lcoolb wrote:@VNTech: that 141g of drag a Venge frame saves over a round tube frame, how many % of total drag is that?
The WeightWeenies website was recently updated and is now fully SSL encrypted (URLs beginning with https).
Probably you have been logged-out, we're sorry for that (was unavoidable), just login again.
When there are errors occuring please first delete cookies and browser-cache - if it doesn't help or you find other problems please post here or write short mail to email@example.com
When you have problems with Tapatalk App please re-follow/re-login.
in the end, doubters will doubt
The picture shows:
-no water bottles
-no bottle cages
(I bet if you put those factors in, the results woudl be so jumbled that the benifits would be even more indecernable, as to negate any benifit of an aero frame)
Tinea Pedis wrote:If I'm pulling out a big 5 min effort to break away, I know from my power curve that an extra 5-6% takes my power from what I would produce over 5 min to closer to my 3:30 power.
That is certainly something I would not sneeze at.
I think VNTech makes some good points. But thisisatest else nailed it when he said
thisisatest wrote:when comparing an aero frame to a traditional frame, the whole point is the other factors are to remain constant. it is how things are tested-changing one variable at a time. so one frame vs another frame, with the same rider, one is faster.
airwise wrote:Right to counter, the wind tunnel tests in Top Velo showed Zipp 404's to be worth all of 0.5 sec per KM, an aero frame less. Now given that tunnel results do not seemingly translate into the real world and overstate the benefits by apparently 50%, the real benefit at 40kph of a frame is likely to be circa 0.3 secs per km.[...]
The argument is that the benefit is remarkably small [...]
fio wrote:Honestly, I believe that aero frames do have their benefits. But I think it depends on what kind of rider you are. If you're typically on the front of the pack attacking, or sprinting, yeah, that aero frame might squeeze out some watts here and there. But if you're a climber or someone who's just sitting in for whatever reason, you'll probably feel the benefits of a light frame much more than you will an aero one.
For me, a lighter bike/wheels is much more noticeable. I weigh 120lbs and climbing is what I really excel at--is having an aero frame on an 8% grade really going to help me all that much? Probably not. But I can tell you that I can definitely feel the lighter weight of my R3 underneath me than anything else. Of course, if you're a 170lb rider and you're off on some solo attack, your results will be different. If you're weighing the options, you should probably understand what you're going to be doing with the bike first.
Tinea Pedis wrote:I'm not looking to convince you, please refer to my last 2 sentences.
As with anything that's had a decent amount of tests/research done on it, you can find tests that disprove the findings of another.
For mine, if choosing an aero frame certainly isn't going to hinder me then I would see no reason not to grab one with both hands if the option was available to me (sadly, it's not).
The argument is that the benefit is remarkably small and may not even exist in the real world.
There is no evidence to date that this argument is misguided.