Interesting, you conclusion totally hits home. I think a lot of us have noticed that when a bunch of bikes stop and are waiting at a light. When it turns green, we all start with about the same acceleration, though sometimes the Bromptons start a bit sooner, they are soon overtaken by the other bikes and then we all meet again at the next stoplight.
I can safely say that your day job is not being a RU-vid influencer. This is as impressive as it is an elegant explanation. The intuition moreover seems correct.
This is by far the most informative and comprehensive video about Brompton I have ever watched, I would just like to appreciate all your efforts!, keep up the good work!.
Nice explanation. Not all bikes are equal. Brompton’s are quite capable at meeting the needs of their riders. They’re an amazing feat of bicycle engineering. Reassuringly expensive…
Thanks for such a great video. Now i remember that on race bikes like used in the tour de france they use heavy clinchers (wheels) to maintain inertia and speed while using light climbing wheels for mountain stages.
Id really love to see you revisit this with some of the changes made by the T line! I assume the T line will still be slower than a comparable road bike, but it would be nice to quantify its advantages over the C line and P line. Another interesting thought experiment Ive wondered about is "at what point does an electric bike become a disadvantage?" An electric brompton, for example will obviously make a ride easier withinna certain distance, but I do wonder sometimes how much using it ats its lowest power assist level is actually better over just using a lighter bike over long distances.
Thanks. Amazing & detailed work. Brompton should hire you guys to improve its' perfornance instead changing colors and model lines every now & then to prove they are doing something. Keep it up!
i have a new hypothesis! new hypothesis, i think “internal gear hub” is at play when people say brompton has good acceleration. i think in urban environment one frequent scenario is to stop at traffic light and start. before stopping at red light it is usually at high speed (heavy gear / large gear-inches) and when start from a complete stop it is easier to use small gear-inch (light weight gear ratio) however for city bike or road bike, it usually takes quite some time (and distance) for gear shift to happens since the chain need to be moved around during pedalling. while Brompton, having an internal gear hub, rider can change the gear ratio WHILE IN COMPLETE STOP. from the highest gear-inch of “3+” to a quite small gear-inch of “1+” can be done by flicking the right thumb two times. in my opinion, although i absolutely agree a light way 7kg road bike at 700C is much easier to accelerate from complete stop than a 12kg C-line six speed Brompton. However, in practise, the Brompton is much easier to change from high gear-inch to low gear-inch due to internal gear hub. for a road bike rider in urban setting to change gear from high to low every traffic stops will be very very annoying. for Brompton, it is very crisp and easy to shift gear IN COMPLETE STOP. you can be at fastest right before you stop. change the gear hub, and use the lightest gear ratio to start (and accelerate) the bike forward
You raise a valid point. The likelihood of a derailleur based system being in the wrong gear at a red light is higher than with an internal gear system (this would put the P/T-Line at a possible acceleration disadvantage over the C-Line btw). In our simulation, we assumed both riders have an identical initial gear development setting. Finally, note that in an urban environment, we rarely use 1-/+ on our M6R(44T) during initial acceleration. We usually go from 2- to 2+ (which involves the 2speed derailleur, not the IGH). The same is likely to be true on the new 12 speed configuration as well (initial acceleration upshifting will be done using the derailleur, not the IGH).
@@2Bikes4Adventure i always amaze at how quick and thorough you guys reply to comments on youtube. it helps me to know more about different setting assumption in the video. love it, thanks. to add on the discussion, i live in (and work in ) hilly area of Kowloon, Hong Kong, China. therefore the need of wide gear ratio is helpful. and when going slightly up hills like in 1:5 gradient or 1:4.5 gradient, i might need 1+ or 1- to start ( so not to piss off van driver behind me 😂😂)
In my experience superior acceleration comes with the proper use of gears when riding the bike. Most of cyclists with which I have shared the road don’t completely understand how their gears work and thus the Brompton virtually out stands the rest.
What I ve got from this video it is that you guys are Super Smart! At 8:00 min, in case you are NOT good in physics 😀 LOL, WTF, I'm IMPRESSED, LOVE YOUR CHANNEL!
The thing unsaid about acceleration is frame strength and thus leverage on the handlebars. Sprinting on a road bike where the limiting factor is rider strength is not comparable to sprinting on a Brompton, or even on my Birdy at torsional rigidity of the two folders is not in the same ballpark as a modern road bike. The fact that you can ad the full strength of your shoulders, chest and upper arms in opposition to the downward and to a lesser extent rotational force on the pedals means folders will always be at a disadvantage as far as speed and acceleration are concerned. Thanks for the excellent video.👍😀
Good point. We touched on the subject of frame flexing briefly in this video ( ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-VwRR3Ubp0DU.html ), but focused more on suspension power loss.
After having watched a few of your videos and being impressed by your grasp and explanation of principles of physics (I am an ME, or MechEng / HVAC depending on where in the world you're from), I started suspecting that one or both of you is either an engineer or a scientist. After watching this video, I am convinced of it! This video is an elegant application and demonstration of principles. Thank you for this!
So, the solution is lighter Brompton wheels. Have you thought of upgrading this video with data from the Superlight/P or Ti variants? Great video, by the way... yes, my Rivendell is lighter than my M6L, but it doesn't fit as carry-on (and I've used the Ikea bags to carry-on my Brompton from the US to Europe and Australia).
@johnclifford1911, the lighter frame and wheels as well as more efficient tires would indeed improve the Ti acceleration performance compared to a regular C Line Explore. We briefly discuss the subject in the last portion of this video: Can a Brompton Climb? - GCN Challenge Explained ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-VwRR3Ubp0DU.html
What another wonderful video! Confirms what I already thought: the radius of the tyre is not hugely relevant, it's just that a smaller wheel is easier to accelerate because of the weight, and the effect is pretty negligible (and quickly cancelled by rolling resistance). Some questions: 1) I understand that the radius of the wheel isn't really relevant to the force required to accelerate it, it's really the weight that's important. But is that completely accurate? What if you had a very heavy wheel but with the mass concentrated near the centre of it? Such a wheel wouldn't have high inertia when spinning, so would presumably still be easy to accelerate. Presumably the principle you mentioned applies to wheels with proporitional weight distributions (or all weight concentrated on the circumference?). And presumably the weight distributions for a Brompton versus a normal bike are about the same, so I guess this isn't important. Actually, if anything, I'd guess a road bike will have quite a light "middle", with most of the weight concentrated around the diameter, so this may count in favour of the Brompton's acceleration. 2) On weights, a decent road bike will be more like 10kg I think. To be fair, you can also get lighter Bromptons, but I think you have to spend a lot to get one at around that weight. So a typical (say £1000GBP) bike, around the same cost of a normal 12-ish kg Brompton, would probably be quite a bit lighter. I'd bet this makes more of a difference than the smaller wheels.
Hi, 1. You are right, we assumed most of the weight was located on the perimeter of the wheel (thus ignoring effect of spokes and hub). Note the typical weight quoted was for front wheels. The SturmeyArcher hub would significantly increase the weight of the rear wheel, but being located near the rotation point and, to simplify the explanation, we assumed it would be similar to the inertia of the lighter but larger hybrid bike’s cassette. So, we basically equipped both bikes with 2 front wheels and included the transmission weight onto the frame. 2. We assumed an hybrid bike (Trek FX3 10 speed) for this test as it has a similar weight to a Brompton (it’s however, quite cheaper). Weight is critical in acceleration computation (more so than for maximum speed). We felt it was important to have 2 bikes of the same weight instead of two bikes of the same price (our other video about Brompton Speed was against a 10Kg road bike of similar price).
Can you make a video of the M6L steel comparing it to the old Titanium and the new P 4 gear series of Brompton?. Few months ago I bought a 2021 Team GB because I watched one of your episode which you mentioned and pointed out that the 1 kg difference of the titanium Brompton is easily augmented by using a swalbe One because its light and less rolling resistance, but now Brompton introduced the Performance Brompton weighing 3kg less from the steel M6L at 12.5kg avaerage, I want to the implication of the 4 speed against the 6 speed , plus the impact of the wieght differnce of 3kg. thank you and all the best and God bless you!
For rotational inertia of a pointmass/hoop it is equal to mr^2 with respect to the rotation point. This makes it that the radius at which the mass exists has an extremely large effect. So if two tires have the same mass but one wheel is double the diameter that will have a 4x bigger rotational inertia. So based on this i dont understand the statement that the radius does not matter.
