How Important is an Aero Position?

fat daddy

bernithebiker wrote:

I have my non-slip shoes on, some flares.

flares are more dangerous than shorts or skin tight clothing as they can get caught in the chain

ugo.santalucia

bernithebiker wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Round here it's all academic anyway... I can't think of a single UK descent where it makes sense to use that position... maybe Fleet Moss north face, but even there, you can reach 60 mph without doing that, not sure many have the balls to go any faster to be honest.

If you crash abroad there might be some extra costs with repatriation, which might be worth considering when choosing an aero tuck.

Various experimentation has shown that I can go faster in a full-on aero tuck;

a) above 55km/h approx, if not really pressing on
b) above 65km/h approx, if going for it.

This is pedalling out on a 50-11.

Plenty of hills can give that speed, in my experience it only needs to be 4% or so.

Anyway, need to pop down the supermarket in a mo. I've risk assessed it, and I think I'm good to go. My insurance is up to date and fully topped up, I have my non-slip shoes on, some flares and a distress beacon. If I don't re-post in the next couple of hours or so, could someone please inform search and rescue? Ta.

You rev your pedals on rather glamorous roads. What I wanted to say is that I am not aware of a descent in the UK where what you suggest is practical or safe. Most of them are so badly surfaced or so battered by side winds, that the chin-on stem approach means a certain trip to the dentist. Many of them are so shaded by trees that you have to come down hoping you don't bang your front wheel in a hidden dip or hole. bends are typically off camber too.

Most of your posts refer to Majorca or the Alps, which is probably where you run your activities... it's very different round here... very very different... I suggest you try your aero tuck to come down any of the Lakeland passes, you choose which, I don't mind... maybe next year come to do the Fred Whitton instead of the Etape du Tour... similar terrain after all...

Spot which is Majorca and which is UK

ForumNewbie

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Round here it's all academic anyway... I can't think of a single UK descent where it makes sense to use that position... maybe Fleet Moss north face, but even there, you can reach 60 mph without doing that, not sure many have the balls to go any faster to be honest.

On a 20% descent down Fleet Moss I definitely don't think it would make sense to use that position - far too scary.

MikeBrew

We had a new lad out on a recent lumpy group ride to spectate at a stage of the ToB. After getting dropped on a long climb, he flew past us in full Frome fetal tuck - we were stopped at the turn we had to take for the descent, waiting for him to catch up. He looked at a bit of tool, as he overshot the turning by 300 yards. Shouting directions after him, we set off on our merry way down to our ToB vantage point.
Turned out that ,that day, he proved to be as much of wally as his ridiculous aero tuck hinted that he might be. Outside of a high level race, why would anyone ever bother ? Trying to catch lunch time last orders , just might be an accepatable excuse, but only if the PO in question served particularly palatable ale.
Still..... a great tenuous pretext for a bit of self promotion there Bernie. :roll: Would I go on one of your tours after witnessing those OCD tendencies ? No, probably not. :idea:

ugo.santalucia

ForumNewbie wrote:

On a 20% descent down Fleet Moss I definitely don't think it would make sense to use that position - far too scary.

True, also those tiny bumps are probably going to crush your teeth...

bernithebiker

Ugo, yes obviously some basic common sense is called for and on those roads you mention, I wouldn't fancy it either. Clearly, there's absolutely no point either if there are lots of tight bends involved.
I ride a lot in France as you know, and the roads are pretty good there too.

LanterneRouge010

bernithebiker wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Round here it's all academic anyway... I can't think of a single UK descent where it makes sense to use that position... maybe Fleet Moss north face, but even there, you can reach 60 mph without doing that, not sure many have the balls to go any faster to be honest.

If you crash abroad there might be some extra costs with repatriation, which might be worth considering when choosing an aero tuck.

Various experimentation has shown that I can go faster in a full-on aero tuck;

a) above 55km/h approx, if not really pressing on
b) above 65km/h approx, if going for it.

