I agree: for crits and the end of road races it is typical to carry only a single bottle. That's the best way to go.

But including the rider is obviously preferable: the rider substantially changes the wind flow around the seat post and the rear end.

Still, the data in the VeloNews article will be far from useless. Given two frames, one better without a bottle, it will probably (not certainly) be better with the bottle.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

Fear not weightweenies, we've discussed all of this internally and have covered as many bases as possible. We of course have a number of constraints to take into account as well.

I pose this question re: water bottles: what if Bike A's shape is faster with Bottle and Cage A than Bike B, and Bike B is faster with Bottle and Cage B, but you in fact ride and race with Water Bottle C?

Placement, size, cage type, bottle type, etc all would have effect. Since it is a non-standard piece of equipment we left it off, despite the fact that almost everyone rides with a bottle.

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

Personally I usually use 1 or 0 bottles. Any ride up to 30 miles will be 0 bottles. Why can't you do without water for 2 hours? Anything above that and I will carry 1 bottle. Probably will not drink from it during the ride due to a couple refreshment stops. During any criterium, 30-45-60 minutes, I would never ever carry a bottle. During a road race, 30-50 miles, one bottle is sufficient.

This is weight weenies? People build up these light weight high dollar bikes? And then strap 4 pounds of water to it? Do you also strap a huge Carradice bag to the saddle and load it up with 5 pounds of tools and gear?

That reply is ridiculous... Please get a wider perspective on what people are using their bikes for. My races are typically around 100-110 kms. I (and all my rivals) are riding two 500 or 750cc bottles, depending on weather. That you only ride crits and stop constantly for refreshments does not reflect many racers behavior, I'm sure.

I look forward to seeing a test WITH a rider, WITH cables and WITH bottles, as this would reflect the real life conditions. Anything else is IMO not more than a qualified guess.

I also look forward to seeing the stiffness test of the all out "Aero" bikes. The latest results I saw in "Roadbike" seemed to confirm that very narrow bikes are also very flexible and suffer from bad handling.

I agree it seems less likely which bottle & cage (assuming a standard-size bottle and a typical carbon cage) should make less difference to the ranking of results than whether there is a bottle or cage. For example the Litespeed was specifically designed to be efficient with a bottle.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

The low-yaw CdA, bike no rider, Zipp 404 wheels... I assume air density = 1.185 kg/m² at the North Carolina wind tunnel.


"standard bike" (unspecified): 0.106
Felt AR: 0.092
Ridley Noah: 0.087
Blue: 0.085
Cervelo S3: 0.083

The contrast with the Tour results really couldn't be more striking. There, the Cervelo was actually slower than the Cannondale System 6 at zero yaw.

Tour reported a typical CdA for zero yaw with rider is 0.31. So a difference of 0.023 (the Cervelo to the "standard bike") is around 7.4% of total wind power. At 40 kph the power difference is 18.6 watts out of 250 watts. At this speed, 33 watts is a typical rolling resistance power (12% of total). Thus, a 7.4% reduction in wind resistance power is around a 2.3% savings in total speed: 85 seconds / hour.

VeloNews claimed more than that: 128 seconds. But they average over yaw angles from -20 to +20 degrees.

I think omitting the rider should overestimate the aero benefit somewhat, so I'd view the VeloNews results as an upper bound on possible savings.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

I recived my Velo News in the mail yesterday. Went to this test right away. I ride a Cervelo SLC so I have some intrest in these test results. I was happy to see the Cervelo S3 won the test. Although I would like to know the stiffness numbers on the non areo test bike. Does anyone know those numbers, or at least were I can look at other bikes that have been tested for stiffness ?

Mike

_________________
Thanks

Mike

Current Rides
2012 Scott Foil Team
2009 Cervelo P3
2008 Cervelo SLC
2009 Blue CXC
2009 GF Superfly
2010 Felt TK2 Track

Good to see that the Blue is just barely "slower" (??) than the Cervelo.

In other words: save yo'money!

_________________
Exp001

The Cervelo rated higher in ride quality, however.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

Unless the test physically measured frame deflection using a standardized testing mechanism and then equated that to an interpretation of human reaction to those qualities, ride quality is always subjective.

to re-quote:


We may also want to add in the factor of 'perceived value' - wherein a rider having knowledge of the frame's monetary value or 'exclusivity' (marketed or otherwise) will rate that frame higher than a frame of less monetary value or exclusivity. There are countless examples of this in any field of interest, not just bicycles, so giving examples at this point is moot.

Any publication which thrives off of the industry's growth, advertising, and appraisal is not immune to the effects of bias through perceived value.

_________________
Exp001

Mike,
The torsional stiffness test will be a constant throughout all our tests this year (six rounds of four bikes total) so you will have plenty to compare to soon enough.


prendrefeu - As noted in the "results" section at the end of the review, we found a distinct correlation between perceived stiffness, as rated prior to the lab testing, and the lab test results. We could feel it distinctly. Those did not correlate to ride quality, though. In other words, "ride quality" does not equal torsional stiffness.

We balanced the subjective ride quality scores and scientific scores for a reason. You need both. No lab can replicate the real world perfectly, and we can't possibly speak for every cyclist regarding the definition of good ride quality. We just know what we like.

Cheers

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

Damn I love this forum. Thanks for being a part of it, VNTech.

_________________
Exp001

My pleasure, I've been a lurker on this forum for the better part of a decade. Always loved it.

I'm just sorry I couldn't think of a more creative handle. I feel I've ripped off Pez a bit

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

Thanks VNtech for your great review. Regarding the stiffness tests I have heard over and over again that my Cervelo is not stiff enough in the head tube area. I don't seem to notice it although many people on this forum do. Love to see the numbers between the S3 and some non aero frames. I am looking forward to upcoming tests !

Mike

_________________
Thanks

Mike

Current Rides
2012 Scott Foil Team
2009 Cervelo P3
2008 Cervelo SLC
2009 Blue CXC
2009 GF Superfly
2010 Felt TK2 Track

VNtech,
I rec'd my issue in the mail and also went straight to the tests.

As I was at least trained as an engineer (structural) and do know all the nuances that could go into such a test, believe you and your team have done a good and fair job on the testing. I particularly like the qualitative testing. Sure, we all have our own opinions on how a bike "feels" but combining opinions of a couple of different riders along with the quant testing is great.

Keep up the good work and look forward to the next series of tests.

_________________
It only hurts if you think.