Hi Jesse, You are right, a bicycle wheel inertia (I) can be approximated to mr^2. So, at first glance, r seems to have a bigger effect than m. The Newton’s second law as applied to rotational motion is: T = I α Where: T = Torque on the contact patch I = Bike wheel moment of inertia (mr^2) α = rotational acceleration (in radian/s^2) Assuming the propulsion force on the contact patch is F, we have T = F r We know the relation between rotational and tangential acceleration is defined as: α = a/r So, if we replace the value of T, I and α in Newton's 2nd law equation, we get: F r = mr^2 α / r If we cancel out all the “r”, we get: F = m a (which obviously looks very familiar) So, the tangential acceleration (a) on the contact patch will be proportional to the propulsion force F applied to it divided by the mass (m) of the wheel. We already established both bikes will have the same "F" if they have similar crank and gear-inch. So, the radius will have no effect, only the wheel mass.
@@2Bikes4Adventure thank you for the detailed response, using energy it might even be easier to show it. U = 1/2 I*w^2 U is the energy in joule w is the angular velocity in rad/s. I is the mr^2 w the angular velocity is equal to v / r. (vehicle velocity v in m/s and wheel radius r) So filling it in you get U = 1/2 * (mr^2) * (v/r)^2, ending up with the classical 1/2 mv^2. My brain fart was not taking into account that while one wheel is bigger, due to that it automatically means it rotates more slowly.
I think frame stiffness should be an integral part of this calculus...so Brommie could be "climby" if it is stiff, which I doubt...on the other hand my 20" wheel Cannondale Hooligan minivelo is a climbing beast with what is reputed to be Cannondales stiffest alloy frame due to its extremely tight triangulation and small size. Love that thing.
Good point concerning frame stiffness. We elaborated on the subject in a subsequent video: Can a Brompton Climb? - GCN Challenge Explained ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-VwRR3Ubp0DU.html
That was quite impressive. I fully expected a Brompton channel to say 'it beats road bikes'. I would be surprised if 90% of the viewers had any idea what you were talking about (myself included) however. I think a real world test featuring the same rider with a watt meter to make sure it is the same output for each bike would have been better. My own experience is that I have a 6.8kg single speed hummingbird folding bike with carbon wheels and the sense of speed, maneuvering and accerlation is unrivaled by any other bike I myself have tried to ride.I think a lot of acceration and time is wasted shifting gears, with the hummingbird, I can stand pedal initially to accelerate and then quickly transition to sitting down without wasting any acceraltion shifting. If you hit a long steep hill, just walk quickly
Actual test would indeed be ideal. We are planning to analyze GCN’s latest YT video about Brompton to extract some “field data”. What crank, gearing (front/back) and tires do you have on your Hummingbird ? What would be the weight of a wheel (about 1Kg?)
I often wonder how these field tests are done... I imagine there would have to be a lot of experimental and statistical control for riders' motivation, familiarity with the bike, road uniformity.
@@tandago7281 One way to simplify the test would be to do 2 races and swap bikes and riders between races (each rider doing a race with a Brompton and a race with a road bike)
Great video! The math in this video assumes the mass of the wheel is homogenously distributed (like a solid disc). A rim type flywheel does indeed store more energy than a disc type flywheel at the same mass and outer diameter. It might not be too "off" an assumption to make as the spokes carry quite a bit of the wheel mass. I am also not sure if taking this into account would be an advantage to the bigger wheel than the smaller one. And of course if we could consider the mass distribution to be the same, then the math would still hold. The difference due to this would be very small for different diameters of bike wheels. However I think that this difference does exist is part of the reason for the "myth".
We assumed most of the wheel mass difference is due to the tire and rim size, thus located on the perimeter. We ignored the weight of the spokes (and assumed the hubs were identical on both bikes). We therefore used the moment of inertia of a hoop (MR^2) and not a solid disk (1/2*MR^2) in our software model.
