*Tour Aero Bike Test 2019*

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Johnny Rad
Posts: 1957
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 6:22 am
Location: Zion

by Johnny Rad

bremerradkurier wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 4:26 pm
A close wheelsucker will reduce the front rider's drag by around 3% as well.
Therefore, wheelsuckers are critical! :beerchug:

Image

* Found it on IG. Maybe from Velopreso?

User avatar
silvalis
Posts: 627
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:02 am
Location: Aus

by silvalis

This is pretty cool too
Image
Chasse patate

by Weenie


RocketRacing
Posts: 691
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 2:43 am

by RocketRacing

Jack65 wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:21 am
Aero Overshoes will be used. Velotoze or similair.

As for chinese carbon aero frames, I see many PlanetX aero track frames on the velodrome. And they seem to be pretty good.

For us, amateurs, I love my Spec Roubaix. But certainly it's not a very efficient bike. One of the easiest ways for us for saving watts is wheel sucking :) As well as lowering position and learning how to ride in aero hoods position. Steve from "In the know cycling" has very good review of latest aeroroad helmets and they do seem to save some watts.

As for weight vs erodynamics, I first appeared on local group rides many years ago with 15kg trekking bike. After mounting cheapest aerobar I was able to sustain 36-38 km/h speed with them. It is also worth noting tha Ondrei Sosenka, who has beaten an hour world record, was using 3kg wheel at the back (http://www.wolfgang-menn.de/sosenka.htm).
Your quoted aero savings are a bit off. And as pointed out... “compared to what?” That last part is key. Plus, aero gains are not 1+1+1=3.

Yup, weight means near zero... especially when we are talking 300w or so, and especially as rider weight goes up. I am 59kg, so 3lbs off my bike means a few percent on steeper climbs. My 78kg buddy who can sprint 1200w... three lbs means near dick all, even on a climb. Put me on a systemsix with all the bling and he will still crush me.

I say take every marginal aero gain you can afford, keep the bike in good order. but remember that it is all marginal vs rider performance, and rider position/aero.

I always like to say i spend thousands of dollars removing three pounds from my bike. That maybe gave me a generous 2% advantage. I increased my ftp 25% training for three months. I also wore fitted bike clothes, and optimized my position, etc, etc.

A good sleep and diet is probably worth more than the most expensive frame/wheels on the market.

And finally: good luck to your son. Sounds like he has potential. But don’t try to justify why person A beat person B by how much and because of what gear. Just train harder and crush them. And het all the marginal gains you can afford while you are at it. Most can be had “cheap” if you go used.

The 2014 felt ar is only 3w slower than the top flight brand new system 6. That is nothing. A 2009 felt da with upgraded bars tested within the realm of error with the cervello p5x. We hit peak aero a while back, so newer is not faster.

And finally, some people are just better shaped for riding. Michael phelps was designed to swim fast. I am light at 59kg... great for climbing. But my head is massive. Added weight and added drag. A twin with a smaller head would always be faster, all else being the same. Some riders just have more lung capacity. It is a volume thing. So all things equal, things are never equal... but at the level of competition your son is at... the big thing is getting the low hanging fruit in marginal and not so marginal gains... and just training hard.

davidalone
Posts: 600
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:27 pm

by davidalone

From my own testing and research:

Aero position: Aero position is the biggest factor and saves huge amounts of watts, depending on 'how good' your position is. Not out of the question to see savings of 30-50 watts moving from road to TT position, however. there is also usually a small power loss of about 5-10% from moving from road to TT position due to the slightly more closed hip angle. Supposedly this can be 'trained' away but not easily for amateurs like us. A good TT position is hence one that balances between the 2.

Aero frame vs absolute worst Bike frame (think huge tubed cannondale CAAD) - ~15 to 20 watts.
However with most modern bike frames the delta is much smaller, between 5-10 watts. For example, a venge vs a tarmac would be something like 5 watts, or even less. The best versus the worst TT frames will be ~10-15 watts AT MOST, the delta is usually much smaller, in the order of 5 -7 watts. Some of the older frames- e.g. Specialized Shiv T, Scott Plasma 3, Cervelo P3 (old version) are still neck and neck with the latest bikes.

Aero helmets Incredibly subjective, because it depends on position. What is critical is getting a helmet that is designed well for your TT position (head up, or head down), or if you can't test, getting a helmet that works for most of the population. According to ERO sports, the 'works well for most people' TT helmets are Giro Advantage 2, Giro Aerohead, Bell Javelin, LG P-09. A aero helmet versus a non aero one will bag somewhere in between 5-10 watts of savings versus a normal road helmet such as a Specialized prevail, but a bad one can actually cost watts.

Skinsuits: Again, incredibly subjective. A poorly fitting skinsuit can cost watts, but a well fitted one can get big chunks of time, somewhere in the region of 10-15 watts versus a normal jersey or maybe more. Rules of thumb are avoid wrinkles and exposed skin.

