The effect of wheel diameter on vertical and horizontal mountain bike position
Journal Title: Journal of Science and Cycling - Year 2014, Vol 3, Issue 2
Abstract
Background: Mountain bike wheel dimensions have evolved to larger diameters in recent years. While numerous claims can be found for performance advantages of larger diameter wheels, systematic comparisons of mechanical characteristics are not available.Purpose: Compare the change in velocity and the variability of vertical position between 26 and 29 inch diameter mountain bike wheels while rolling across a straight 10 m long bumpy track over a range of velocities. Methods: Horizontal and vertical bike position data were collected across a straight wooden track (10 m) with an assortment of 21 randomly spaced wooden bumps ranging in size from 1.75 to 7.5 cm. Position data were recorded at 200 Hz using a 10 camera Vicon System with a reflective marker attached to the stem. Two front wheels (Stan's NoTubes ZTR Crest, Maxxis Ardent tire, 26 psi inflation, tubeless) were matched in all characteristics except diameter and mass. Mass differed by about 100 g (7%). A carbon, hardtail frame (Niner Air 9) was used throughout with 29 inch rear wheel; 26 and 29 inch front wheels were exchanged between conditions. Rigid (White Brothers Rocksolid) and suspension (Rockshox Reba) front forks were tested with each wheel condition. For each wheel/fork combination 10 trials were ridden with increasing speeds that ranged from 3 to 8 m/s. Conditions were randomized with the rider (male, 30 yrs) riding passively without lifting or pedaling during each trial. Analysis of covariance was used to compare conditions with speed as the covariate. Linear regression was used to assess the relationship of the change in velocity to incoming velocity and the variability of vertical position to incoming velocity.Results: There was no significant difference for all wheel/fork conditions with the change in velocity (suspension; p = 0.4523, rigid; p = 0.4164). The variability of vertical position with a rigid fork and 29 inch wheel was significantly greater (p = 0.0004) than with the 26 inch wheel. With the suspension fork, there was a small but significant difference (p = 0.0006) with the 29 inch wheel over the 26 inch wheel.Discussion: Wheel diameter had no significant influence on the change in velocity of the bike. However, for both fork conditions, the variability of vertical position was significant between the 29 and 26 inch wheels. The larger wheel experienced a greater vertical motion due to the mechanics of the wheel. The larger diameter of the 29 inch wheel translated to more contact time with each bump causing more vertical motion. This difference was seen in both fork conditions, albeit much smaller with the suspension fork. For each wheel/fork condition, the change in velocity decreased as the incoming velocity increase. For both wheel diameters with the suspension fork, the vertical motion decreased as incoming velocity increased, whereas with the rigid fork, vertical motion increased with an increase in incoming velocity. Conclusion: Wheel diameter has a significant influence on the vertical motion of a mountain bike; however, changes of velocity were not affected by wheel size. Wheel diameter on a mountain bike with a rigid front fork has a significant influence on vertical motion while a bike travels along a bumpy track. The larger wheel diameter produced greater vertical motion.
Authors and Affiliations
S Phillips| Colorado Mesa University, Grand Junction, Colorado, USA, M Levy| University of Minnesota Duluth, Duluth, Minnesota, USA, B Alumbaugh| Colorado Mesa University, Grand Junction, Colorado, USA, G Smith| Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado, USA, G Smitn| Colorado Mesa University, Grand Junction, Colorado, USA
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP2867
- DOI -
- Views 370
- Downloads 26
Comparison of power output demands for a top-10 ranking between Tour de France and Vuelta a España
Background: Grand Tours (GT) are extreme endurance cycling events with about 3500 km covered in twenty-one stages during three weeks. Using the heart rate measurement, Lucia et al. (Lucia et al., 2003: Medicine & Science...
Wind speed, wind yaw and the aerodynamic drag acting on a bicycle and rider
A large portion of a cyclist’s power is consumed by air drag. Opposing force power meters measure air drag with a wind sensor. In cross winds the bicycle and rider experience a different air drag than that informed by a...
Bicycle Shoe Insoles and Their Effect on Lateral Knee Movement, Leg Muscle Activation Patterns, and Performance in Experienced Cyclists
Introduction: Riders contact their bicycles at three points: hands, hips, and foot-shoe-cleat-pedal (FSCP) interface (Figure 1). Three techniques are used to achieve fit: experienced-based direct observation, technology-...
Computer modelling of energy turnover and body temperatures in elite cyclists during climbing: steep, steeper, Angliru; cold, colder, Gavia
Climbing very steep mountain roads (e.g. Monte Zoncolan, Angliru) or high passes with sub- zero temperatures at the summit (e.g. Gavia, Stelvio) imposes intense stress on the physiological system during professional bicy...
Multisensor monitoring cycle ergometer
Cycling ergometers provide a repeatable and controllable test setup to observe the effect that the mechanical (e.g. frame geometry), biomechanical (e.g. position on the bicycle) or biophysical (e.g. effect of rider posit...