I think that makes sense. It is a good enough approximation even if I think the thickness of the rim+tire should be a larger portion of the wheel diameter for the Brompton given similar rim thickness and tire "thickness". So there would be slight advantage for the Brompton. The hub on the Brompton would carry more inertia however so a slight advantage to the road bike there.. Spokes are probably negligible 🤔
Sorry, as well intentioned as this video is, there are several errors in the deductive logic and calculations. To highlight one, at c4.40mins, the weight of a bicycle wheel *is* a factor in the linear inertia, but a much greater consideration is its radius. This can be understood better by considering a wheel as a simple lever in which a longer lever resisted at the fulcrum requires more force to resist with the same weight applied at the other end than a shorter lever; in other words the Brompton wheel will initially accelerate quicker with the same force applied at the hub than a larger wheeled bike because of the mechanical advantage. The issue that is most egregious however, is the omission that friction in the Brompton gear hub, especially in the high gear, is significant which slows acceleration. In the case of a headwind, the Sturmey Archer friction is unable to overcome the opposite force applied to the rider which prevents any acceleration at all. Brompton's are great bikes, despite this flaw, but this video does not unfortunately fairly represent the physics involved.
Internal hub friction losses vs derailleur and aerodynamic effects (as discussed in our video ( ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-F98oQ7Xo5mI.html )) were indeed taken into account in the simulation model used. This model ( www.researchgate.net/publication/279937184_Validation_of_a_Mathematical_Model_for_Road_Cycling_Power ) was demonstrated to have a correlation (R2) of .97 between projected number and actual measurement. If your recorded evidence significantly diverges or maybe you favour some opposing view research paper, please share them with us.
Everything else being equal (same tire type/brand/model/width, pressure and road condition), a 16” tire should have a rolling resistance about 40% higher than a 700c. Increasing the pressure could help, but only if the road conditions permit (otherwise, it could make things even worst).
moment of inertia is actually sum( mr^2) for all the point mass in an object. so i believe when calculating the rotational kinetic energy, since the mass is closer to the axis of rotation, mass value is NOT the only factor? however, i agree there are too many factors at play, so, why don’t you do some physical experimentation with some bikes you have. accelerate 10 times with each bike, look at the footage and give conclusions. isn’t this how we get statistics?
You are right Osmond, a bicycle wheel moment of inertia (I) is computed using sum(mr^2). So, at first glance, r seems to have a much bigger effect than m. To simplify calculation below, let assume most of the mass is located on the perimeter of the wheel. The Newton’s second law as applied to rotational motion is: T = I α Where: T = (Tangential) torque on the contact patch I = Bike wheel moment of inertia (mr^2) α = rotational acceleration (in radian/s^2) Assuming the propulsion force on the contact patch is F, we have T = F r We know the relation between rotational and tangential acceleration is defined as: α = a/r So, if we replace the value of T, I and α in Newton's 2nd law equation, we get: F r = mr^2 α / r If we cancel out all the “r”, we get: F = m a (which obviously looks very familiar) So, the tangential acceleration (a) on the contact patch will be proportional to the propulsion force F applied to it divided by the mass (m) of the wheel. We already established both bikes will have the same "F" if they have similar crank and meter of development. So, the radius will have no effect. Rotational dynamic motion is based on Newton’s laws, not statistics.
Good point Jari. In our calculation, we assumed continuous average crank force. It would be interesting to model the effective tangential force as a function of the crank angle (some kind of sinusoidal) and see how different wheel inertia would affect the results. Maybe something for an “advanced-bonus” video :-)
I believe the nimble feel of the Brompton gives the illusion of acceleration. Regardless, on my 6 speed with 44T front chainring, I use gear #1 for maximum acceleration out of difficult junctions (from a standstill) but otherwise gear #2. I have never attempted racing conventional bikes away from standstill, but in tight traffic conditions I am happy to say that the Brompton is the fastest of my own bikes for making good progress. The nimbleness, short overall length, and ability to change to a low enough gear (on the 3-speed changer) at or near standstill means the bike is a perfect traffic companion.
Agree. Size, agility (and downshifting while immobile) makes it easier to use in a crowded urban environment than a full-sized bike (We have 44T as well btw.)
A year ago, I've made some math and get the rotational inertial of 20" wheels would translate to 1,5 kg advantage weight in comparison to 26" wheels, which mate your results. That doesn't explain why I jump ahead in may folding bike when the lighs go green. The answer may be on the much faster changing gears that is possible on a bike with smaller wheels.
