Tour Magazine Aero Frame Test (wind tunnel) - Anyone read it

[thisisatest]

the point is, all else being equal, the aero frame will get you farther, sooner. not a lot, of course, but some. on top of that, even on weightweenies, you have to know that weight saved on a bike does next to squat from a pure performance point of view. it sure feels nice, though.
so whenever you bring up other variables that make one person faster than another, different situations, with different moods, know that in each specific event, if the rider on a non-aero bike was instead on an equivalent aero bike, that rider would have been slightly ahead. even if the non-aero bike is 1/2lb lighter.
unless youre starting at the bottom of a mountain and finishing at the top, with an average of 5-8% grade depending on rider speed, etc.

[Discoverspeed]

Exactly. This is the ceteris paribus concept in economics and science experiments. ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL. Then there is a basis for comparing apples with apples and examine the impact of a single variable - in this case aerodynamic drag on whatever dependent variable (sprint speed, etc).

@Mikmik, no body is disagreeing with you that there are many other factors involved in winning a race but we are talking a like for like comparison of a single factor - aerodynamic drag of a frame. There are no"if" this or "if" that when we are isolating the aerodynamics of the frame. All else being equal, superior aerodynamics will result in less drag, with the drag higher at higher speeds (as in a sprint) - that is the hypothesis in question. If two riders did exactly the same things leading up to the final sprint, the hypothesis is proposed that a "faster" aero frame will give a competitive advantage.

In a multi-variate model, you will then introduce all the other factors that you have mentioned but that is a separate discussion (and model) altogether.

[kgt]

Nobody disagrees that aerodynamics is important as a science that involves physics, mathematics, computation etc etc. Of course it is.
All that in theory. In practice isolating the aero properties of a frame offers nothing.

[airwise]

the point is, all else being equal, the aero frame will get you farther, sooner. not a lot, of course, but some. on top of that, even on weightweenies, you have to know that weight saved on a bike does next to squat from a pure performance point of view. it sure feels nice, though.
so whenever you bring up other variables that make one person faster than another, different situations, with different moods, know that in each specific event, if the rider on a non-aero bike was instead on an equivalent aero bike, that rider would have been slightly ahead. even if the non-aero bike is 1/2lb lighter.
unless youre starting at the bottom of a mountain and finishing at the top, with an average of 5-8% grade depending on rider speed, etc.

And this is the point because all else can never be equal. No aero frame is as light/stiff/comfortable as one designed with different design priorities. All of these factors will have an effect on the performance of the rider ( or engine if you like ) - the result of which is not measurable in a wind tunnel.

[Discoverspeed]

Nobody disagrees that aerodynamics is important as a science that involves physics, mathematics, computation etc etc. Of course it is.
All that in theory. In practice isolating the aero properties of a frame offers nothing.

In practice? Well allow me to offer my own experience -

I have been riding a road aero frame (an S5) for 3 months and can say that any "new bike/ aero placebo effect" has been removed from my judgement. In practice, my aero road bike does ride faster than my non-aero road frame which is a Dogma (as in measurable lower watts needed for the same speed using same wheels, same tires, same pressure, almost same equipment, same riding position over my usual course). Although, as many has pointed out, I cannot pin it solely on aerodynamics as frame stiffness, angles, etc may have played a part but IMO, a major departure between the two sets of variables has been the aerodynamic design.

Look, I am a user like most of you and have no interest whatsoever in bicycle sales. I too am wary of marketing claims on speed, weight and so on (and been a victim of spurious product claims). However, in this area of aerodynamic drag, I am a believer as I can practically see the reduction in power wasted when I jump on my aero frame versus a traditional frame. This advantage is more obvious when you work at the front or go on training rides alone. I am not talking about race winning advantage just because I am on an aero bike but less aero drag makes riding at the front and training easier - come to think of it maybe legs are fresher for the final burst.

I know that there will always be people who will disagree but please do give aero frames a try before pronouncing the senselessness of such designs. In theory and in practice.

[djconnel]

My theory: http://carmudgeon.starbike.com is redirected to these forums.

[beardking]

This advantage is more obvious when you work at the front or go on training rides alone.

There is no advantage in training on an aero-frame or wheels over training on a none aero-bike (other than getting used to riding that piece of equipment).

[kgt]

@beardking: I didn't write that
@Discoverspeed: Good for you but I still cannot accept that's due to the aero advantage.

[beardking]

sorry, got my quote wrong

[sawyer]

This advantage is more obvious when you work at the front or go on training rides alone.

There is no advantage in training on an aero-frame or wheels over training on a none aero-bike (other than getting used to riding that piece of equipment).

What about the shorter time the training ride would take?

[djconnel]

Like 1-2% less time? Get home in 1:59 instead of 2:01? Winds precisely the same, precise to a subdetectable level of precision, as the day before? Jersey fits the same, not looser, no tighter, such that body aerodynamics is perfectly matched?

Okay.

[Tinea Pedis]

Having just spent a decent race looking for any extra speed I could get to stay in touch with some vastly superior riders, I'd certainly at least give an aero frame a go if one was available to me.

As 20w, or even 10w, across the course of a couple of hellish hours where the peloton has no interest in letting a break go, would be damn handy to have up my sleeve.

Also, coincidence or not, all the Garmin boys did very well in the TT where we had to use our road bike with clip on bars.


WW being as it is, all this comes with the usual grain of salt and likely to be pulled apart

[airwise]

I spent all of yesterday's ride on an aero bike. Was I any quicker? No. Can I prove that? No. And therein lies the genius of the marketing.

[el condor]

Don't know if it has been mentioned before, I own a Canyon Cf SLX, just by the looks of it it's easy to figure out that's it's not a very aero frame, but riding a 100 to 200 km's on a very compliant-more comfortable frame which the Canyon defenitely is, may leave the rider with more power left compared to one on an aero bike. Just my 2 cents.

[Zoncolan]

Quoting the picture not required.

All good data but I do have one question for anyone here. Over the last month or so I have seen pictures of the Venge, Foil and S5 on the test but none of the control bike (Centurion). I think given that's the main comparison here that that is actually quite an important picture or video to see. Has anyone seen it?