Very interesting discussion. Especially that I'm a father of a perfect test "guinea pig", 15-year old, top 10 U17 road time trialists in my country, averaging around 300 watts in 10 km time trial on a standard bike (no aero bars allowed) with aero wheels of maximum depth of 90 mm and with 46x14 gear allowed. Same kid averages 50 km/h in a 2km time trial on a velodrome with full aero gear allowed. Aero bars and disc wheels.
Correct me me if you think I'm wrong, but here is my observations:
Aero frame vs regular road race frame - 15-20 watts
Aero skinsuit - 10-15 watts
Decreasing your body aerodynamic drag by 5% - 15 watts
Aero helmet - 5-10 watts
Aero cockpit (stem+handlebar) - 4-5 watts
Aero overshoes - 2 watts
Removing QR skewers and replacing them with aero ones - 2 watts
Better tire selection (faster and 105% rule) - up to 5 watts
Better aero wheels selection - up to 10 watts
Ceramic everything marketing hype - 2-4 watts
Better, fresh and/or waxed chain - 2 watts
Bike weight on flat course - EXTREMELY OVERRATED
Crucial sources od information:
https://road.cc/content/feature/213876- ... ind-tunnel
From the practical tests I've observed in our U17 category in 10 km road time trial and 2km velodrome time trial, here are my conclusion.
A kid, let's call him #1, beats all the rest on the velodrome by 2 seconds in 2km time trial. He is the strongest and fastest. On the velodrome he has nearly the same equipment as his competitors. Good carbon frame with aerobars, disc and trispoke wheels, aero helmet, aero suit (not skinsuit).
He is known to be best road time triallist as well. But this year he faces 3 very strong competitors, 1 year younger, on the road.
#2 and #3 from Kwiato Road Cycling Academy
They both use Trek Madone, with low drag rim brakes (not sure which model) and aero cockpit, Kask aero helmet, aero overshoes, Zipp 404 58mm aero wheels
#1 uses Trek Emonda, 90mm deep aero wheels, FFWD if I'm correct, aero overshoes and aero Laser helmet. From the photos I assume he creates slightly more aerodynamic drag than #2 and # 3 because of his hand position (#2 and #3 using prying position) and slighly elevated head
This probably compensates with his wheel advantage beacuse his competitors use wheels with smaller height profile
#4 (my son) is using Specialized SL4 Comp with standard alu round handlebar cockpit, old Giro aero helmet, no overshoes, reasonable but not yet optimized position.
#2 and 3 beat #4 by 20-30 seconds. #2, thinner, Roglic type is always first, #3, thicker, Sagan type usually second. And they beat #4, Roglic type by another 5 seconds. We are talking flat course.
So where is their advantage? It has to be in the frame/bike and position. I guess frame/bike setup must save them around 20 watts resulting in 20 seconds advantage. And this is the difference you will observe in velodrome tests between for example Merida Scultura and Merida Reacto in the youtube videoes I linked. It seems consistent overall between non aero racing bikes and aero optimized bikes.
We are planning to do the tests with both Trek Madone and Venge Vias 2016. As we can have access to both. I will keep you informed.