Everything else being equal, 20” tires have better rolling resistance than 16”. The bike (and you) may also be lighter than your opponents (and/or you are in better shape then them :-)
Hello, many thanks for the super clear (and sometimes over the top of my head) explanation. I can empirically validate your conclusions from my daily experience :). Usually, I am the fastest to get out of the bicycle jam (mostly of city bikes) with regular effort, but once in a while, there is a road bike or hybrid that overtakes me. However, there are at least 7 intersections with traffic lights in my 25 minutes one-way commute, and other bikers always catch up. I also catch up with e-bikes. Separate topic, I have always admired your animations, always simple and elegant. I would love to learn to make such visuals for my presentations at work, what software do you use? Thanks.
Hi Kaustubh, As surprising as it may sound, we are using Apple Keynote for our graphics. Leveraging its “Animate: Magic Move” feature, rudimentary animation is possible. Anything too complex can quickly become a nightmare though, so we need to keep it simple. We have experimented with Apple Motion, but hasn’t master it yet.
Love the thorough and fair exploration. I did have one question that I either missed or was not mentioned. As the wheel accelerates would the weight being on the outside of a larger circle have a greater effect than the same weight (or even less weight in this example) on the outside of a smaller circle? or is this weight just as negligible as the wheel weight difference?
Hi Dustin, Assuming most of the weight is from the rim+tire and ignoring the spokes (and hub) weight, a Brompton 16” 1Kg wheel would have the same acceleration performance as a super-light but larger 700c 1Kg wheel. The radius would have no effect, only the wheel weight. Note that having the choice between a “lighter and better acceleration wheel” vs “heavier but better aerodynamic wheel”, most road bike racers prefer the 2nd choice.
The larger circle of the wheel is negated by the fact that it is spinning at a slower speed for the same forward speed. So as mentioned it is just a factor of the rim and tire weight. Now it you can trade off a heavier hub for a lighter rim you do have an advantage. That is why some exotic wheels will have the spoke tensioning mechanism in the hub rather than use traditional spoke nipples.
Am I correct in thinking that wheel radius does not matter for acceleration only if the ratio of the rolling radius to the radius of gyration remains the same?
Correct. We assumed the wheel mass was located on the perimeter (rolling radius) for both bikes (ignoring hub and spokes differences). The specified mass (1Kg and 2Kg) was measured for front wheels. We assumed the Brompton’s internal rear hub moment of inertia was equivalent to the hybrid Shimano cassette and ignored it in rotational motion calculations.
While the Brompton wheel base is comparable to a full size bike, it does have an unusually small mechanical trail. Combined with its smaller overall length, it translates into an agile bicycle in crowded environments (city traffic or sidewalks).
Interesting video, but physics aside, maybe its the riders simply accelerating faster because of the fun factor on the Brompton ;) ...or maybe other cyclists are stunned into decelerating? Here are some reactions to a Brompton (I have a rear facing camera on my Brompton) in the mountains (Sellaronda Bikeday in the Dolomites), 34 seconds in is a priceless reaction from a roadie... ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-T2hPOJpNYc0.html ..I would be interested iif the small wheels are advantageous in cornering due to the lower centre of gravity? Maybe an idea for your next video :)
We saw your video a few days ago on the GCN YT Channel. What a great compilation of surprised riders (even taking pictures of you with their cellphone) and a great testament to the Brompton capabilities. Thanks for sharing it with us. Many commented on the effect of frame flexing (most noticeable at high power setting), how would you rate this aspect of the bike following such climb? PS The Dolomites has such great sceneries. We only cycled there once (it was with our Birdy’s) . PPS Indeed cornering (and stability) would make a good subject for a future video.
