Aero bikes and the Pro peloton...

[kgt]

Let us make somethings clear here, an aero bike is faster than a non aero bike. That does not necesserily mean that a cyclist ridind an aero bike is faster than riding an non-aero because there are many variables at play, both physical and mental ones!

Another logical fallacy maybe..?

[Hexsense]

say you are 10 watts more aero at speed than any other people in the group.
When riding along together, are you slowly cruising away from the group because of such advantage?
No?

yeah, that's the thing. 10 watts more aero is useful when riding alone. While math say watt saving is still there in the group and still provide bigger gain in total time from the course even with some climb, you just don't break away from group or deposit time from the group by such advantage. However, lighter frame make decisive advantage on climb where group split up.

[robeambro]

say you are 10 watts more aero at speed than any other people in the group.
When riding along together, are you slowly cruising away from the group because of such advantage?
No?

yeah, that's the thing. 10 watts more aero is useful when riding alone. While math say watt saving is still there in the group and still provide bigger gain in total time from the course even with some climb, you just don't break away from group or deposit time from the group by such advantage. However, lighter frame make decisive advantage on climb where group split up.

Erm, sorry but you are a bit confused. If you are saving 10 watts, you’ll be able, all else equal, to keep the speed of the peloton by spending less energy. Full stop.

[Hexsense]

Maybe it make difference when are close to your limit.
But crusing with the group, Doing 60% FTP or 59% FTP, it's still an advantage, yes. But doesn't feel much difference nor really keep you noticeably fresher.
It's not as decisive as when you want to split from the group by accelerating hard or climb hard.

[seaneT1]

Let us make somethings clear here, an aero bike is faster than a non aero bike. That does not necesserily mean that a cyclist ridind an aero bike is faster than riding an non-aero because there are many variables at play, both physical and mental ones!

Another logical fallacy maybe..?

Nope, in the first part, the bike is alone and is faster, while in the second part, you have a SYSTEM of bike+RIDER, which add other variables in to play that may change the outcome.

[seaneT1]

Let us make somethings clear here, an aero bike is faster than a non aero bike. That does not necesserily mean that a cyclist ridind an aero bike is faster than riding an non-aero because there are many variables at play, both physical and mental ones! In the end, what we actually want is the bike that will enable us to go faster, so if an aero bike for example causes you severe back pain, you will end up going slower than riding a non-aero bike that does not. Are we all on the same page now? Because all of the talking about logical fallacies and all that does not need to continue if we are to have a nice conversation IMHO.

Same rider riding exact same position on same wheels and tires inflated to the same pressure, dressed the same, will ride faster on aero bike than on non aero bike for the same wattage or have to produce less watts for exact same speed.

Back pain and mental aspect only come into play if position is allowed to change or if effort level isn't kept constant.

Fully agree with whoever said that one is allowed not to buy an aero bike without having to make up alternative facts to imply that aero bikes provide no advantage ALL ELSE EQUAL.

For the love of god, what you wrote is correct, but neither adds nor subtracts anything from what I wrote!!!! I totally agree with you and I am full on aero weight weenie myself just to be clear.

[TobinHatesYou]

Just break everything down to the component level.

Is less aerodynamic drag good? Yes.
Is comfort good? Yes.
Is light weight good? Yes.
Are any of these things truly exclusive to each other? No.

From an average speed + comfort standpoint, I imagine the best bike for how most people here (and elsewhere) ride is a very aero bike with deep tube shapes at the expense of a up to 1kg. For anyone climbing steep stuff, a Tarmac or Dogma F10 are almost certainly going to get you to the top of the mountain faster than an Emonda. The Emonda is neither stiffer in the BB or more comfortable in the seatpost/tube than either, but it is light.

Pick the bike you like.

[kgt]

Nope, in the first part, the bike is alone and is faster, while in the second part, you have a SYSTEM of bike+RIDER, which add other variables in to play that may change the outcome.

I know what you mean but have you ever seen any bike riding 'alone'?
Let me give you another example: You have a car with 1000PS horsepower and another one with 500PS horsepower. In theory the first one is faster but when driven on a track the 500PS car might be the fastest just because it is just a better car overall or just because its rider can handle it in a much more efficient way.
So, what I am saying is that, you cannot isolate horsepower as you cannot isolate aero drag of the frame and make conclusions. The system rider+bike is the only thing that actually counts. All the variables together define performance. That's how science works. Everything else is just marketing.
I know that in the 'all things equal' argument the frame with better aerodynamics wins. Sure. The thing is that in the real world all things can never be equal. And this thread is about pro cycling performance not about wind tunnel testing performance.

