seemingly unbreakable time of 59:54. Milostic started his mission at 8:58am under a patchy sky with a slight North /Easterly and an ambient temperature of 20 degrees. He was almost poetic on his outward journey powering over every climb in his aerodynamic time trial position. He hit the Somersby turnaround in an amazing sub 29 minute time, which was significantly faster than McDonald’s record time. The plan started to go pear shaped towards the end of his return trip and he was spotted struggling over the notorious Blood Hill however, once over the killer climb, Milostic recomposed himself quickly and powered home to stop the clock at 59 minutes and 34 seconds. The presentation of the ATTA record trophy and $100 cash was conducted by Chris Greeves in front of gob smacked ATTA riders who applauded loudly for the new champion. Within moments of Peter crossing the line an ATTA official was SMS’ing Peter McDonald to inform him of his broken record. In a post presentation interview Milostic expressed his pleasure of beating the record and his intentions of using the event for the coming months to gauge his performance. He was excited at the prospect of a duel between him and McDonald in lowering this prestigious record. December was also the first week of the new “Personal Best (PB) ride Scheme” whereby after a rider establishes 2 rides on the same course, any rider who betters their PB will be rewarded with a free entry for the next calendar event. Results have been kept on a data base for every event since mid 2005. You can find out your PB at the ATTA NSW start line. ATTA NSW conducts Time Trials on the first Sunday of each month rain,hail or shine. http://www.atta.asn.au/

Some more about wheels... and airflow

My friend, he with the Six13 and Lapierre, went on to say, "Yeah, but the more I thought about the test (see my previous post) the more I question the relevance. Most of the top tyres and almost all of the aero tyres were tubulars. How would the stiffness compare on the equivalent clincher? You can get clincher Ritchey WCS carbons for instance. They didn't use that many top end clinchers in the end, I would've liked to have seen Easton's top clincher in there."

To which I would say that clinchers are by design not as stiff, certainly laterally but in every way, as a tubular (ie glue on) rim, whether made of carbon or not. It's stiff by design, being a closed loop, whereas a U-shaped rim can bend more easily.

Undaunted, he went on: "What has me thinking is the front to rear stiffness difference in the Campy Eurus. I do talk about the freaky handling of the Lap, but maybe it was the wheels?"

Which had me thinking about my old Campag 24 spokers. Light, great for climbing, but hopeless in corners. Just too soft laterally (it felt it was laced with spaghetti spokes, cooked ones). Sometimes a bit more weight (as in more spokes) is worth it - again it's horses for courses.

My friend also commented that "the R560 Shimano does pretty well, considering it's their 105 spec wheel. Just shows how far Shimano have come with their wheels and they definately are the best value wheel on the market at the moment."

Probably a good call. I still like Mavics. Those sealed bearings last a long time (mine have lasted 16 years without a failure, and with minimal maintenance).

He also "thought the 50kph (test) was a bit extreme, but I did like that they tested a variety of angles, something that you question when you see the Cervelo Soloist design... surely it can't be that good at anything except straight on (ish)?" Of course on a bike you tend to go forward (hopefully!) so you are always penetrating the air straight on, so the Soloist does make sense. It also has a greater side profile surface area so maybe it is susceptible to crosswinds, but I have trouble in 40-60knot crosswinds on my regular bikes, so maybe it's just a matter of degree?