返回列表 回復 發帖
同意 不過 單車的人 都唔係人人追輕鈴.
我有個去台灣賽隊際公路單車既朋友,
佢係平均速體力型佢就係用重鈴.

如果係絕對的話佢地賽幾十公里既上落山.
平均速既一個就唔會用重鈴.
去keep住全隊的速度.

cardon一 ...
掌摑王 發表於 22-3-2012 00:31
各施各法啦 師兄 ^-^
同意.
我冇否定.
我只話因素有好多.
當然亦存在好多貪有型而用carbon的人.
掌摑王 發表於 22-3-2012 00:38
好中肯
the idea is, if you can afford, get lighter weight if possible. It can improve the handling, and fuel consumption because wheel is the main unsprung weight of the car....
災後重建中.......
所以我一直都係話因素有好多. ^^

攪攪副偈 (人既體能)
分分鐘送石油田氣果架都踩到曉飛
掌摑王 發表於 22-3-2012 00:49
得閒要出黎聽多D聖經
the idea is, if you can afford, get lighter weight if possible. It can improve the handling, and fuel consumption because wheel is the main unsprung weight of the car....
sammykwan 發表於 22-3-2012 00:48
100% AGREE
100% AGREE
thomas_llai 發表於 22-3-2012 00:57
just improve the handling is already worth the money.....because the handling of a 7 seater is really bad......not everyone of us can drive like James, CFO, Dicken and Nana..... improve the handling may save our life .....
災後重建中.......
just some reference for unsprung weight

災後重建中.......
同意 不過 單車的人 都唔係人人追輕鈴.
我有個去台灣賽隊際公路單車既朋友,
佢係平均速體力型佢就係用重鈴.

如果係絕對的話佢地賽幾十公里既上落山.
平均速既一個就唔會用重鈴.
去keep住全隊的速度.

cardon一 ...
掌摑王 發表於 22-3-2012 00:31
我諗均速用重鈴,係可以借條鈴既 moment of inertia 去維持速度,對抗外來因素對速度上既改變,即係上少少斜唔駛突然間要踩好大力去維持個速度,變相個人係果一刻會舒服一啲。如果上大斜既話,重鈴應該會比較 PK,肯定要用多啲體力

重鈴用於汽車上就應該無乜著數,輕啲加減速靈活好多。上次車聚占士兄話齋,幾千蚊加個 VSD 都係追求「爆」果下,爆贏好多車。鈴輕啲肯定更爆。
George
真係吸引
LHO 發表於 21-3-2012 22:43
RF 咁慘情?

我返工來回港島東同大角咀,換完 speedmaster 之後今日平均去到 9.1L/100km,around 1.3/1.4 左右 1 km。
George
同意 不過 單車的人 都唔係人人追輕鈴.
我有個去台灣賽隊際公路單車既朋友,
佢係平均速體力型佢就係用重鈴.

如果係絕對的話佢地賽幾十公里既上落山.
平均速既一個就唔會用重鈴.
去keep住全隊的速度.

cardon一 ...
掌摑王 發表於 22-3-2012 00:31
玩公路係玩刀鈴,有慣性可以keep速,,,但係city 真車玩重鈴行下停一定食油
玩公路係玩刀鈴,有慣性可以keep速,,,但係city 真車玩重鈴行下停一定食油
jackykiller 發表於 22-3-2012 04:55
睇黎師兄都係單車友,去邊度踩多?
我諗均速用重鈴,係可以借條鈴既 moment of inertia 去維持速度,對抗外來因素對速度上既改變,即係上少少斜唔駛突然間要踩好大力去維持個速度,變相個人係果一刻會舒服一啲。如果上大斜既話,重鈴應該會比較 PK, ...
Aliens 發表於 2012-3-22 03:13
can't agree anymore !
全中 所以一直都係話因素太多.
而用重鈴的都係體能耐力好好的人.

因為佢係冇速度又冇爆發力
只有耐力.
負責頂頭壓風及keep住全隊時間.
俾其他隊友回氣. ...
掌摑王 發表於 22-3-2012 08:31
師兄,車隊係輪流帶,輪流勾車,唔會只係無速度,無爆炸力既車手帶頭,
can't agree anymore !
cliffchow 發表於 22-3-2012 08:37
support view of point of cliffchow
唔明 行車時 個轆唔會好似片尾咁fing格.
轆就掂地既 一點地震動就俾地面及避震吸走.
凌空時fing十下 及fing少幾下 點影響行車??
掌摑王 發表於 22-3-2012 08:33
果個係Demo, 俾你睇到震動後你要做多D定少D work 去平衡翻

係任何情況, 減磅一定有正面效果, 而係UNSPRUNG WEIGHT減磅出黎既效果仲係倍數既tim....你唔好睇小果3幾KG

等我又試下分享我見解同大家硏究下。。。。。
一部車裝左輕身鈴跑同一部車裝左重身鈴跑
我會認為裝左輕身鈴跑時起跑用既扭力,收步用既制动力,都會用少D
均速時兩者一样
重身鈴唯一係滑行時, 會溜得較遠
所以輕、重不做成分別只會係一個完全唔用BRAKE既情況出現, 但完成相同路程時間都係輕身鈴短D

e.g. 2 RG1 need to run for 10km (a fixed disctance), A) with light weight rim and B) with heavy weight rim

A) starting from 0km/h and will use less power to speed up (lower fuel consumption) to a fix constant speed, said 60km/h.
B) starting from 0km/h and will use more power to speed up (higher fuel consumption) to a fix constant speed,  said 60km/h.

At constant speed, both will have the same consumption.

After running for 9.5km, B) can leave the car slide for the remaining 0.5km (0L/100km fuel consumption), and the speed is slower and slower...till 0km/h  to the end point 10km.

but for A), it will only slide after running 9.7km. So, it will slide for 0.3km  (0L/100km fuel consumption), and speed below 60km/h till 0km/h to the end point 10km.

Result: both car consume the same amount of fuel
because A) use less at speed up, but "driving" longer (9.7km), but B) use more at speed up, but "driving" shorter (9.5km)
Average speed, A) is higher than B)
because at the last 0.5km, A) has 0.2km still running at 60km/h then slow down while B) is always below 60km/h.

Therefore, no matter how, light weight is always better (either consumption or performance).
災後重建中.......
返回列表