Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site bmcg.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!bmcg!marc
From: marc@bmcg.UUCP (Marc Lee)
Newsgroups: net.bicycle
Subject: Re: Wind-load simulators ("wind trainers")
Message-ID: <1922@bmcg.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Oct-85 12:58:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: bmcg.1922
Posted: Mon Oct  7 12:58:16 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 15-Oct-85 06:13:18 EDT
References: <1160@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Reply-To: marc@bmcg.UUCP (Marc Lee)
Organization: Burroughs Corp. ASG, San Diego, CA.
Lines: 22

In article <1160@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> eam3@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (edward a. morris) writes:
>I am considering purchasing a wind-load type trainer for the 
>upcoming winter months.  I would be interested in opinions about:
>
>  (1) The various models on the market, particularly the "standard"
>      mount types vs. the new piggy-back style from Racer Mate.


I bought a "piggy-back" trainer recently, because of its compactness vs
turbo-type trainers or rollers, and the fact that it isolates floor vibration
better than other types (important when used in a 2nd floor apt.).  It sets
up in about a half-hour, with the minor drawback of having to use Racer-Mate's
quick release on the rear.

It gives a good workout, comparable to the front-mount type.  The base isn't
real wide, so when used on a soft carpet it is a little unstable.  One draw-
back I've noticed with wind-load trainers is lack of a flywheel effect when
spinning; it is harder to maintain a constant cadence, and the resistance
throught the pedal stroke isn't exactly like real riding.  The Kreitler
rollers that I've tried do a much better job of this, probably because the
actual rollers are fairly heavy.  I think if I had room (and money) I would
probably have bought the new Kreitler wind-load system.