HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 125 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 6:14 am
Posts: 1205
Location: by Crystal Springs (Sawyer Creek Trail)
Funny how people still believe in the "if it looks fast it'll be fast." I see quite a few things on the BMC that aren't optimal and would bet the S5 is the more aero bike.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 4:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 1:05 am
Posts: 8
dvincere wrote:
Matching protocols can't account for variables they don't control. Comparing aero data across different tests should be deemed impossible.

yeah i guess that's probably the main conclusion to be drawn here.

i wouldn't necessarily have expected the tmr01 to match the s5 given that its a bit less full on aero but thought it would be more in line with s5 than trek - tmr01 is a proper kammtail with much of the teardrop intact, just missing the last bit whereas the trek is basically a rounded triangle missing virtually all of the tail. maybe the trek designers know what they're doing :shock: and the tail is not significant unless you have it all


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 4:38 am 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 6:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 479
I asked this on the other "aero frame" thread, but....
how does the old Carbon Soloist rate, aero wise, compared to the modern stuff?
thanks. I just bought an old red one for a song.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 7:13 am
Posts: 1512
I know I was the one to respond before but I thought you might like a little data; here is a test with the old s3, only difference from S3 to Soloist Carbon is the seatstays, which was more about ride quality and less about aerodynamics as I understand it; either way probably within spitting distance in terms of drag:
http://velonews.competitor.com/files/20 ... 452866.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 23, 2013 5:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 479
^ Thanks very much


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 125 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dellpan, Hastur and 36 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. TOUR Magazine light frame test - January 2014 info?

in Road

villahidalgo

13

2105

Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:40 pm

DWatkinsBSB View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Tour magazine frame weights: carbon, titanium, steel

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Road

djconnel

18

2012

Tue Sep 16, 2014 9:07 am

airwise View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. comparing claimed mass to Tour magazine measurements

in Road

djconnel

5

511

Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:48 pm

tinozee View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Kask Infinity test in Tour Magazin 08/2014

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Road

pyf

15

1418

Thu Aug 07, 2014 7:28 pm

pyf View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. New aero test: 12 aero frames vs 12 "unaero" light frames

[ Go to page: 1 ... 8, 9, 10 ]

in Road

fa63

136

13228

Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:54 am

highdraw View the latest post


It is currently Thu Oct 02, 2014 10:28 am

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB