So I guess shaving your legs does work...

Savagestorm

Surprisingly significant results!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZnrE17Jg3I

MountainMonster

I would have never thought that it could have made that much of a difference. It *almost* makes me want to shave my legs, but I still don't think I will. Maybe once i'm a bit faster i'll try it.

kim10

I'm on my way to the shop to pick up some Veet before it sells out!!!!!

RDW

Kim10 wrote:

I'm on my way to the shop to pick up some Veet before it sells out!!!!!

No problem - Amazon has plenty (check the reviews for useful tips):

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Veet-Men-Hair-R ... B000KKNQBK

BrandonA

I don't have headphones at work. What sort of saving (if any) are they suggesting?

They did a video a week or two ago in which they stated that having facial hair made no difference.

lawrences

They reckon it saves 80 seconds over 40km. Which they haven't backed up with a scientific theory as to why.

I expect next week Specialized will be selling a range of £1000 carbon razors, and shortly after will be suing all other razor manufacturers.

MattC59

BrandonA wrote:

I don't have headphones at work. What sort of saving (if any) are they suggesting?

They did a video a week or two ago in which they stated that having facial hair made no difference.

I'd have to disagree there. I now have a beard and on my Sunday ride recorded several PBs and an overall PB for a local 40 mile route. That's clear proof that facial hair makes you faster !

redvee

lawrences wrote:

They reckon it saves 80 seconds over 40km.

Not much benefit on my 10-15 miles commute etc but when it rains smooth legs are a lot quicker to dry off. I just run my hands down my legs and 'squeegee' the water off them.

Pituophis

It stops the hairs sticking through your fish net stockings. I find this very off putting, even on women

lawrences

redvee wrote:

lawrences wrote:

They reckon it saves 80 seconds over 40km.

Not much benefit on my 10-15 miles commute etc but when it rains smooth legs are a lot quicker to dry off. I just run my hands down my legs and 'squeegee' the water off them.

Lucky. Takes me 80 seconds to dry mine!

lawrences

MattC59 wrote:

BrandonA wrote:

I don't have headphones at work. What sort of saving (if any) are they suggesting?

They did a video a week or two ago in which they stated that having facial hair made no difference.

I'd have to disagree there. I now have a beard and on my Sunday ride recorded several PBs and an overall PB for a local 40 mile route. That's clear proof that facial hair makes you faster !

Something to do with boundary layers probably. Same reason Zipp dimple their rims.

d_o_g

Unless you have someone to massage your legs after each ride, shaving them is for appearance only, which is for girls.

de_sisti

I wonder if male cyclists who shave their legs also shave their forearms?

IanRCarter

I shave my legs and I don't race. The main reason I give is that it's more aerodynamic (without any proof) however the real reasons are that the pros do it; smooth legs look better with skin tight clothing; unshaved, my legs are very hairy which looks horrible with skin tight clothing; my legs don't tan at all if there is a forest growing out of them and if I come off it will be a lot easier to clean. The reasons for shaving my legs which don't apply to me are that I'm a girl, want to be a girl, want to express my feminine side or that I'm homosexual.

Now, with this, I can use the aerodynamic reason and have proof to back it up.

It also seems that some people still scoff at the idea of smooth legs making any difference, perhaps it wouldn't really shave 70 seconds off a 40k TT but the results prove that it does make a difference. You can't argue that there is a hidden agenda here either, the test was carried out by Specialized not Gillette.

I don't shave my arms though, the hairs on my arms are much finer and the light colour blends in well with the tan so they look fine. I'd be interested to see if it made a difference though.

iPete

So basically, forget saving for a Venge frameset, just shave my legs? That's like £2500 cheaper.

Thanks Specialized!

lawrences

IanRCarter

The video was a joke... A disc doesn't save you 70 seconds over 40km.

MountainMonster

lawrences wrote:

IanRCarter

The video was a joke... A disc doesn't save you 70 seconds over 40km.

Can you back your claims up, as they have data that show shaving made that much of a difference, and I've seen other wind tunnel tests where discs make very large differences.

Or are you simply just a sceptic who doesn't believe anything?

lawrences

MountainMonster wrote:

lawrences wrote:

IanRCarter

The video was a joke... A disc doesn't save you 70 seconds over 40km.