Tyres: Tyres are a big one. The best versus worst tyres (say corsa speed versus gatorskin) can be ~20 watts, but at the sharp end (say, corsa speed versus Michelin power competition cs Conti GP TT) would be around about 5 watts . I would say that the differences at the sharp end are small enough that other things, such as puncture resistance or availability of the right tyre width will be more important.

Wheels: Using the right tyre width is important (follow rule of 105). the right tyre width for a 50mm wheelset versus a box section wheel would save between 5-7 watts. Most of the modern, top end wheels of similar depth are so close that they are typically between 3 watts of each other, and I wouldn't lose sleep over that. A rear disc wheel would be worth about 1-2 watts more than somehting like a rear 80mm, but more importantly helps with handling.

Handlebars Handlebar is a good area to pick up low hanging fruit. a good handlebar versus the worst ones can get you 5-7 watts (eg. a vision metron 5D versus a round bar) at high speed, although typically a little less. Now there are some new companies offering custom 3D printed aerobar extensions, and these potentially can be worth quite abit more, but these aren't available widely yet and are crazy expensive.

optimized chain: versus a normal new chain, worth 2-3 watts.

However, as what some posters have said, it's pointless to say 'my gear was 2 watts slower than so-and-so' thats why I lost. Most of today's modern equipment is close enough that there are more important variables. It's important to know what are 'good' and 'bad' equipment choices, but IMO most stuff nowadays is pretty good and splitting hairs. sleep well, proper nutrition, skill at following the black line on the velodrome, training, are probably bigger factors- if an athlete can't make it on a Cervelo P3 2009 versus the latest P5, honestly upgrading is not going to help him. Get the best equipment you can get within reason, and there will be very little seperating you versus the rest. the rest is all training.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 3585
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

davidalone wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 7:20 am

Skinsuits: Again, incredibly subjective. A poorly fitting skinsuit can cost watts, but a well fitted one can get big chunks of time, somewhere in the region of 10-15 watts versus a normal jersey or maybe more. Rules of thumb are avoid wrinkles and exposed skin.

I think it's important to note that exposed skin is preferable to wrinkles, and why a few non-custom skinsuits use short sleeves. But yes, buy the smallest skinsuit you can possibly fit in without tearing it apart at the seams.

fxx
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:10 pm

by fxx

TobinHatesYou wrote:
davidalone wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 7:20 am

Skinsuits: Again, incredibly subjective. A poorly fitting skinsuit can cost watts, but a well fitted one can get big chunks of time, somewhere in the region of 10-15 watts versus a normal jersey or maybe more. Rules of thumb are avoid wrinkles and exposed skin.

I think it's important to note that exposed skin is preferable to wrinkles, and why a few non-custom skinsuits use short sleeves. But yes, buy the smallest skinsuit you can possibly fit in without tearing it apart at the seams.
Not if you are hairy.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk


Johnny Rad
Posts: 1957
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 6:22 am
Location: Zion

by Johnny Rad

silvalis wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 12:24 am
This is pretty cool too
Image
Argh, didn't realize chatting and riding side-by-side was harder than just being out on the front alone... wow.

User avatar
Dan Gerous
Posts: 926
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:28 pm

by Dan Gerous

Johnny Rad wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 3:47 pm
silvalis wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 12:24 am
This is pretty cool too
Image
Argh, didn't realize chatting and riding side-by-side was harder than just being out on the front alone... wow.
If only motorists yelling at cyclists riding two abreast used that argument! :mrgreen:

aeroisnteverything
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:43 pm

by aeroisnteverything

Johnny Rad wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 3:47 pm


Argh, didn't realize chatting and riding side-by-side was harder than just being out on the front alone... wow.
Riding and chatting is definitely harder than just riding. Tends to be less aero too, because we don't usually chat while in the drops. :smartass: So it's just bad practice, all in all. Shut up and ride. :lol:

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 3585
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

fxx wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:08 am
Not if you are hairy.
Razors and epilators exist.

bremerradkurier
Posts: 315
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 4:18 pm

by bremerradkurier

Dan Gerous wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 3:51 pm
Johnny Rad wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 3:47 pm
silvalis wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 12:24 am
This is pretty cool too
Image
Argh, didn't realize chatting and riding side-by-side was harder than just being out on the front alone... wow.
If only motorists yelling at cyclists riding two abreast used that argument! :mrgreen:
"You're losing marginal gains!"

Jack65
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 4:40 pm

by Jack65

Thank you for all comments. Especially @davidalone and @RocketRacing.

We are facing very tough competition from cyclists from CCC-Kwiato Academy. They have access to top equipment and top coaches who are also our national coaches. Competitors attend Kwiato Academy which is full board cycling schoool with education optimized for their cycling training.

We could believe in training alone as RockRacing and davidlaone said and most probably finish at the end of top 10 at nationals. I don't believe we could improve more than 6 watts by training alone within 6 weeks we have left to nationals. We already started motorpaced trainings, riding 20 km at speed of around 50 km/h. But 6 watts more will probably result in at around 6 seconds in 10 km flat ITT. We are also competing against one year older kids which is another disadvantage. Before the start of the season we never thought that we would be able to compete against top 10. First starts proved otherwise and we are not for away from podium.

