Is my math right? Aero bikes

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

mbrider
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:49 pm

by mbrider

On the PR front, it would be interesting to see Matt Hayman' power numbers - to see if he had an extraordinary day or if he has always been able to put out those kind of watts for that long. From the footage I watched, he didnt seem very active in the early part of the breakaway (had a teammate that seemed to be doing more work in those stages of the break). And I def. think he profited from being in the break and seeing the cobbles in a more relaxed and controlled fashion (not having to fight for position etc.). It also looked to me as though the Orica boys were the only ones on aero bikes, maybe Katusha would be the only other team. Over the distance of the break and the fact that the Scott Foil tested very well in compliance for an aero bike, I think it meant that it gave Matt H an advantage over any other non aero bike set up. He also appeared to be the freshest of the bunch in the last ~10k, even before the sprint.
Its evidence to me that an optimized aero set up (like everyone else is saying, aero helmet / skinsuit / wheels and bike) can add up to make a slim advantage. Sometimes a slim advantage is all you need.
These guys I would guess were always traveling at speeds where aero gear makes sense (almost all run a 44 inner ring - gotta be a low gear and cadence that equals over 15mph?) And the average speed for the race was 27ish mph. probably with little variance (what was the max speed, maybe just over 40mph? and not for very long I would imagine).

Regarding the Tri Rig brake - do you have the older version, or the new one?

I have both on my TT bike. The old one is now set up with a cross style headset front brake hanger and just bare cable down to the brake. it works much better. The new one is even better still (and on the rear).
On the S3 this set up will only be used with carbon wheels and the newer style wide rim format which will increase braking even more. I am very confident that this will be an awesome front brake set up (the new one is pretty slick, and is pretty easy to wrench / set up).

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



User avatar
Dr.Dos
Posts: 1073
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 11:00 pm

by Dr.Dos

Nonsense, it's the rider and if anything, it's the tire (Conti's pro limited series is awesome, Orica's tech guy tested this stuff on our local races and raved about it, he tested wheels and pressure until material failed here as well).

Canyon was all aero, didn't help Alex though.

User avatar
Miller
Posts: 2773
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:54 pm
Location: Reading, UK

by Miller

mbrider wrote:Regarding the Tri Rig brake - do you have the older version, or the new one?


It's the current model Omega X set up with a cable hanger in the stem. For all its aero virtues it does not deliver braking power like a groupset caliper plus you're locked into a particular stem height and it's more hassle to work on. For me those are significant negatives for putting it on a general use road bike.

Marin
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:48 am
Location: Vienna Austria

by Marin

wop wrote:stiffness of a frame is much more import


I agree with the rest, but how is stiffness supposed to help? "Power Transfer"?

dalex
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 12:05 pm

by dalex

Dr.Dos wrote:if anything, it's the tire (Conti's pro limited series is awesome, Orica's tech guy tested this stuff on our local races and raved about it, he tested wheels and pressure until material failed here as well).


These are the awesome, pro limited tubulars that one cannot actually buy in a shop?

User avatar
BeeSeeBee
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:00 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

by BeeSeeBee

Marin wrote:
wop wrote:stiffness of a frame is much more import


I agree with the rest, but how is stiffness supposed to help? "Power Transfer"?


Yeah, we already had a long thread about it that didn't result in any conclusions, just more conjecture: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=133901&hilit=stiffness

User avatar
Dr.Dos
Posts: 1073
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 11:00 pm

by Dr.Dos

dalex wrote:
Dr.Dos wrote:if anything, it's the tire (Conti's pro limited series is awesome, Orica's tech guy tested this stuff on our local races and raved about it, he tested wheels and pressure until material failed here as well).


These are the awesome, pro limited tubulars that one cannot actually buy in a shop?

Not available for us mere mortals. They come with latex inner tubes and various rubber compounds and layups depending on conditions.

Lars Teutenberg is known as aero and equipment geek for decades (he must be like 46 now). If he shows up at local races, you know it will be a damn fast finale and most primes are belong to him or his buddy. I've seen him puncture with the super fast flavor at least twice, very unlikely to happen with the regular Conti stuff.

