- HOT TOPICS:
- The new VeloNews.com (BETA)
Tech Report: The cobbler's tale and a visit to Rock Shox
- Article Extras
- Photos
Screwed
First off, you’re probably wondering why you’re looking at a photo of VeloNews’s Lennard Zinn drilling a hole into the sole of a perfectly good $400 pair of cycling shoes. Good question. As we put the finishing touches on our 2004 carbon road shoe comparison, we’ve begun to notice that actual sole thicknesses seem to vary a bit from numbers claimed in advertising. Because most manufacturers want their numbers to reflect the lightest/stiffest/thinnest “interpretation” of the measurements, Zinn and I decided that the only way to find out exactly how thick the soles were was to measure them all in exactly the same spot; at the raised cleat mounting area, not at the edge of the carbon sole. So, armed with our handy Makita, we began to drill through each sole and take the true measurement ourselves.
We were surprised to find that some of the manufacturer’s claims were as much as 5mm off the actual measurement. For proper position set-up, any fit technician worth his weight in plumb bobs will tell you sole height can dramatically affect seat height, so it’s helpful to know the exact distance between the bottom of your foot and the top of the cleat.
So, in a hunt for truth, Zinn and I set about drilling holes in some really pricey carbon. After two months of weighing, measuring, twisting, bending and even riding, this was the final step in our in-depth look at many of this year’s most sought-after road shoes. If you’re in the market for some new kicks, take a look for the full results in the next issue of VeloNews.
Shocked
Just to assure to myself that there’s more to this business than drilling holes into pricey shoes, I took a quick trip down to Colorado Springs to spend the day at RockShox’s Research and Design headquarters I was actually invited for a couple of reasons. One, to address concerns that I had raised regarding a particular Pike fork and two, to witness the type of testing and prototyping the company carries out to develop new products.
Regarding the Pike, about one month ago I rode off a picnic table for little “freeride” testing and ended-up landing a bit heavy on the front wheel– a sort of unplanned “nose-pick” maneuver. I felt something bend on the bike and I assumed it to be the new Pike. After sending the fork back to RockShox, their test crew said that in fact it was not bent and invited me to come down and see for myself.
So while I was there I watched as my fork was dissected and compared side-by-side to an off-the-shelf production Pike on level table. Clear as day, the measurements were spot-on. I guess it’s time to take a closer look at the headset bearings and frame alignment of the 2004 Specialized S-Works Enduro I was riding at the time.
Of course, one benefit of going to the Springs to witness the “autopsy” of my Pike is that I also had a chance to see the test facilities at Rock Shox. After reconfirming the integrity of the Pike, I was led into the test lab where I got a chance to check out an assortment of forks undergoing torture testing.
In this case, “torture” is an understatement. One machine was cycling a Boxxer fork so aggressively (both vertically and fore/aft) that I was nervous, even standing10 feet from it. The machine can be used to simulate actual data acquired by professional racers on some of the world’s most famous (infamous?) downhill runs.
Of course, if you’re still a kid at heart, you would enjoy the work going on in the destructive testing part of the lab. Prototype, production and returned forks are snapped, cycled and smashed all in the hopes of producing a better product down the road.
While I was there, lab techs destroyed two forks just to show what sorts of data one can get from destructive testing. Without it, fork manufacturers would have to play engineering guessing games, with consumers acting as guinea pig. The hundreds of forks I saw destined for the dumpster were a sign that the ones that finally reach the market are designed to suffer through more than any of us can dish out.
While at Rock Shox, I also had the chance to visit with Jeremiah Boobar, head of RockShox’s BlackBox racing program. If there’s a secret part on one of its sponsored racers, Boobar knows about it - and probably installed it himself. He showed off a few goodies that are currently on the race circuit including the made-specially for the Olympics Sid Athena and SRAM X.0 short and long cage rear derailleurs with composite cages. The refinement saves 2 grams and is more resistant to bending. Factory rider Steve Peat asked for the technology, and he got it. As for you and me, we’ll have to wait and see if the prototype derailleurs ever see production.
Before leaving RockShox product manager Sander Rigney pulled me aside to show one final suspension goody–RockShox’s 2005 Motion Control equipped MC3 and MC3R rear shocks. Although Trek has the exclusive on the shocks for 2005, look for RockShox’s new Ario rear shock to come with the unique lock-out feature found on the MC3R. Controlled by a handlebar-mounted remote, the MC3R can be activated and deactivated with the flip of the rider’s thumb. Even more interesting is that RockShox will produce a lock-out called the PopLoc Dual which will operate both the front and rear lock-outs simultaneously.
At the end of the day, I walked away with a new respect for the engineering that goes into many of the products we ride and an assured sense that final safety testing really isn’t left up to the consumer. Accidents do happen, but chances are good that engineers have already seen an identical scenario in the lab and have designed their products to address that very problem.
