TOUR MAG AERO TEST 2016

[BeeSeeBee]

Here's something interesting to think about. You'd think pros would all know exactly what their bike weighs, right?

Wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMsgzD-JFQs

Or what pressure they're running:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pIHm40Amx0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FI7cniRBsNc

And even if they do, that pressure is probably non-optimal and causing far more power loss than a non-aero frame


http://trstriathlon.com/talking-tires-w ... -poertner/
(Contador apparently rides 140psi)

There are too many examples of pros and teams making poor choices to hold them up as the pinnacle of efficiency.

[Dez33]

And even in the peloton, you still have to pedal, there is still drag - you are moving at 50km/h ish, so even sheltered, you still have to pedal. Better to spend 200W here, than 230 surely?

On that note - neither Specialized nor anyone else said that an aero fram would save you minutes over a Tarmac. They said an aero frame, plus aero wheels, plus aero handlebar, plus aero skinsuit, plus aero helmet, plus aero shoes would save you minutes over the equivalent 'normal' kit.

So how much is the frame alone saving then? 1 minute? Less? Even if we say it's only 10 seconds, that's a lifetime in a Pro Tour, surely?

You can analyse the difference in the venge and the tarmac from the tests, the key difference in components are the bars, the wheels and the frame. The wheels will have the biggest impact, the roval 64 compared to roval 40's then bars and frame probably similar, or at least close.

I would say 10 seconds is overstating the frame but in any case that's only if they are away on their own for the last 40km.

[Dez33]

I ride an SWorks Tarmac (SL5) and am seriously considering a full on aero road bike as my next purchase. But I would like to fully understand the pros and cons before I take the plunge. And the one thing I cannot figure out is why so many pros are still not riding aero frames. I haven't seen a decent explanation yet......

Simple preference. Maybe they're used to it and don't want to change. Maybe they like the feel better. Maybe they feel the handling is better. Whatever their individual reasons are, they clearly feel that overall the benefits of an aero frame does not outweigh their reasons for choosing to ride something else. k

Personal preference I would say. I would imagine Sagan knows the watt saving a venge gives him but mostly chooses the tarmac for comfort and handling.

My own experience was tarmac to venge then straight back to tarmac. I just liked the tarmac ride quality more.

[ichobi]

Ride quality matters most to pro i would say. They race and train like what 4-7 hoursna day give or take? An uncomfortable bike will loae you more watts than any aero benefit presents as you cannot exert your effort at maximum capacity. Nonody at bmc rides the tmr. Sagan dish vias if thre terrain or weather are bad. But look at Trek-Segafredo, everyone rides Madone 9 now even Cancellara and they have 2 other bikes to choose from. Not sure how forceful Trek ask their rider to ride the Madone 9 but i would say it's good enough for most of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyanH]

@karlc, I'm currently running Vittoria Pave 27mm tubulars that measure a nice round, actual 27mm. I have some Veloflex Vlaanderen's coming in which are supposed to be 27mm too.

[cyclespeed]

Well, I'm very happy with the SL5. Had an SL4 for 2.5 years before that which was great, and I went from a 54 to a 52 when I got the SL5 which makes it even better for me.

No spacers, 130mm stem, I also reduced the bars from 42cm to 40 which helps ALOT with aero. 6.0kg.

So essentially, I've done pretty much everything aero apart from the frame. But I love the feel of the frame; it's handling, comfort, liveliness.

If I went to an aero frame (was looking at the Madone 9 and the Cervelo S5), I don't want to lose the above characteristics that I love so much. Especially since I am a natural climber (62kg) rather than a puncher / TTer.

And any gains seem very hard to quantify; in a race I tend to sit in the peloton and attack on climbs. I guess my solo rides would be a tad faster, but who cares about that really?

It seems to me that something has to give when designing an aero frame, or bikes like the Tarmac or the Evo would no longer exist. What is it that you sacrifice? Weight? (yes, seems a little bit) Handling? (if geometry is kept very similar, then unlikely) Comfort? (aero tube shape less forgiving, but progress being made with the likes of the Madone...?)

[micky]

Ride what you like and end of discussion.
As long as you're happy, everyone is happy too.

This topic should be about the german magazine Tour test.

[BRM]

Simply because a TT is about the fastest person that goes from A to B, where every nano second counts.
In a road race is not about the fastest time but who finish first.
In a road race are many parameters that set the Aero advantage of a road race bike to almost zero. In this condition its' of no meaning.
Aero is not understand by many here.

A rider has more benefit with a bike with good handling and where he feels comfortable on, than just extra Aero elements on a bike which suits him less.
The difference between a normal road race bike and an Aero one is pure marketing to sell more bikes to normal consumers.

Really poor argument. There are many many wins that have more to do with aero than any other equipment parameter. Sprints, breaks, marking moves, making moves, etc. Saving energy is also critical in an endurance race over the course of weeks, like the Tour.

Aero is understood by many.

Tour de France winner has been on an aero bike for some time. Green jersey has been won by riders on aero bikes.

There is a statistically significant advantage in the pack and even more advantage at the front.

I guess you can win the race without ever going to the front?

Hilaric that you mark my text as poor arguments while your text has really no meaning at all.
You call that arguments?? Really what a joker.

I stay out of these topics now because the discussions are too low to my like.

[fa63]

Obviously the two sides are not going to convince each other. I say we move on. It is ruining an otherwise nice thread IMO.

[RyanH]

I settled on the Foil Team. Tour rated it as higher on comfort than the Madone, which I'm a little skeptical about. We'll see. The Syncros bar stem is supposed to be super stiff, which I'm looking forward to.

I placed an order for a pair of tri rig OmegaX brakes. I was going to opt for EE's on the rear but the combo of ee's being a pita to clean as is, even more holes on the direct mount version and the brake placement being under the frame, I unfortunately think any weight savings of the ee's will be offset by extra cleaning time and weight gained over time by gunk accumulation. Fingers crossed, the tri rig brakes will be easy to adjust under the BB.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[AndreLM]

I placed an order for a pair of tri rig OmegaX brakes. I was going to opt for EE's on the rear but the combo of ee's being a pita to clean as is

If I am not mistaken, the new Foil uses direct mount brakes, and Omega X needs an adapter for that, while EE DM-front caliper has an aero cover and should be much lighter than TriRig. For the rear, check also if there is enough clearance for the Omega... it seems quite long, and some frames will definitely have issues with it.

An EE-front with aero cover + Dura Ace rear should be aero, light & powerful (I would personally go full EE, though).


.

[R350]

Wouldn't swap my TCR for anything 'more aero'. What it lacks on the straights it more than makes up more for on the up's and down's. If I had a spare few k though, a Canyon may tempt me..

[User Name]

What's new about aero frames? Back in my day.....

[GothicCastle]

Trek Madone 9

I rode up to someone who was riding a red Madone with 808s today. Beautiful bike.

Then I passed him. Fitness trumps aero.

[micky]