Can you back your claims up, as they have data that show shaving made that much of a difference, and I've seen other wind tunnel tests where discs make very large differences.

Or are you simply just a sceptic who doesn't believe anything?

I really shouldn't have to do that you know.

MountainMonster

lawrences wrote:

MountainMonster wrote:

lawrences wrote:

IanRCarter

The video was a joke... A disc doesn't save you 70 seconds over 40km.

Can you back your claims up, as they have data that show shaving made that much of a difference, and I've seen other wind tunnel tests where discs make very large differences.

Or are you simply just a sceptic who doesn't believe anything?

I really shouldn't have to do that you know.

LOL, that's a great reply.

I'll just take your word on the topic and assume professional aerodynamicists testing on an unbiased basis in a wind tunnel and producing the results have no clue what they are doing.

StillGoing

D O G wrote:

Unless you have someone to massage your legs after each ride, shaving them is for appearance only, which is for girls.

Err no, it's also a lot better in an off. Gravel rash and having to pick the hairs out of the mess is not good. And hairy legs on a road cyclist is just wrong.

dennisn

IanRCarter wrote:

smooth legs look better with skin tight clothing;

I'm not sure I agree with this. I'm of the opinion that you need legs that look good to shave them. Certain people shouldn't do it. Exposing flab, stretch marks, cellulite, etc. does not help in the least to make your legs look better.

lawrences

"A flat disc is generally found in wind-tunnel tests to be worth a saving of about 30-40 seconds over a 25-mile time-trial compared with a standard road wheel. A lenticular disc or a set of wheel-covers can improve a further 5-10 seconds on that, possibly more in a stronger crosswind.

Performance estimates are based on a number of assumptions. Individual results may vary. Key assumptions are:-
• Speeds around 30 mph.
• Flat course.
• Negligible wind.
• Typical rider and bike proportions."

Taken from RALtech website ran by a professional aerodynamicist (which isn't a word btw). These two Specialized guys are obviously amused at getting asked the same question again and again so have put together an amusing video about it.

Please just have a good think about it.

dennisn

MountainMonster wrote:

lawrences wrote:

IanRCarter

The video was a joke... A disc doesn't save you 70 seconds over 40km.

Can you back your claims up, as they have data that show shaving made that much of a difference, and I've seen other wind tunnel tests where discs make very large differences.

Or are you simply just a sceptic who doesn't believe anything?

I think you've got the wrong idea of skeptics. Without a bit of skepticism pretty much everyone would simply buy into whatever anyone says. i.e. you're a skeptic because you don't just blindly believe. You look into issues(at least I hope you do). Everyone does(well mostly). Blindly believing things is not the way to go, and I think that's pretty much everyone's take on the subject.

lawrences

I may delete my posts because I am enjoying the idea of MountainMonster turning up Sunday morning fleshly shaven still bleeding slightly around the knees telling his mates how he's going to be 70 seconds faster today.

d_o_g

philthy3 wrote:

D O G wrote:

Unless you have someone to massage your legs after each ride, shaving them is for appearance only, which is for girls.

Err no, it's also a lot better in an off. Gravel rash and having to pick the hairs out of the mess is not good. And hairy legs on a road cyclist is just wrong.

Better to not crash in the first place.

Savagestorm

Found some additional info here:

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/cgi-bin/gfo ... 75#5149075

iPete

I've looked at the date, its a long way from April 1. So this is likely to be true then

NeXXus

As somewhat of a triathlete, body hair just gets in the way in all 3 sports

chris_bass

lawrences wrote:

I may delete my posts because I am enjoying the idea of MountainMonster turning up Sunday morning fleshly shaven still bleeding slightly around the knees telling his mates how he's going to be 70 seconds faster today.

I think shaving flesh off is going a bit far!

Old_Timer

Chris, he may well be a supreme weight weenie, every gram saved is more to brag about in a forum somewhere :P . I'd thing that "fleshly shaved" is a more apt description. anywho :roll:

lawrences

Oooh my bad. I look a bit sadistic there.

But yes flesh around the knees is grams wasted.