Skip to main content

Should we restrict the drop on a Calibration Course?
We all know when riding a bike up a hill is not the same as riding the bike down a hill. You have an unequal weight distribution, hence the counts may vary. At the present time Calibration Courses have no restrictions on the drop. Any thoughts on this?
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I'd agree with Pete here. I have one calibration course with a slight hill that consistently reads different one direction than the other by about 4-5 clicks. Unless I did all four rides the same way I don't see the issue. In this part of NC saying all calibration courses had to be flat would be pretty restrictive.

Asking for the net change sounds like a good idea and wouldn't be a burden to provide and the state certifier could use judgement. I've not see any evidence of lack of it on the state certifiers part.

The measurers should be considered to use some good judgment also. When you think about it, if you're measuring something like the Hog Pen Hill Climb or Mt Washington wouldn't it make sense to measure from the top and calibrate the same way?
At present there is no requirement on the calibration course application to put anything other than an approximate altitude of a calibration course. If this were changed to require start, finish, low and high altitudes then certifiers would get a better feel for whether excessive variation in calibration numbers is due to an irratic measurer or altitude changes.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×