Kenda booster & rush. Continental race king. Maxxis Aspen & Aspen ST. Schwalbe RRs, Vittoria Mezcal, S-works Renegade & fast track, Pirelli Scorpion. Basically every MTB tire manufacturer makes an XC race tire in the 600g range. Some are below 600g, some are above 600g (but below 700g). Just look at the list on the website this thread is under.
But these do not show amazing rolling resistance on that site either. Only Race King approaches top RR numbers of the gravel tires. There are plenty of sub 400g gravel tires with less RR than these. As far as I understood my correspondent, he predicts that riders will add angular momentum (when and MTB riders already complain about steering on gravel bikes) and, apparently, won't win any rolling resistance. What for? Riding at even lower pressure? To do what?
I think decoupling health insurance from one’s employer could greatly change the entire healthcare industry. It would go a very long way to reduce cost obfuscation, among many other things. So many people think their health insurance costs $30 a month because that’s their “contribution”.
Unfortunately it will never happen, as it’s insanely politically unviable as almost no one wants that to happen. It’s the ultimate free market approach, but then people would have to pay for something they “get for free”. And once they realized how insane the system is, and how much everything actually costs, you might see knock on effects from that. Some bad, some good. It would be an experiment for sure.
Single payer is more realistic, even if it doesn’t do much to affect many of the underlying issues.
How’s that prejudice? If you went and worked for Tesla after 2020 when all of their flaws were out in the open, then you opted into that environment. Are you saying you don’t make hiring decisions based on resume and where people worked? Hiring is always a subjective process. “Cultural fit” is a thing.
Cycling economy increases naturally with increased fitness. As with virtually all forms of fitness training. It along with many other factors is why someone can quadruple their possible power output with training. All without melting. Look up cycling economy.
Also how much you sweat is a trained response. This is why athletes do heat training before hot events. There is more to it than some oversimplified physics based equation. It’s a biological system.
All these things are much more significant when going from someone who basically never cycles or exercises, to someone who does. It is less significant in pros, so keep that in mind if you are looking at studies of “trained cyclists”. Law of diminishing returns.
I’ve always been an athlete from when I was a competitive athlete in my college days (cross-country running) but I’ve always sweated a lot more than average and it’s not correlated with my fitness. I’ve always been slim and fit and I’ve often noticed that I sweat a lot more than people whom I’m beating in races! That is, I can be fitter and faster than someone and still sweat more.
On the flip side, I am extremely cold resistant and when others are chilly and need to wear a sweater or coat, I don’t need it. My body just seems to run hotter than others, for better or worse.
Adaptations include decreases in HR, internal body temperature, skin temperature, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and sweat sodium and chloride concentrations, as well as increases in plasma volume and sweat rate.
Sweat rate. Sweat rate is a training adaptation. Thus we would say sweating is a trained response.
Yes, I have no doubt you are very sweaty. That doesn’t mean that sweatiness isn’t a trained response though.
> All these things are much more significant when going from someone who basically never cycles or exercises, to someone who does.
You could say that I do that every season(well, I walk all year round at least) and my observation is that there's maybe a short period of increased unnecessary movements that I do which produce more sweat, but after two weeks, when I relearn the right movements, it plateaus and sweating is just proportional to energy used - it's lower, but still there.
In any case I noticed that I would need to go frustratingly slow to be appropriately fresh for an office. Even at my leisurely pace of 15km/h I change my shirt when I get back from a ride, because it's simply uncomfortable otherwise.
Regen braking in most EVs is significant enough that the brake lights come on when you lift off the throttle pedal (which is what engages the regen). Tesla has said their brake pads are potentially lifetime. And for good reason. You barely use them; so much less than a normal car it’s not even close. I have a friend with a 3 approaching 100k miles and isn’t even through half a set of pads. My EV, you couldn’t even bother me to check. I already know it’s pointless.
There is a lot of variance EV to EV. Some have strong regen, some not so much. Some use 1 pedal driving, some don’t.
For instance the Porsche taycan brake pedal is setup such that the first part of the travel uses exclusively regen braking, and as you push harder it blends in more and more friction braking too. Don’t expect this to become common though, as this primarily just benefits real performance driving. Trail braking is very hard/frustrating without this kind of feature, but driving that way on the street is certainly dumb, and probably illegal (could fall under exhibition of speed?).
Basically there are a lot of reasons, but it all comes down to a small aerodynamic efficiency gain is no where near the sacrifice required in the other disciplines.
in other cycling disciplines the efficiency of a rider on a flat smooth road, in the wind (no drafting) without significant corners or descents (no technicality) matters far less, and/or how you get efficiency is different. In fact in other disciplines that situation basically doesn’t exist.
Keep in mind that for a lot of people, for a long time, the pinnacle of triathlon, and primarily how these bikes are marketed and designed, is around the Ironman World Championships in Kona. The 112 mile course only has 4500ft of elevation gain. That is very flat.
Additionally some top triathlon pros consider even themselves to be basically beginner level bike handlers compared to road bikers. Which is basically beginner level bike handling compared to mountain biking. Why can you win races and compete for world championships if you have such poor skills? Because in that discipline courses are designed such that one needs virtually no skill, and the bikes are thus not designed at all for handling.
Meanwhile in road bike racing, such as the Tour de France, riders can win races or stages due to their descending skills despite bike handling not being a top priority of the discipline (look at Tom Pidcocks performance vs Chris Froome on Alpe d’Huez in 2022). Also in road bike racing, protected riders are protected from the wind 99% of the time or more. It’s more important to be able to get close to the rider in front of you, and to still have control of your bike, than to be extremely aerodynamic yourself as most of those gains are lost in the draft. Especially true in the peloton, where riders frequently talk about the feeling of being “sucked along” and not having to pedal basically at all. It’s almost hard to believe, but it’s wild when you actually experience it.
In mountain biking for instance, control, grip, flexibility of body position etc is much more important than just outright aerodynamic efficiency. Rolling resistance too is a much bigger proportion of the energy lost than on smooth roads. Speeds are also naturally slower due to the fact that courses are not only off road, but often much steeper than what is typically found on road. Additionally aerodynamics matter little if you can’t complete the course without crashing/blowing up your bike. (See Peter Sagan at the Olympics where he DNFd.)
I don’t think “beaming 4k video around the world” is really an issue at all.
The way the internet works, with peering etc. bandwidth is super, super cheap. It’s basically too cheap to meter. AWS bandwidth pricing has no relationship to actual bandwidth costs and never did.
Netflix has for years been operating open connect, basically they place proxy servers with ISPs (effectively a peering type arrangement). In 2021 Netflix said they spent $1B worldwide on open connect over the previous 10 years. But they spent $19B last year on “cost of revenue” which basically means content.
$20B a year on content. $0.1B a year on their CDN. I can’t imagine Disney, Comcast, etc is much different.
Probably didn’t help that the app was so bad for months after Joe switched over that Joe was saying “sorry the app is so bad, they tell me they are working on it”.
How much audience did they fail to convert? How much harder did that make building momentum?
My understanding was that the whole design was based on a radical exoskeleton concept in order to reduce production cost. But in development that didn’t work out (NVH was a nightmare among other things) and so it’s a conventional structure with the weird design and stainless steel panels on top. It seems to me that they should have completely redesigned the truck when they found they had to stop pursuing the original concept, but they kept the exterior they originally showed. I think it’s great that they tried something different, but I’m worried that they now have a compromised design, inheriting the compromises of the original design, with the cost, weight, and complexity of underpinning it with a traditional unibody.
It will be interesting to see how the cybertruck turns out.
