Yea I’m following you with the power reading. It’s still not clear whether they should be different or not based on suspension type. I dont think it is clear that you WOULD actually have longer pedal travel with suspension not locked out.
But man…devils advocate…I think the suspension might fool to the power meter and just have it give you credit for a longer pedal stroke if the suspension comes into play. I dont know enough about how the power meters work honestly.
I’m saying with a high level of confidence I have no confidence on any aspect of this
Totally agree with this. 180 watts may make both bikes move along the trail at the same speed but one may extract a greater toll on the rider. The cart would be great but we’re going with heart rate and try to make some sense of it that way.
In addition, the feel may matter. As in the squishy bike may be a bit faster but emotionally the hardtail just feels so much faster it might make a difference. Like as in one bike may feel like it is working with you more than the other and over the course of a long one may actually matter.
Feelings aren’t really a great gauge. Otherwise we‘d still be on 17, 19mm tyres and 120psi on the road. If you’re only climbing the smoothest gravel roads then yes, the hardtail will probably be more efficient and thus faster. As soon as it gets bumpy the full sus will probably be more efficient and faster.
Pinkbike did a ‘fieldtest’ some time ago where they tested XC bikes from Cannondale, Canyon, Specialized, Trek, and two DC bikes, the Transition Spur and Yeti SB115. In this mix was a Trek Procaliber in different categories and discussed the overall ‘best’ XC/DC bike. They did a short smooth climb and a loop on a XC course. On the smooth climb the Trek Procaliber (Hardtail) placed midpack among the Epic Evo and Supercaliber (2.43). The Canyon Lux was fastest (2.32) with the Epic (2.38) behind. I can’t see how the Lux could be 10 seconds faster over such a short climb, but anyway - bro science yo.
They did another lap on a XC trail with a steep and bumpy climb. Of the top of my head I remember the conclusion being that the more modern geometry was fastest, but I could be wrong. As far as I remember they didn’t include the Hardtail on this lap (why would you?). This ‘field test’ is of course for entertainment and not really a scientific comparison. If you want to have a look, here’s the playlist: 9 XC Bikes (& The Grim Donut) Hucked To Flat | 2020 Field Test XC/DC - YouTube
When I do long uphills on tarmac or gravel with my FS, Yeti SB100, inn full open it bobs a cm or two and it feels like I am losing some power. In “lock” it becomes so stiff and i get bob in the tires and the resulting resonance does not compute with my body, so it certainly feels like I am losing even more power.
In the middle setting the bob is just barely there, but the rear shock takes up just the right amount so the tires dont have to, and i get a nice and flowy climb experience.
This experience coincides with that on my HT, where i also had a problem with tire-bob. When i Changed the seatpost from a stiff alu-stick to an nice carbon with a minute flex (Syntace Hiflex) the problem was solved. On the SB100 the dropper post does not flex any, so the suspension will have to do it.
I rarely stand on long uphills but if I do i lock the rear. On singletrack I always have the shock fully open because that gives me the least amount of hold ups => better efficiency and speed.
I strongly believe that the only advantage a HT have over modern FS is lower weight, and for me that lower weight does not outperform the FS.
I wasn’t clear. I’m with you that a bike that “feels” faster may be slower and I hope to get data showing this. What I’m saying is…say you have a bike that runs 90 seconds faster per hour with the same physiological tool as a 2nd bike but the 2nd bike feels super fast and the 1st bike feels like a sloppy, soggy, heavy pig. Even though you might be faster on the big soggy bike, because of the feeling you might get more out of yourself on the slower bike because of the emotion. If it’s light, sprightly, and just a joy to ride you might appreciate it on hour 2 or 3 vs. the heavy boggy bike…even if the heavy bike is faster.
The “emotional quotient”…if that makes any sense.
I haven’t seen any decent tests comparing speeds of bikes yet. If they’re out there I’d love to see them
Had much better results today, got the new (well “new to me”) saris app and calibrated the trainer every run. Today the Power2Max reigned supreme but Quarq only varied 3 watts if I throw out run #1 (I’m thinking the trainer was warming up based on the roll down times).
I’m going to figure the Quarq reads 4 watts higher than the Power2Max so I’ll shoot for 180 watts on the Quarq and 176 on the Power2Max. I’ll calibrate the Quarq every lap because it seems like it drifts a little bit. The P2M doesn’t have calibration. Apparently doesn’t need it either LOL.
Got some laps in, mostly hit my target of 3-4 watts higher on the Quarq (Quarq is on the YT, Power2Max is on the Epic).
Ave for epic 14:14 @ 166 watts and HR of 118
Ave for YT 14:23 @ 169 watts and HR of 119
As far as I can tell the power to the wheel was the same and at virtually the same HR and only 9 seconds difference in lap time…I’m calling these bikes too close to call in the runs I did today.
Now a couple of things…first, this HR monitor gives odd numbers sometimes so I’m going to recheck with my better strap. And…how much variation is there on this lap anyway? As in…same bike, same everything, same power…what’s the spread? On the way home I was like…probably should have done that first. But that’s the next thing…6-8 laps seeing how consistent everything can be.
Oh yeah and I’m running a cane creek suspension post on the hard tail because I just can’t take the beating otherwise. But with 100mm of travel up front and the post, the ride is decent. It’s not like the YT but I feel like I could race it a couple hours no problem.
Finally, the feeling is just ridiculous between the two with the HT feeling so much faster. But after 6 runs…I can’t prove it’s faster.
More laps…today going for the same everything and just seeing how consistent I could make the laps.
-Lap 4: Calibration came up with -31 where as the other calibrations were -19 and -16. I probably should have just calibrated again but didn’t. Suspecting calibration was the problem.
-Lap 5 was on my friends bike with his garmin pedals for a powermeter.
If we throw laps 4 and 5 out we’re left with 5 good laps at 169-171 watts and between 14:01 and 14:08 in time.
I’m thinking that if I test two things (tires, clothes, suspension open or closed, tire pressures, etc.) and I find a 15 second difference or more over multiple laps that it will prove a difference. Heck, maybe even a 10 second difference. What do you think? Does this sound reasonable?
A little more testing fun today, this time with two different front tires, Kenda Booster Pro 2.6 TR and Schwalbe Wicked Will 2.35 Super Race. Went AABBA today, everything was looking good and consistent (1 second variance on tire A, 9 seconds on tire B) until lap 5 and then…a fly in the ointment. I think the B tire is actually a little faster but I’m sure it’s a statistical dead heat. I think 8 laps going abababab is probable the way to go in the future.
Thanks for sharing all your test data, it’s really interesting. It’s not often that people show the results of their tests when they are somewhat inconclusive. More often, there’s a tendency for people (in all fields of research actually) to publish only the conclusive and positive results. Your testing has shown, as much as anything, that it’s really hard to get consistent results, with the differences in equipment you’re trying to measure often the same order of magnitude as the test variability. Then, unfortunately, it’s not practical for us to gather hundreds of data points to mitigate that variability.
It’s been an interesting thread to follow, with lots of good discussions. Anecdotally, I have found something similar in the past concerning HT vs FS. I bought a lightweight hardtail about 7 years ago, expecting it to be faster on my local trail (which is fairly smooth) than my 26” Giant Anthem. Disappointingly, it was no faster, perhaps slower, with the same tyres and same perceived level of fitness. Not a controlled test, but an interesting and unexpected experience nevertheless.