User avatar
Ailar
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 4:09 pm

by Ailar

Aero is a buzzword when talking about frames. Not a single bicycle company has tested aero frames in real situations. Aero is good when you are on the first, third, fourth in the line. I haven't seen any videos of aero testing in groupetto, because that would be too expensive. There are only videos of aero bike alone, aero bike on the third position, but in grouppeto air moves much different then in the front.

So if you're not building a TT bike or planning to be in the breakaways all the time, save your money and invest in light aero wheels and buy something nice for the money that was not spent, because you skipped the "aeroframe" buzzword ;)
Cycling geek from Estonia

cobrakai
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:19 pm

by cobrakai

Ailar wrote:Aero is a buzzword when talking about frames. Not a single bicycle company has tested aero frames in real situations. Aero is good when you are on the first, third, fourth in the line. I haven't seen any videos of aero testing in groupetto, because that would be too expensive. There are only videos of aero bike alone, aero bike on the third position, but in grouppeto air moves much different then in the front.

So if you're not building a TT bike or planning to be in the breakaways all the time, save your money and invest in light aero wheels and buy something nice for the money that was not spent, because you skipped the "aeroframe" buzzword ;)


Sure, there is very little reason to upgrade to an aero frame if you already have a perfectly good frame. But if you are in the market for a new bike there is very little reason to not consider an aero frame if they fit well. Other than the uber expensive Venge and Madone most other aero frames are priced similarly to a manufacturer's round tube race offerings.

Krackor
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:48 pm

by Krackor

Ailar wrote:Not a single bicycle company has tested aero frames in real situations.

Complete bullshit. Trek has not only tested their new Madone in real situations, but they have released detailed descriptions and data from their tests in the Madone whitepaper. You ignore their testing, and ignore the possibility of bike companies doing their testing but not releasing results. At best you might be able to say that you are unaware of any testing done in real situations, but if you don't know of the Madone whitepaper you can't possibly be well-informed about aero bike frames. This statement alone shows that you have no credibility.

Ailar wrote:So if you're not building a TT bike or planning to be in the breakaways all the time, save your money and invest in light aero wheels and buy something nice for the money that was not spent, because you skipped the "aeroframe" buzzword ;)

Why buy aero wheels but not aero frame? This again reveals that you're just a luddite or contrarian who doesn't want to accept a new technology, instead of making a decision based on data and logic.

Add one to the list of ignorant aero skeptics on this forum.

User avatar
Ailar
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 4:09 pm

by Ailar

Krackor wrote:
Ailar wrote:Not a single bicycle company has tested aero frames in real situations.

Complete bullshit. Trek has not only tested their new Madone in real situations, but they have released detailed descriptions and data from their tests in the Madone whitepaper. You ignore their testing, and ignore the possibility of bike companies doing their testing but not releasing results. At best you might be able to say that you are unaware of any testing done in real situations, but if you don't know of the Madone whitepaper you can't possibly be well-informed about aero bike frames. This statement alone shows that you have no credibility.

Ailar wrote:So if you're not building a TT bike or planning to be in the breakaways all the time, save your money and invest in light aero wheels and buy something nice for the money that was not spent, because you skipped the "aeroframe" buzzword ;)

Why buy aero wheels but not aero frame? This again reveals that you're just a luddite or contrarian who doesn't want to accept a new technology, instead of making a decision based on data and logic.

Add one to the list of ignorant aero skeptics on this forum.


Could you please provite that whitepaper? :beerchug:
Wheels are spinning, frames aren't.
Last edited by Ailar on Thu Apr 14, 2016 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Cycling geek from Estonia

Krackor
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:48 pm

by Krackor

It's literally the first google result for "Madone whitepaper". Do your homework before you make such brash claims.

What's your mathematical basis for believing that the fact the wheels are spinning makes their aerodynamics matter while a frame's aerodynamics doesn't? This would be a revolutionary conclusion that turns the industry on its head if it were true. Show me your data!

AJS914
Posts: 5406
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

Wheels are turning, frames aren't.


Really? Airplane wings don't turn.

Post Reply