Weight weenies vs watt weenies...

[V3Rs]

I was wondering about the general evolution of aerodynamics on frame and component design.

My question is that if one could start with a great frame from the pre wattage era, say a C-40,
and measure its aerodynamic effeciency with a rider wearing clothing from that era and compare
it to say a Cervelo S-5 with a rider wearing the best clothing of this era, what would we find?

I dont even know how this is measured but at the end of the day, wouldrotating ones head downward
a few degrees be more or less than these "improvements?"

[TobinHatesYou]

I was wondering about the general evolution of aerodynamics on frame and component design.

My question is that if one could start with a great frame from the pre wattage era, say a C-40,
and measure its aerodynamic effeciency with a rider wearing clothing from that era and compare
it to say a Cervelo S-5 with a rider wearing the best clothing of this era, what would we find?

I dont even know how this is measured but at the end of the day, wouldrotating ones head downward
a few degrees be more or less than these "improvements?"

Helmets don’t want to be rotated downward. The ideal position is an awkward kinking of the neck and shoulder shrug with the helmet at more of a 40deg angle. Ideally there would be minimal gap between the back of the helmet and your upper back.

[V3Rs]

Helmets don’t want to be rotated downward. The ideal position is an awkward kinking of the neck and should shrug with the helmet at more of a 40psi angle. Ideally there would be minimal gap between the back of the helmet and your upper back.
[/quote]

Useless answer...

[TobinHatesYou]

Useless answer...

Just pointing out that your intuition fails you. Anyway aero tube shapes vs round tube shapes might add up to 20-25W in a near worst case at 45km/h. Getting your body roughly 2cm lower is also about a 20W difference at 45km/h. The best skinsuits save >10W over regular modern bibs/jersey at 45km/h.

[bananastand]

Helmets don’t want to be rotated downward. The ideal position is an awkward kinking of the neck and should shrug with the helmet at more of a 40psi angle. Ideally there would be minimal gap between the back of the helmet and your upper back.

Useless answer...
[/quote]

Wow you're fun.

At 45kmh I'm guessing it's about 80-100 watts (clothes, wheels, helmet, frame)

[TobinHatesYou]

Wow you're fun.

At 45kmh I'm guessing it's about 80-100 watts (clothes, wheels, helmet, frame)

Admittedly the average speed of a large peloton only depends on the first 15 or so riders while everyone else gets sucked a long, so aggregate speeds haven't changed as much. Breaks and sprints are where modern bikes shine.

[spartacus]

There's no way in hell it's 80-100w at 45kph. Average race speeds weren't that much slower back then and there are still some competitive course records from back in the day.

[TobinHatesYou]

There's no way in hell it's 80-100w at 45kph. Average race speeds weren't that much slower back then and there are still some competitive course records from back in the day.

See my previous reply.

[V3Rs]

This is theoretical question- wind tunnel stuff maybe ITT- not peloton....
Yes, I am fun when something is funny......

[spartacus]

There's no way in hell it's 80-100w at 45kph. Average race speeds weren't that much slower back then and there are still some competitive course records from back in the day.

See my previous reply.

So the first 15 riders are immune to the aero advantage because.... ?

[maxim809]

GCN did it

https://youtu.be/1mJ06mro5fw?t=814

[maxim809]

btw I think TBY's point is that in a field with +100 ppl, the guys rotating on the front would naturally just take shorter pulls if they have to do an extra 80~100w extra at pro peloton speeds

it's NOT that they are not immune

it's also NOT like every cyclist, whether pro or not, actively "measures" a 80~100w difference and 'titrates' their turns based off of that

if you deplete anaerobically faster because you're less aero, you simply flick sooner in hopes of keeping the speed high

that's why the importance of aero matters MORE in a sprint or break, but in a peloton it's less pronounced because you have the field to lean on

if you race, you know

[spartacus]

I don't agree with "they're just going to take shorter pulls". If the difference was really 100w the speeds would be faster full stop. 20 watts otoh I believe and that's what I would guess based on my personal experience.

Also it's not like 10-20 years ago everyone just wore a flappy kit it was still possible to get tight fitting kit.

[ArtifactsInMotion]

I don't agree with "they're just going to take shorter pulls". If the difference was really 100w the speeds would be faster full stop. 20 watts otoh I believe and that's what I would guess based on my personal experience.

Also it's not like 10-20 years ago everyone just wore a flappy kit it was still possible to get tight fitting kit.

The speeds have been trending faster since a decade ago. This is largely attributed to more emphasis on rider fitness,aero, and weight. Here's some supporting material https://cyclingtips.com/2022/06/why-has ... stigation/

[spdntrxi]

I have literally 20 watts between my Moots and my Aero BMC.. so if you count clothes I can see 40 pretty easy.

My moots is lighter too.

Dont make me put a powermeter on my Look KG86