I thought some people here might appreciate it. More of Sueshiro Sano´s stunning work: http://sanomagic.world.coocan.jp/englishindex.html
I thought some people here might appreciate it. More of Sueshiro Sano´s stunning work: http://sanomagic.world.coocan.jp/englishindex.html
Rubber isn’t the only shock absorption that a racing bike uses. The metal wheels deform a bit to absorb impact as well.
You must be thinking of steel rims, which are completely outdated tech. Bikes have aluminium rims nowadays and aluminium rims are stiff af, compared to other materials
Aluminum in and of itself is not stiffer than steel. It’s about 1/3 as stiff as steel. That said, it is quite a bit lighter and since stiffness is proportional to cross sectional area aluminum parts can be stiffer than steel parts at the same weight because they can use more material. Strength is a whole other can of worms.
That is all true from a purely theoretical, material science based perspective on this, so the misconception is understandable. However, please mind that in practice, when it´s about bike components the main criteria is that they have to be lightweight. So when it´s about bike parts we always compare the stiffness of steel parts and aluminium parts of the same weight and as you explained correctly:
Obviously that results in the aluminium bike parts being generally stiffer than the steel bike parts they are compared to. I apologize for any confusion I caused but I am a bike mechanic and not a metallurgic engineer.
It’s true that I can get caught up in the nuance sometimes. That said, you and I both understand the details behind what you’re talking about but odds are a number of people lurking in the comments don’t. All I was really trying to do was nudge those people away from “substituting aluminum in place of steel with no other changes will result in a better part”.
Never mind, we just approached this from different angles :)