This is pedalling out on a 50-11.

Plenty of hills can give that speed, in my experience it only needs to be 4% or so.

Anyway, need to pop down the supermarket in a mo. I've risk assessed it, and I think I'm good to go. My insurance is up to date and fully topped up, I have my non-slip shoes on, some flares and a distress beacon. If I don't re-post in the next couple of hours or so, could someone please inform search and rescue? Ta.

pedalling out a 50-11 happens at 73 k/h (130 cadence). I used to think above 60k/h then getting more aero was faster, but figured out that putting watts down is still faster

ForumNewbie

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

pedalling out a 50-11 happens at 73 k/h (130 cadence). I used to think above 60k/h then getting more aero was faster, but figured out that putting watts down is still faster

Even if someone was going flat out at 130 rpm in 50-11 on a downhill slope, being more a bit more aero (although not recommending dangerously aero as suggested above) will make it a bit easier to pedal at a high cadence, i.e. less power output for the same result. Saying that, I don't think I could reach that cadence in that gear.

ugo.santalucia

This discussion is becoming even more pointless... now it's about pedalling at 130 rpm downhill...

ForumNewbie

ugo.santalucia wrote:

This discussion is becoming even more pointless... now it's about pedalling at 130 rpm downhill...

Yes, I agree 130rpm especially in 50/11 is probably a bad example. The point I was trying to make was that if a cyclist gets a bit more aero - not the dangerous positions being suggested - they should find pedalling a bit easier in the same gear, i.e. same speed for less power output.

ugo.santalucia

ForumNewbie wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

This discussion is becoming even more pointless... now it's about pedalling at 130 rpm downhill...

Yes, I agree 130rpm especially in 50/11 is probably a bad example. The point I was trying to make was that if a cyclist gets a bit more aero - not the dangerous positions being suggested - they should find pedalling a bit easier in the same gear, i.e. same speed for less power output.

Are you suggesting power required and aerodynamic drag are somewhat proportional?

ForumNewbie

ugo.santalucia wrote:

ForumNewbie wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

This discussion is becoming even more pointless... now it's about pedalling at 130 rpm downhill...

Yes, I agree 130rpm especially in 50/11 is probably a bad example. The point I was trying to make was that if a cyclist gets a bit more aero - not the dangerous positions being suggested - they should find pedalling a bit easier in the same gear, i.e. same speed for less power output.

Are you suggesting power required and aerodynamic drag are somewhat proportional?

Okay, I'm probably stating the obvious, but this thread seems to be all about getting ridiculously and dangerously aero on steep downhills. However the thread title is "How important is an aero position?" - I was just trying to say that even on the flat if you take up a slightly better aero position than arms straight up from the hoods, pedalling in the same gear at the same cadence gets a bit easier as fighting less wind. It might seem obvious to experienced cyclists but maybe not to beginners.

ugo.santalucia

ForumNewbie wrote:

Okay, I'm probably stating the obvious, but this thread seems to be all about getting ridiculously and dangerously aero on steep downhills. However the thread title is "How important is an aero position?" - I was just trying to say that even on the flat if you take up a slightly better aero position than arms straight up from the hoods, pedalling in the same gear at the same cadence gets a bit easier as fighting less wind. It might seem obvious to experienced cyclists but maybe not to beginners.

In the days when spending £ 500 an hour in a wind tunnel was not popular, people used to take photos of themselves from a set distance, while riding a stationary bike in different positions. The photos were then printed and you would cut carefully around the profile of your body with scissors. Then you would weigh them, so see which one had the lowest frontal area...

Ah, the days when integrals played a role in sport... mind you, you can still do it

bernithebiker

LanterneRouge010 wrote:

pedalling out a 50-11 happens at 73 k/h (130 cadence). I used to think above 60k/h then getting more aero was faster, but figured out that putting watts down is still faster

Depends on the situation; trying to save a bit of energy, or looking for the very last km/h.

