Parlee ESX Aero

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8609
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

justkeepedaling wrote:If you calculate the total gradient of your entire ride, what % do you get?


Your question is a bit vague, because it depends on a) how you calculate it and b) if the ride is a loop.
In the case of a) I can point at a local short climb that is, say, 6 miles long at an average of 6%, but I can get back down the hill with a significantly shorter descent at 17% average. Going down this, while I'm not using the brakes that much, I am certainly not thinking "damnit, if only I had that aero frame! I could be going much faster! gah! life is miserable without the aero frame" That descent, by the way, you don't want to take too fast because it's very windy with off-camber turns. Aero will be the least of my concerns there.

Then, really, to answer your question about a local loop I do 2-3 times mid week depending on my mood, only a short portion of the ride is spent at 0%... I can guess less than 1/4 mile total out of 25 miles, but 15 of those miles are spent above 7% and the rest are either descents or climbing above 3%. See the previously linked chart. Even at 1% gradient gravity's effect jumps up from 1% (at 0% gradient) to 24%!! That's 1% gradient. Take a look at your local roads: even if you live in a flat area, you may find a lot of your time is spent at a low percentage grade, not 0%. That isn't to say you throw aero out the window, it still matters at those low gradients and relatively high-er speeds (assuming you travel at a high speed or your relative wind speed is significant)... but come on, "weight does not matter?" Please.

Maybe people who live in the Netherlands, where it's 0% the majority of the time, could really use the aero frames above weight. Definitely a strong possibility.
Or if you ride on the track.

It should also be noted - as Tapeworm pointed out over in a thread in the Training forum - that aero gains are really dependant on speed, and the chart calculates 300W consistency... so let's think about that: 300W all out for the entire duration of your ride, regardless of gradient? You better be "motoring" (quoting TP). But, let's go back to reality: it's unlikely you're putting out 300W the entire time, and much more likely that you're going much slower than necessary to get all those aero gains you are seeing from wind tunnel data.

Then again, if you live in a relatively flat area, go for it. There's a reason the market, thankfully, has options and choices, we have diverse riding interests.

That said, my original point stands: weight still matters, gravity is constant, aero gains are variable, the aero frame is quite low on the list of money-spent vs. performance gains.

Reality bites. :wink:
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

User avatar
elviento
Posts: 1235
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:09 pm
Location: In the industry
Contact:

by elviento

Agreed the idea of a big round bottle right at the trailing edge of a perfect airfoil is such a dumb but effect marketing move. See P.14 at http://www.falcobike.com/ttwhitepaper.pdf

That said, we have indeed seen many frames w/ a flatter section below the bottle, as early as the original 2001 DeRosa King. The Parlee differs w/ a slight bulge in front of the bottle nozzle (the green circle), but it will not have too much aero benefit.

Image

If we are REALLY talking about building a bike around the idea of a bottle... LOL

prendrefeu wrote:It appears to be one of the first framesets that is intentionally designed around the concept of the rider using a water bottle.
Fast falcons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3mTPEuFcWk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
www.falcobike.com
Facebook: falcobikeglobal

cyclenutnz
Posts: 764
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:18 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand
Contact:

by cyclenutnz

prendrefeu wrote:I guess you spend a lot of time not climbing?

Not so much that, one of my favourite training rides is repeats of 15mins @10% gradient. It's more that I am 97kg, I think the inner weight weenie screaming to be let out fits in one of my legs. I'm a few kg above race weight at the moment but even so - my lean body mass is likely more than you and your bike together. I take weight savings where they don't compromise other factors but I don't obsess over them.

So in the context of this discussion where the Parlee is likely to tout being lighter and better ride quality I was pointing out that the 200-300g advantage vs most other aero road frames is not that big a deal.
prendrefeu wrote:gravity never goes away and is a constant rate on the earth's surface

No. Gravity is not a constant. It varies over the course of a long enough climb and by ~0.7% over the earths surface. Gravity is everywhere (that we can ride) would be a better way of putting it.
prendrefeu wrote: and frankly the frame is the least priority for aero in gains vs. money spent. The body comes first, clothing with that, helmet, gloves/no gloves, wheels... frame is way down the list. Aero is nice.

Again no. Impact of frame aerodynamics can be significantly higher than wheel aerodynamics, often at similar price differentials. Main advantage of a deep carbon wheel is actually weight, not aero (unless it is windy).

I have no argument with the graph you posted, or the idea that saving weight is a good thing. And that for both weight and aero - starting with the body is the most logical path. What the graph fails to show is how much of the time each of those scenarios is significant. Which is why I model complete courses using environmental data, wind tunnel data, tyre rolling resistance and weight differences.