P.S. I am not an 'aero denier' myself. I ride a Time Skylon which is a decent aero frame according to the tests (Tour etc.). I am only a marketing BS denier.

[cunn1n9]

Nope, in the first part, the bike is alone and is faster, while in the second part, you have a SYSTEM of bike+RIDER, which add other variables in to play that may change the outcome.

I know what you mean but have you ever seen any bike riding 'alone'?
Let me give you another example: You have a car with 1000PS horsepower and another one with 500PS horsepower. In theory the first one is faster but when driven on a track the 500PS car might be the fastest just because it is just a better car overall or just because its rider can handle it in a much more efficient way.
So, what I am saying is that, you cannot isolate horsepower as you cannot isolate aero drag of the frame and make conclusions. The system rider+bike is the only thing that actually counts. All the variables together define performance. That's how science works. Everything else is just marketing.
I know that in the 'all things equal' argument the frame with better aerodynamics wins. Sure. The thing is that in the real world all things can never be equal. And this thread is about pro cycling performance not about wind tunnel testing performance.

P.S. I am not an 'aero denier' myself. I ride a Time Skylon which is a decent aero frame according to the tests (Tour etc.). I am only a marketing BS denier.

How do you find the Skylon particularly the smoothness of the Activ fork?

Also I would be interested in just how aero it is compared to an all out aero bike. If the ride feel is very good and it only gives up a few watts then it is probably a great all rounder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stueys]

Just break everything down to the component level.

Is less aerodynamic drag good? Yes.
Is comfort good? Yes.
Is light weight good? Yes.
Are any of these things truly exclusive to each other? No.

From an average speed + comfort standpoint, I imagine the best bike for how most people here (and elsewhere) ride is a very aero bike with deep tube shapes at the expense of a up to 1kg. For anyone climbing steep stuff, a Tarmac or Dogma F10 are almost certainly going to get you to the top of the mountain faster than an Emonda. The Emonda is neither stiffer in the BB or more comfortable in the seatpost/tube than either, but it is light.

Pick the bike you like.

Add stiffness to that list and this

[jih]

Maybe it make difference when are close to your limit.
But crusing with the group, Doing 60% FTP or 59% FTP, it's still an advantage, yes. But doesn't feel much difference nor really keep you noticeably fresher.
It's not as decisive as when you want to split from the group by accelerating hard or climb hard.

By this logic, pro bikes woudln't be set up to save small amounts of aero drag by getting the handlebars 10mm lower. Or, pro riders wouldn't wear aero helmets, skinsuits etc. Skinsuits were frowned upon for stage races until they weren't. I suspect aero frames now are where skinsuits were 10 years ago.

[kgt]

Nope, in the first part, the bike is alone and is faster, while in the second part, you have a SYSTEM of bike+RIDER, which add other variables in to play that may change the outcome.

I know what you mean but have you ever seen any bike riding 'alone'?
Let me give you another example: You have a car with 1000PS horsepower and another one with 500PS horsepower. In theory the first one is faster but when driven on a track the 500PS car might be the fastest just because it is just a better car overall or just because its rider can handle it in a much more efficient way.
So, what I am saying is that, you cannot isolate horsepower as you cannot isolate aero drag of the frame and make conclusions. The system rider+bike is the only thing that actually counts. All the variables together define performance. That's how science works. Everything else is just marketing.
I know that in the 'all things equal' argument the frame with better aerodynamics wins. Sure. The thing is that in the real world all things can never be equal. And this thread is about pro cycling performance not about wind tunnel testing performance.

P.S. I am not an 'aero denier' myself. I ride a Time Skylon which is a decent aero frame according to the tests (Tour etc.). I am only a marketing BS denier.

How do you find the Skylon particularly the smoothness of the Activ fork?

Also I would be interested in just how aero it is compared to an all out aero bike. If the ride feel is very good and it only gives up a few watts then it is probably a great all rounder.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I ride it with the simple fork and it's fine but a friend of mine who has the aktiv fork he loves it.
Now, I don't have the numbers but let's say that the Skylon is somewhere between traditional frame and a pure aero frame.

[diegogarcia]

An ironic slant, but worth a watch -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9InzRc3Tz8

[tommasini]

LOL - thanks for the link

.........Well done satire by GCN.

[kgt]

Cool : )