Hi

I have searched and searched, but it doesn't seem to be much data/comparison on aerodynamics on road frames. We hear a lot about "more aerodynamic for 2013" "Hidden cables for better aerodynamics" "New seatclamp to reduce drag" etc, but I can't find any hard numbers. Note that I'm looking for frame alone. I saw some numbers comparing the new Madone to some other bikes, but that was complete bike speced, which kind of makes it useless.

Has anybody seen some data on this? How many watts difference are we talking about?

If there is a thread going on, please refer me and delete this.


Please use search

_________________
WTB: MTB hubs, 29'er carbon rims

My 7.3kg/6.4 kg 29'er project buildthread!
My Bianchi Oltre XR

You have searched and searched?

Really?

Topics and links have been discussed ad naseum around here.

Several vendors have done some tests and there are links around to Velonews latest with Venge, Foil and S5..

hey Martin,
there is some data out there from Tour and from Velonews and then from manufacturers like trek, scott, cervelo and specialized; though the latter two don't really name the comparison bikes from other companies.

What you will note is that there is a fairly big range of how aero minded the companies are, from Trek where aero is a part of a total package, to the Cervelo S5 which uses much of the same tube shaping as the P5.

Velonews most recent test is here:
http://issuu.com/khcycle/docs/foil-velomag-2012" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Velonews 2011 is here:
http://www.cervelo.com/r/velo_news_2011-04.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But yeah, just search on google:"site:weightweenies.starbike.com aero test velonews tour" and you should get more than you'd ever want to read

It's been discussed a number of times, but from what I remember there was this one, http://www.tour-magazin.de/services/qtr ... 7.html#/24 performed by Tour Magazine in Germany, this VeloNews one, http://www.cervelo.com/reviews/Velo_News_2011-04.pdf , and then one more recent Tour test that I can't find, but I found the graph.



The Tour Magazine tests seems to suggest that from best to worst you are looking at about 25 watts.

I'd love to know if they tested with or without a rider. I think it was in the "Mavic Challenge" that was posted recently, where the claim was that with a rider the difference between frames was within measurement error i.e. not significant.

_________________
Bikes: Raceur, Beateur

hey wasser, that was one run, in the MIT tunnel. MIT tunnel has had "blockage" problems in the past where data with riders on have not been as accurate because they take up such a large amount of space in the tunnel. Tour tests with a dummy, as does Cervelo and Trek; and they all show statistical significance between aero frames and non-aero frames with dummies on.

I myself noticed a decent change in speed with the same watts when i went from a non-aero steel tri bike to a Felt carbon bike. I was doing one of my workouts on the same stretch of road both before and after the change in bike; I also kept track of wind conditions and avg power and there was a noticeable change.

I've seen tests and discussion, yes. But manufacturer claims are blurred and configured to benefit manufacturer of course, and a lot of tests include manufacturer specced wheels, bars etc.

Thanks for the velonews and tour test, I had not seen those. Too bad its so few bikes in it though

_________________
WTB: MTB hubs, 29'er carbon rims

My 7.3kg/6.4 kg 29'er project buildthread!
My Bianchi Oltre XR

NGMN, good info, cheers.

Any idea whether they made the dummy pedal in the Tour test? If they just drive the front and rear wheels like in the photo above, it would be freewheeling.

_________________
Bikes: Raceur, Beateur