We have another 15-year kid in our club. He was beaten by my son in last 2 previous ITT (within last 30 days) by 22 and 18 seconds by my son. He was riding some Colnago top of the line race bike, non aero optimized. I'm not familiar with their models, so I don't know its name.

Today he raced on borrowed Trek Madone from bike shop. Result? He was beaten by my son only by 5 seconds. Huge inrease! My research shows 15-20 watts difference between top of the line aero non optimized race bike and aero optimed bike with aero cockpit at around 45 km/h. And this ITT result proves it. It is quite consistent. When you watch Cycling Weekly tests done on velodrome, you will hear experts confirming what Merida for example stated. That their Merida Reacto is 20 watts faster at 45 km/h than their Merida Scultura. And tests show that it is similiar within other manufacturers product range.

I have access to performance tests done in the lab by these two kids 2 months ago. My son was producing 4.5W/kg at AT, the other kid 4.25. It probably didn't change much within 2 months.

Bits and pieces form my last chat with my aero consultant expert:
Fastest helmets he and his buddies tested in ITT on velodrome and outside: No 1 Giro Aerohead and Kask Mistral. No 2: Met Drone, Laser Wasp. 3. Specialized S-Works TT. According to him Giro Aerohead is 0,5 seconds faster on every km than Specialized S-Works TT. We curently own Giro Advantage 2. Our consultant recons we will gain 1.5 sec/1 km using skinsuit, better helmet and aero oershoes. So 15 watts/ 15 seconds gain at 45 km/h on 10 km course.

We work on position. So far we got what is on the picture. As you can see 56 cm frame is too big and we had to reverse seatpost with a setback to get reasonable position on the Tarmac. Of course we also work on nutrition. But sleep and rest lucks. School finishes soon, we'll work on it then.

For further changes we will do the at lowest possible cost. We will not buy aero frame. But we will borrow one. We've been advised to swap saddle to Adamo or newer ISM PS 1.0. I also consider swapping cranks from 172,5 he have, to 175. We have 180 cm tall, 67 kg rider.
Attachments
P1070566.JPG

izza
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:03 pm

by izza

Richards1987 wrote:Does anyone know if you can put a different bar and stem on the 2019 Trek Madone SLR Rim Brake? I am looking at buying the Trek Madone and am trying to bring its weight down as close to 6.8kg as possible and believe the madone specific stem and handlebar is quite heavy (>500 grams). Was thinging the 3T Aeronova team stealth handlebars and 3T ARX LTD stealth stem?
With the upcoming release of the Madone SL this will now be possible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

gbrnole
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:40 pm

by gbrnole

AJS914 wrote:
Fri Dec 21, 2018 3:55 am
robeambro wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:29 pm
This test seems to suggest that not all aero bikes are created equal. Some will give an advantage, some may not.
Weirdly enough, I may buy a Ridley Noah Fast, and it will be "much slower" than other aero bikes, virtually as aerodynamic as a Tarmac SL6.

In other words, you buy an aero bike, it looks faster (cause the Noah does "look" faster than the Tarmac), but at the end of the day for some of these bikes the wattage saving is just not there.
If you add the legs to the manequin and it adds 200 watts you are looking at 403 vs 413 watts to hold the 45km/hr or a 2.5% difference.
I read this a lot about the full mannequin being 200 watts slower but there are plenty of videos on youtube showing real-world testing at 45 km/h being, in some cases, much lower than that. The tests that cycling weekly did with Dan Bigham are a good reference. In their first tests, they compared a vias, madone 9, aeroad and cervelo S5. The differences were about 80 watts greater than tour test results for the similar bikes using the rider in the aero hoods position.

The actual wattage differences seen between the above bikes tested was pretty much in order with tour mag 2016 test results.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUUh_QeNRVE

Later videos, parts 2 and 3, changed the testing protocol a little bit to give repeatable numbers for straight arms on hoods, straight arms in drops and aero hoods positions. The worst-case scenario, straight arms on hoods, was typically a further 80 watt penalty over the aero hoods position.

I don't think it's unreasonable to add either 80 or 160 watts to the tour mag results depending on what riding position you are approximating, but for most of us, I still would prescribe the 80 watts as being the most appropriate number to add since we are likely to be in an aero hoods position pulling on the front, and in a normal hoods position following wheels where we will be drafting and saving about 35% of power.

rudye9mr
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 12:01 pm

by rudye9mr

ryanw wrote:
Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:56 pm
All tested at 45kph:

2019 Cannondale SystemSix Disc - 203w
2016 Trek Madone - 204w
2016 Specialized Venge ViAS - 204w
2016 Cervelo S5 - 205w
2016 Felt AR FRD - 205w
2019 Cervelo S5 Disc - 206w
2016 Canyon Aeroad - 208w
2019 Specialized Venge Disc - 208w
2016 Giant Propel Advanced SL - 210w
2016 Scott Foil Premium - 211w
2016 BMC Time Machine - 211w
2016 Look 795 - 212w
2019 Trek Madone Disc - 212w
2019 Ridley Noah Fast Disc - 213w
little bit of a bump but any updates to the list?

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post