Ron and Tim were out riding together yesterday. Ron's bike was stolen while they broke for lunch at a diner. Somehow they needed to get back home. Luckily, Tim's bike was equipped with a heavy-duty rear rack and toe clips, taboot. Of course, it goes without saying Ron and Tim are very skilled cyclists.
To distract Ron from thoughts of his stolen bike and daylight coming to an end, Tim suggested they race on the way back to the city. Ron pedals first, racing from mile 1 to mile 12 with Tim sitting on the rear bike rack and timing Ron. Next, Tim races from mile 12 to mile 24 with Ron sitting in the rear of the bike and timing Tim.
Racing Tim's bike, Ron wins easily. How so? Is it because Ron is a much stronger cyclist? Or is it because he weighs less? Did Tim eat something at the diner that upset his stomach? Tim drags his feet? Or is it some other reason?
Cycling Riddle
"-All things being equal (wind, terrain, etc), it is likely that Ron can apply more power to the pedals over 12 miles than Tim.
I'm guessing that you are posting this because you are surprised with the outcome. Here's an example:
Rider #1 Can average 300 watts for 12 miles, but weighs 90 kilos (198 lbs). His power/ratio ratio is 3.3
Rider #2 Can average 250 watts for 12 miles, but weighs 70 kilos (154 lbs). His power/ratio ratio is 3.6.
Rider #2 is ""stronger"" and will be able to put Rider #1 in a world of hurt over time if the terrain is hilly enough.
Now if both riders are sitting on the bike,
Combined rider weight is 160 kilos:
With rider #1 pedaling, power/weight ratio is 300/160 or 1.88
With rider #2 pedaling, power/weight ratio is 250/160 or 1.56
All other things being equal, bike would move faster with rider #1 pedaling.
"
Ron was really pissed about having his bike stolen! Which diner was it stolen from?
There are 12 miles from 12 to 14 but only 11 from 1 to 12.
Should have known better. No one but Mordecai rides with toe clips anymore. Well, the scenario is possible even with equivalent distances. I'm glad that no one had their bike stolen. Happy New Year Year everyone!
You are correct (typeo aside) - Ron peddled 1 mile less than Tim.
If no typo or riddle, in the same amount of mileage I doubt Ron would have beaten Timothy. However, if they were of equal weight and ability and all variable being equal, the second rider would probably win. The first rider would have lost weight through his effort so the second rider would have a lighter load for his distance.
The 2nd racer's effort would be hampered by a world of bother after sitting on the bike rack for 12 miles.
B. Dale's explanation was pretty good, too. Incidentally, I just choose those monosyllabic names for typing convenience.
"This one was on Car Talk last year. It is about running up Mt Washington but can be translated to a cycling event. It is from the file of 2004, 05-17 PUZZLER: A Run That's ""No Sweat""
go to: http://www.cartalk.com/content/puzzler/transcripts/200420/index.html
for the answer go to: http://www.cartalk.com/content/puzzler/transcripts/200420/answer.html
But I think there is another aspect not considered."
They wore coolmax/polypro clothing or drank alot of beer and ate alot of pretzels before running up the mountain.
Who can dial-in running, off the 'mill and in that environment, *exactly* 5.8 miles per hour anyway?!? ;-)
If we assume, as they do, that the conditions in the lab were identical to those on Mt Washington, the elevation gain is an endothermic process due to a gain in kinetic energy. The release of this energy is apparent when brakes heat up going down hill and Steve Weiss can attest to it as he recalls his crash a year and a half ago. We just don't notice the minor loss of heat as we climb.
