I think, "when world records are broken," would mean broken at the time of the speech.  Most people would take 1 & 2 to mean that as well, but I don't think it does.  In my opinion, 1 is closer than 2 in that respect.

Hi N2g,  I try to make my replies unintimidating, but sometimes I get careless.  No worries on my account.  I enjoy trying to figure these things out.

I know this avoids your question, but your interviewer and his audience (or readers) are going to be more puzzled than I was.  Why be so circular?  I'd be more direct.  (We probably have different upbringings.)  "We think we have a winner here. We believe with the right rider we can set some new world records, and that's what we're shooting for."

BTW, we say, "I would like to break the record  -  break a record  -  break a few records."  "This will be a record breaker."  "We expect to do some record breaking."

None of your three examples make it clear why you, personally, should be happy when a record  is, or records are, broken.

Exactly when is it that you believe you (we) are supposed to be happy?  At the time the record is broken, right?  Because not long afterward it will be just another new record waiting to be broken. 

How about, "We are always happy to see world records broken."  This would be more natural, and would make clear your happiness is at the time of the record breaking.  But even this seems a bit sadistic.  It's like going to the auto races hoping to see an accident.  You want to see something broken.  You want to see someone's record fall.

Why not put a more positive slant on it: "We are always happy to see someone set a new world record."   "We are always happy for someone who sets /  has just set a new world record."  This way you can be happy for a person as well as for the achievement of your new bicycle design, and you can continue to be happy as long as he continues to hold the record.  When you place the focus on the old, broken record  -   hey, it's gone!

Okay, I agree "for" focuses on the cause of the happiness   -   but why it pleases you is somewhat suspect.    The use of "to be broken" probably relates it to the time of the breaking as effectively as using "when - - - - are broken."

"That" is probably the weaker of your original pair.  It almost sounds like you're always happy about the fact that records don't last forever.

So what do you think?

  - A.

Your explanation of "see through etc." is accurate.  It's better to use "someone's eyes," rather than "one's eyes."  "One" is a special case.  It's as close as active voice comes to being passive voice. Public transportation may be used as a way of saving gas.  People may use public transportation as a way of saving gas.  One may use public transportation as a way of saving gas.  "One" is nobody and everybody.

With the image we're discussing, we have to make clear that there's a person A and a person B.  When you say, "to see through one's eyes," you're only talking about one person.  "Try to see this situation through someone else's eyes other than your own."  "John should try to see the argument through Mary's eyes."  I'm sure you understand the concept.  Just avoid "one's."

I don't know if you were around to see Kooleen's old signature quote about walking a mile in someone else's shoes.  It brings up the same sort of idea.  (I believe it was originally a native American expression.  I could be wrong.)

Best wishes, - A.