@@2Bikes4Adventure Thank you :) in terms of frame flexing, it wasn't something I noticed or was aware of during the climbs. I was riding with the 44tooth on the front and the Brompton was a standard six speed. Since the climbs are not too steep at Sellaronda there were not too many situations where I was out of the saddle. I was also running a mid-riser handlebar somewhere between an S and an M type. PS. Yes the Dolomites are a dream! Its the second time I am doing the Sellaronda Bikeday with a Brompton, last time in 2019 there were 50+ Bromptons in total. This year I didn't any others. PPS. I will look forward to a 'cornering' video with science ;) I had the feeling that I could take the corners at a higher speed than the 'roadies' and was rarely overtaken on the the descents, but maybe the science will say otherwise, just as it does with the acceleration :) Keep it up, love your videos!
great maths but in the real world its unlikely one would accelerate from a stand still from half way through their gear range. would be interesting to see the results of a real world drag race next time! thanks
We support your suggestion for an actual “drag race”! We confess, in a normal urban environment (assuming flat road), we rarely use our Brompton 1st or 2nd gears, even at traffic lights (we do have a 44T) Doing the math using a lower gear setting, the Brompton would lose and additional 3% efficiency due to its hub planetary gears while the Trek would see an improvement in efficiency due to its use of a bigger sprocket, so the updated results would not be too favorable for the Brompton.
@@2Bikes4Adventure _"We confess, in a normal urban environment (assuming flat road), we rarely use our Brompton 1st or 2nd gears, even at traffic lights (we do have a 44T)"_ This is exactly right. On my Brompton, I typically start in gear 2 or 3 when it's flat, which is already 'easy enough'. Also saves an early gear change. I only tend to use gears 1 and 2 when going slowly through busy areas or going uphill. None of the above is that relevant either, though, because the non-Brompton can just be down-geared to make it equivalent (indeed, it has a larger gear range) and then, as stated above, the Brompton loses some gear efficiency.
Sorry, you didn't cared about mechanics , I'm 26" Montague Paratrooper and brompton owner , I'm used to ride them alternative , monday with one , tuesday with other, and compared them and feel be easier maintain high speed on avenues because the last element in contact with pavement must have shorter transmission rate, the 16" wheel in this case. This is a practise experiency. Not theoric.
Thanks for your insightful comment. Our Montague Paratrooper 26” (yes, we do own one as well) is heavier than our Brompton, is it the case for you? Our Montague tyres have a higher coefficient of rolling resistance than our Brompton, is it the case for you? If yes, this would explains why you (and we) are faster on a Brompton. If not, congratulations, you have beaten the law of physics.
The acceleration of a Brompton is quicker up to around 10mph than most full size bikes. However this is not down to comparing wheels, rotating weight etc it is down to it lower centre of gravity and stability allowing the rider to get away easier. At higher speeds this advantage falls away. It is as simple as that
Somehow, superior stability is not the first thing that comes to mind when thinking about Brompton (ever tried to cycle it with no hands?). So, could you support (through scientific references (url)) your claim about Brompton’s superior stability and the advantage it provides over a full size bike during acceleration? Alternatively, feel free to use eigenvalue analysis (or any other mathematical methods) if you want to elaborate yourself.
@@2Bikes4Adventure thanks but I think that you are missing the point in that your video should have taken this into account. The Brompton isn't the only bike with small wheels and a low centre of gravity. There is research back to the late 1950 by Dr Alex Moulton that demonstrates clearly this point when he was designing the f frame. This along with other scientific tests around wheel sizes led him to draw this conclusion.. A traditional frame with larger wheels has a higher centre of gravity and initially is more awkward to get going. The low centre of gravity on small wheeled bikes allows the rider to make the most of inputs. As for stability yes I agree taking hands off is not Ideal but this again relates strongly to weight distribution being concentrated low and placing hands on bars is the perfect counterweight to aid stability and a clean getaway Which is also why I can make crazy Sharp turns at lower speeds that my full size bike could never make. On a large wheeled bicycle stability comes into its own when properly on the move. The low centre of gravity also aids loading these bikes right up and maintaining stability. It arguably is also in part why small wheeled bikes are still banned from a lot of cycle race events. If they were no competition what are they worried about? Watch the video link from the 60s which eloquently shows how good small wheeled bicycles are and it has taken large framed bicycles a long time to catch up at the expense of fragility due to the higher than usual tyre pressures and frame stiffness that was not present until relatively recently
Hi Harry, thanks for the URL. Moulton’s victory was most likely due to its smaller frontal area (aerodynamic, especially while drafting) and suspension (less rolling resistance). Needless to say, the drop bars and front suspension are nonexistent on a regular Brompton. In any case, stability (and its effect on performance) could make an interesting subject for a future video. We will look into it