For instance - the most popular century event here in NZ is hilly in the first half and flat in the second, total climbing 1800m. Using Cervelo RCa testing (which includes a dummy so is the reference for good testing) and factoring in the draft effect. Compared to a Tarmac SL4 the RCa could be 5.65kg heavier (for my situation) to give the same overall time. Though I should note that I haven't done the 'pinch' analysis to determine if that weight difference would be sufficient to lose the group on a climb, unlikely as the groups are massive at that event.

For a 67kg rider in the same group the weight difference could be 5.8kg to maintain overall performance. Allowing for better body aero on the smaller rider and lower power.

Does that explain why I wouldn't care about 300g if we're talking aero differences of that order?
http://www.speedtheory.co.nz
http://www.velogicfit.com - 3D Motion Capture and Frame Finder Software

User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8609
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

Yes, thanks. In your case, weight may not matter as much, but it still matters.
I also had the word "relatively" in the phrase regarding gravity, but decided not to include it... but thanks for bringing up basic level physics anyway. :lol:

They both matter. That's the point.
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

phallenthoul
in the industry
Posts: 744
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:15 pm

by phallenthoul

I dont think it looks that bad, but I would choose a Z5 or even Z4 over it any day..

User avatar
legs 11
Posts: 3657
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:22 am
Location: Leg hurty

by legs 11

What a pig!.....a fugly pig at that.
How long would a BB mounted brake caliper last in northern European conditions?
Reminds me of the concept car type of design brief.... 'just make it look flash, don't worry about the practicalities'
Pedalling Law Student.

User avatar
btompkins0112
Posts: 2693
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:04 am
Location: Mississippi

by btompkins0112

legs 11 wrote:How long would a BB mounted brake caliper last in northern European conditions?


Ask someone with a Trek Madone 6 or 7 series.....

Ozrider
Posts: 1021
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 6:06 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

by Ozrider

I have a Madone, and don't find the brake gets any dirtier than normal brakes, but then I don't live in Northern Europe.
It is a bit of a hassle to swap pads or set the brakes up initially, but not a major issue. It took me a fair while to set up when I first assembled the bike, but now I know how it works, it is a lot easier, just different.
Most " Aero" bikes have some compromise with brakes, whether it is BMC, Ridley or Giants integrated brakes, or Trek and Parlees BB mounted rear brake.
However, I suspect that many owners of Aero road bikes would have a training / winter bike or a standard road bike as well.
Last edited by Ozrider on Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ozrider - Western Australia
Parlee Z5 XL (6055g/13.32lbs) Trek Madone 5.9 (7052-7500g)Jonesman Columbus Spirit (8680g)
Chase your dreams - it's only impossible until it's done

Ozrider
Posts: 1021
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 6:06 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

by Ozrider

Some more pics from Parlee and Bespoke Cycles

Image

Some interesting shaping on the down tube, and a better view of the tube shaping.

Image
Ozrider - Western Australia
Parlee Z5 XL (6055g/13.32lbs) Trek Madone 5.9 (7052-7500g)Jonesman Columbus Spirit (8680g)
Chase your dreams - it's only impossible until it's done

User avatar
HammerTime2
Posts: 5430
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed

by HammerTime2

Ozrider wrote:Image
Serious question: Will this accommodate a large (750 ml) water bottle on the down tube, for example
Image

User avatar
legs 11
Posts: 3657
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:22 am
Location: Leg hurty

by legs 11

Just so wrong, on so many levels.
Pedalling Law Student.

hzucker
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 5:56 pm

by hzucker

it has for sure been designed without the use of a windtunnel and parlee took on a project to design an artisan aero bike, not a true aero machine.

User avatar
btompkins0112
Posts: 2693
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:04 am
Location: Mississippi

by btompkins0112

Evidence that no wind tunnel was used?

LionelB
Posts: 1442
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:09 pm
Location: Aix en Provence

by LionelB

Calnago wrote:And just out of curiosity, which frame would you consider uglier, if this isn't the worst...just for a point of reference?


I would put the S5 as uglier. But this Parlee makes a Dogma look super pretty. And I find the Dogma ugly.

Ozrider
Posts: 1021
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 6:06 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

by Ozrider

Quoted from the article in bikerumor.com.

"Throughout the project, even back when we saw the prototypes, they’ve been testing in the wind tunnel. First, they put it against their own round tube Z5 to see if there was enough difference to justify the effort. They had some help from folks at MIT to interpret the data, and the answer was yes, based on drag and watt savings. For example, at a 10º wind angle at a realistically fast output, they found about a 13 watt savings. The savings were validated across a range of angles and speeds that reflected what normal riders achieve, so they moved forward."
Ozrider - Western Australia
Parlee Z5 XL (6055g/13.32lbs) Trek Madone 5.9 (7052-7500g)Jonesman Columbus Spirit (8680g)
Chase your dreams - it's only impossible until it's done

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post