My point is, where are you drawing the line here?

Are deep carbon wheels "all in your head" too? Is STI shifting "all in your head"? Aero helmets? Shoecovers? Skinsuits? Anything cycling related that wasn't developed in the 19th century?

Pretext: This is in the Scott FOIL thread... I do like the FOIL, I think it's a great balance between the 'aero trend', stiffness, weight, and aesthetics.



Eventually we'll all be on aero bikes then?

But, really, if you're a fat ass you'll be quite un-aero.

Actually, the greatest improvements any person can make to being aero on a road bike (non-TT) are on the person themselves. Wasn't this tested & found to be true by some magazine nearly a decade ago? (It's so old that I can barely remember which magazine, but I remember they listed improvements by margin of gain and frame was way, way, way, way, way down on the list... well after helmet, clothes, gloves... wheels eventually ended up on the list, too, above the frame).

It feels like we're just circling back to what they've figured out way back then: the least aero object is the person riding the bike. Make that person more 'aero' and you'll have significant gains...

Heck, there was a recent example from Colorado: one racer sets up his NON-AERO FRAME as a TT bike, does significantly better than other top competitors on their full TT setups. Guess what the greatest factor is there, all else being equal? The rider. The frame? Not so much as we're lead to believe by trends and marketing. (and I'm involved with marketing, it's part of what I do, but let's get a reality check in here)

But, again, in a race that isn't a TT? So many other factors go into winning and not-winning. Despite all the data-from-the-wind-tunnel, the reality of a race is different. Again, NON TT.

In a TT, when you're riding all alone, sure - aero will be a more significant factor. Your position on the bike will still be the greatest factor.... then everything else falls in line. Eventually you'll get to the frame.

As a not-off-topic but side comment: my road bike is just as fast as Thor Hushvod's Aero road bike... when they're both up against a wall and we're having coffee. It's the RIDER that is the biggest factor, the RIDER that wins the race, not the bike. Similarly, what's with all the 'aero' development being done in a windtunnel without a rider on top of it, in motion? Great. Put a rider on top of it, things change. Unfortunately bikes aren't racing themselves, the riders are racing. Scott did their aero development with a dummy RIDER in the wind tunnel. Coincidentally, Simon Smart did aero development for Enve with frame and rider on top in the wind tunnel. Guess what those two companies have realized more than the others? The most obvious thing: THE RIDER matters most. Marginal gains happen well after the rider. Throw in an actual race and your marginal gains are even less of a factor.

But hey, gotta make a buck and the best way to get people to buy something is to present a marginal gain to someone, marketing will let them forget about just improving themselves first... perhaps by riding, training, nutrition, and everything else. Your marginal gain won't mean sh*t if you don't have the confidence, skill, and so on (see previous post).

Yes, everything in weight and aero is all about marginal gains. Perhaps work on the biggest factor first (YOU) then add in the other stuff to get closer and closer to the 'ultimate' aero or weight goal. That applies to being both a Weight Weenie and an Aero Weenie. Even by then, your marginal gains won't matter in an actual race, because everything will end up being more-or-less equal for equipment, and we're back to YOU being the most significant factor.

Look, it's even evident on a track. They're pretty much all running the same wheels. Same clothes, more or less same helmet. Frames? Basically the same. Guess what determines a winner? The rider.

_________________
Exp001

so, in sweden you get the "old 404's"? but yes i know that on the premium you get the new FC 404 carbonclincher.

While in principle I agree with you, why would I have to work on myself first and then "the other stuff", when I can do it all at the same time?

Those things don't contradict each other.

I'm sure Fabian would have appreciated an extra mm at the finish of the Worlds road race this year and wouldn't mind giving up a couple in the TT.

It all matters, always.

Speaking about marginal gains, once you've fixed all the things you mentiond as being more important than the frame, the frame all of a sudden becomes a lot more important because it contributes a larger percentage to overall drag and, while I'm not an aerodynamicist (not even sure if they are called that), I'd guess that once you've cleaned up the stuff hitting the air before the frame, you've got a way better chance to actually make an impact with making your frame more aero.

_________________
"Nothing compares to the simple pleasures of a bike ride," said John F. Kennedy, a man who had the pleasure of Marilyn Monroe.

Yes, you're right there. All at the same time though.

Eventually we will see more aero bikes winning races... when the entire peloton are all riding 'aero' bikes.

_________________
Exp001

yes. the premium has DA di2 and the al carbon clincher 404 rims and team, with sram red has the "old" heavier rims. why? what i have heard, from a friend talking to the scott representative person here in sweden, it was because then didn´t want the third best bike, to be lighter then the second best. considering that sram red it much lighter then DA di2

I remember this study. I think it was done by researchers at MIT. And if I remember correctly, it wasn't a straight up analysis of aero gain, but an analysis of aero gain vs. cost. This is an important distinction.

So, not wearing gloves produced the most aero gain because there was no cost involved. Aerobars and helmets, likewise, do not cost nearly as much as a frame or wheelset, hence the greater aero improvement compared to cost.

There was the MIT study, but I'm referring to another one which preceded the MIT study and it was performed by a magazine... can't recall which one though. Tour, maybe? My internet memory is getting frail, must be all those damn internet memes overwhelming the storage in my brain.

_________________
Exp001

BikeRadar

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/h ... ero-19273/

_________________
BIKE DESIGN AND +

http://cds-0.blogspot.com/

have been doing some reserch and here's what i got today in my mailbox from a Scott rep in th UK


so now I wonder about an acctual weigth on those wheels, My best guess would be that they weigh in on about the same as the old 404's (1658g/pair). but a 404 FC with an alloy breaksurface wouldn't be all that bad. but then again if the weightpenalty is too high what would be the point of adding those alloy bits?

update, got a new mail from that Scott rep the other day:

even if it´s "special made" (i doubt it ), i don´t se why i shouldn't get the al carbon rims, when i pay 8400 euro (thats the price in sweden).

Hi all.

Sorry for hijacking this thread but i just got my Foil R2 and weighed everything. Just thought i'd post the results if anyone is interested.
The R2 is made from the heavier HMF carbon, not to be mistaken from the lighter HMX carbon like the Foil Premium or Foil 10 model.
It's a size medium 54cm.


Frame - Scott Foil R2 (Medium 54cm) - 921g
Fork - Scott Foil R2 - 413g
Stem cap + bolt + compression plug - 34g
Headset - Ritchey WCS Integrated - 61g
Seat Mast - Ritchey Carbon - 199g
Seat Mast Clamp bolt - 24g
Derailleur Hanger + bolts - 12g

TOTAL - 1635g




FRAME 54CM MEDIUM - including the headset press fit cups (i wasn't about to remove them just for the scales)
no hanger
no seat post bolt
no cable guide under the BB



FORK - Weighed with the compression cap.
Compression cap weighs 24grams so final weight for the fork is 384grams



SEAT CLAMP BOLT



DERAILLEUR HANGER + BOLTS



HEADSET - does not include the cups that are pressed into the headtube




STEM CAP + COMPRESSION PLUG + BOLT


The story so far...
please ignore the cockpit, the stem and handlebars are just there until the 3T Ergonova handlbar and carbon stem arrive

_________________
2012 Scott Foil Premium

My team provides me this bike for the 2012 season! I love it

Funny arguments here. The most silly that stands out to me is the use of GC guys as a data set. Those aren't exactly the guys who are catching a lot of wind in races, or fighting wind to win them. GC guys fight gravity, not wind. In time trials, the only time they fight the wind, they run aero frames (obviously).

Now, to the FOIL. I've stated here before that I like the frame very much. I haven't tested it in the tunnel, but will be soon. But that's almost irrelevant, because I like it because it rides like a normal frame. It feels like an Addict, or a slightly less forgiving Madone. I'd pick it on ride quality alone (and looks, maybe). The aero qualities are just a side benefit. I ride A LOT of bikes (I'd wager more than just about everyone here, barring some of the industry types) and it still sits up near the top of my list in terms of ride quality for race bike.

As the technology develops, more and more aero frames will ride like this. And then the reasons to run standard frames will dwindle. It's just like light frames of old — when sub-1000g frames were truly pushing the envelope, they often rode terribly. Only the true weight weenies rode them; those who were willing to take a sacrifice in ride quality. Now, the technology has caught up and everyone can ride them happily. In the next decade, I believe aero frames will go through a similar transition. Right now, most aero frames do NOT ride as well as, for example, a Madone, SL4, SuperSix EVO, etc. But they will get there. It is perhaps the one positive side effect of the 6.8kg limit, forcing companies to think about more than just a light frame.

_________________
VeloNews Magazine/VeloNews.com tech
Contact always welcome - http://velonews.competitor.com/author/cfretz / cfretz at competitorgroup dot com.
Twitter: @CaleyFretz