Weight Weenies

Calnago wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 27, 2019 3:51 am

I’m not really asking for a source because I know he’s pulling stuff out of his ass. And you’re not really reducing the frontal area if you fill that area with spacers. That was the whole concept behind the idea that it was easier to shape the headtube in an aerodynamic fashion than to add spacers with the added benefit of better steertube support.

if the spacers are less aero.. who knows I ride with spacers myself and it still puts me 5mm lower then a slammed stem of the next frame size up. Anyways we are talking "tour magazine" here and I've never been a fan of their test results anyways.. and I doubt if they bother to make the H1 and H1.5 apples to apples by adding spacers to the H1 to make it the same HT as H1.5.

why is H1.5 less aero then H1... yes HT, disc brakes, test varience.. crash test dummy position slightly altered.. maybe it has cankles. I'm out

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

spdntrxi, nah they don’t add or remove spacers. The dummy has no torso, no head, no arms. They just use the bikes as supplied so each bike in the test likely had roughly equal spacer stacks, maintaining any frame stack differences.

I admit I didn't study their testing protocol, but if it's true they don't test the closest possible frame sizes with the closest possible match in the overall setups (with the achieved geometry values provided along with the data from the tests) then those tests have only an informative value and are otherwise worthless.
There will likely still be some variances due to some different (proprietary) components used but achieving the same (well, almost the same - within the smallest possible range) riding position is one of the basics for such kind of testing.

@cal what does the a in cda stand for again?

mag wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 27, 2019 5:58 am

I admit I didn't study their testing protocol, but if it's true they don't test the closest possible frame sizes with the closest possible match in the overall setups (with the achieved geometry values provided along with the data from the tests) then those tests have only an informative value and are otherwise worthless.

Frame size, ST, TT, HT, wheelbase, trail, stack and reach are all listed for each bike. Most are within a couple millimeters of each other stackwise and reachwise. The H1 Madone is one of those outliers. If anything the H1.5 data is more relevant since it more closely matches the geometry of competing bikes.

Yes tht's fine, those values are dictated by the frame size. But how about the handlebar positioning? Different frame stack height = similarly different handlebar vertical positions? Given how you describe it that seems to be the case.

mag wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 27, 2019 7:17 am

Yes tht's fine, those values are dictated by the frame size. But how about the handlebar positioning? Different frame stack height = similarly different handlebar vertical positions? Given how you describe it that seems to be the case.

It would be nice if they went into that much detail, yes. Bar width, BB-bar stack, detailed photos of how each bar is taped, etc. No one is really arguing whether Tour's tests are practical or useful...there's just too many variables. We're just reasoning why the "2016 Madone" only required 204W vs the "2019 Madone Disc" requiring 212W. Well some of us are anyway.

I know this is wayyyyy after the fact but does anyone know if the cages pictured on the Venge and SysSix, and the saddle bag on the Venge were on it during the test

CAAD8FRED wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 17, 2019 10:15 pm

I know this is wayyyyy after the fact but does anyone know if the cages pictured on the Venge and SysSix, and the saddle bag on the Venge were on it during the test

NO and ofcourse not to the saddle bag

Speaking of aerodynamics, I got tired waiting for the official felt realease of the next ar (not available till nov-dec anyway, and i am in canada so it would be April till i could ride it), so i bought by dream bike. I figure if you plan to go aero, you need to do it properly. Balances well with my 13lbs climbing bike (felt f series). I have been terrorizing local strava segments ever since as i train for tt efforts. Holding 45k/hr+ is now not such a big deal.

Nice flat back.

RocketRacing wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:03 pm

Speaking of aerodynamics, I got tired waiting for the official felt realease of the next ar (not available till nov-dec anyway, and i am in canada so it would be April till i could ride it), so i bought by dream bike. I figure if you plan to go aero, you need to do it properly. Balances well with my 13lbs climbing bike (felt f series). I have been terrorizing local strava segments ever since as i train for tt efforts. Holding 45k/hr+ is now not such a big deal.

3B6F35D7-EE80-4018-A1BA-BE6AFDE39893.jpeg

1812091E-D2E2-4AA4-897C-4F1A41B125E6.jpeg

24A47786-DB0D-4340-ACBC-84BB61393531.jpeg

Your jersey/ helmet/ bike matchy2 game is on point 10 watts saved right there, just for having matching stripes LOL

I just ordered the clip on bars similar to the Madone Speed for my Madone SLR. Just out of curiousity, how close would my Madone SLR (rim brake) with Bontrager XXX-6 wheels come to a full Tri/TT bike with similar wheels?

Noctiluxx wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:55 pm

I just ordered the clip on bars similar to the Madone Speed for my Madone SLR. Just out of curiousity, how close would my Madone SLR (rim brake) with Bontrager XXX-6 wheels come to a full Tri/TT bike with similar wheels?

it's probably not that bad.. I bet it's sniffing within 2-3w. if you are a trigeek just go full Tri-bike because it's easier to get in a position that makes it easier to run afterwards.

Holy balls it's ironic reading tobin telling anyone to grow up.

AJS914 wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:44 pm

Some interesting aero talk in cyclingtips first nerd alert podcast:

https://cyclingtips.com/2019/07/nerd-al ... de-simple/

Best bang for the buck seems to be:

shave legs
positioning
tight fitting kit - no wrinkles
helmet
wheels
frame


The other interesting point was that tight fitting kit, aero wheels, and an aero frame all provide around the same benefit.

Unfortunately they didn't mention aero/integrated handlebar but my understanding is that that is worth about half an aero helmet.

I'll have to give this a listen. I seem to recall pretty much every other source putting those items a bit further apart as far as magnitude of impact. Mainly, tight fitting kit making a lot more difference than wheels, and wheels having more like twice the savings compared to frame. Unfortunately for those in the business of selling speed, that order is exactly inverse of what costs the most.

And yeah, unfortunately little information out there about the effect of tidy bar and stem - although it's largely attributable for the savings across the board the last couple years. Just wish there was some testing to isolate those changes!

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com