130 cadence is pretty damn high, especially in a tuck, not sure how long I could hold that for.

There is a video out there somewhere comparing high speed pedalling to high speed tuck, and I seem to remember the tuck won it, but I guess it depends on conditions (% slope, power, etc. etc.)

bernithebiker

ForumNewbie wrote:

The point I was trying to make was that if a cyclist gets a bit more aero .... they should find pedalling a bit easier in the same gear, i.e. same speed for less power output.

4 pages in....Hallelujah!!

sloppyschleckonds

bernithebiker wrote:

ForumNewbie wrote:

The point I was trying to make was that if a cyclist gets a bit more aero .... they should find pedalling a bit easier in the same gear, i.e. same speed for less power output.

4 pages in....Hallelujah!!

ForumNewbie

bernithebiker wrote:

ForumNewbie wrote:

The point I was trying to make was that if a cyclist gets a bit more aero .... they should find pedalling a bit easier in the same gear, i.e. same speed for less power output.

4 pages in....Hallelujah!!

Glad you agree. I think the video was concentrating on the extra speed/distance when getting more aero when freewheeling. That is why I was keen to emphasise the point on pedalling made easier if you can get a bit more aero. I am in my late 50's and my bars are not low by any means, but even with me it makes a difference on the flat if I get my body into a bit more of an aero position.

darkhairedlord

Unless you're racing, aesthetic trumps aero.

angry_bird

darkhairedlord wrote:

Unless you're racing, aesthetic trumps aero.

This.

MikeBrew

This is the beginners thread, where Aero makes less difference than an extra Mars bar. Surely this over the top, discussion for the feeble minded, should be take place in a thread for pseudo racers and people who are ridiculous enough to consider a bubble-wrap chin rest on their stem.

hopkinb

My 11 year old step son was most taken with Froome's descending in the Tour of France this year. He now has some very sore balls after trying to emulate him. A less than perfect road surface meant that top tube met testicles with some force.

ForumNewbie

MikeBrew wrote:

This is the beginners thread, where Aero makes less difference than an extra Mars bar. Surely this over the top, discussion for the feeble minded, should be take place in a thread for pseudo racers and people who are ridiculous enough to consider a bubble-wrap chin rest on their stem.

Yes, when people talk about an aero-specific bike or a racing aero position, or sitting on the crossbar with chin on stem, that is over the top for this forum. I was only trying to explain that if you try not to always ride bolt upright with hands on top of the bars, you will go a bit faster for less effort. It's the same principle as wearing baggy clothing that holds you back in the wind - you need more effort to go at the same speed than if you are wearing tight-fitting clothing.

If you are a beginner and are happy to not be aero at all and struggle more in the wind, that's fine, but usually when beginners buy a road bike they want some tips on how to go further and get faster. You obviously need to try to get fitter as well, but if these other things are slowing you down, you may lose motivation.

darkhairedlord

ForumNewbie wrote:

MikeBrew wrote:

This is the beginners thread, where Aero makes less difference than an extra Mars bar. Surely this over the top, discussion for the feeble minded, should be take place in a thread for pseudo racers and people who are ridiculous enough to consider a bubble-wrap chin rest on their stem.

Yes, when people talk about an aero-specific bike or a racing aero position, or sitting on the crossbar with chin on stem, that is over the top for this forum. I was only trying to explain that if you try not to always ride bolt upright with hands on top of the bars, you will go a bit faster for less effort. It's the same principle as wearing baggy clothing that holds you back in the wind - you need more effort to go at the same speed than if you are wearing tight-fitting clothing.

If you are a beginner and are happy to not be aero at all and struggle more in the wind, that's fine, but usually when beginners buy a road bike they want some tips on how to go further and get faster. You obviously need to try to get fitter as well, but if these other things are slowing you down, you may lose motivation.

Baggy trousers never held back my wind.