cycling weekly tests inadvertently shows how little aero frame is worth
Comments
-
Same HR ? Same power if you have it ?0
-
Identical tyres? Tubes? Pressures? Not even the purveyors of aero frames dare to claim a 1 MPH advantage.0
-
Well I said 'nearly 1 mph'.It might have been more accurate to say between 0.6 and 0.8 mph consistently .I use a heart rate monitor.I ride alone so no drafting on these rides.I ride the same time trial course many times each year -not on this bike-and my times are always within a 20 second window.My performance is consistent whether racing or training.Wheels are the same.clothing the same.The other bike in the comparison is a 7 yr old Ribble -so no hidden cables,no aero tube shapes,not particularly stiff or cutting edge.But tyres ,wheels and drivetrain all in top condition and of comparable quality.bike maintained meticulously.no doubt if we were comparing the 2016 aero bike with something non aero from thIS year,eg a Supersix, for example, the difference would not be as great.OnYourRight wrote:Identical tyres? Tubes? Pressures? Not even the purveyors of aero frames dare to claim a 1 MPH advantage.
And please try and bear in mind I am not making a trumped up claim that ' aero bikes are worth nearly 1mph'. I am merely reporting the facts of my own experience. If you want to find out for yourself you need to buy an aero bike for yourself.They are everywhere now. And better value than ever.So you might as well give in and get one.0 -
Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Aero frames are 100% a marketing gimmick.
Add in the often unreliable braking and they're probably slower on the open road day in day out
Obviously you haven't got one. Or if you have it's not very aero..
Mine is consistently nearly 1mph faster (8 x rides now) over a regular 30 mile route than my other carbon bike. Wheels are the same between bikes.
After your scientific testing and power data you have convinced me. Quod erat demonstrandum.0 -
LanterneRouge010 wrote:Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Aero frames are 100% a marketing gimmick.
Add in the often unreliable braking and they're probably slower on the open road day in day out
Obviously you haven't got one. Or if you have it's not very aero..
Mine is consistently nearly 1mph faster (8 x rides now) over a regular 30 mile route than my other carbon bike. Wheels are the same between bikes.
After your scientific testing and power data you have convinced me. Quod erat demonstrandum.
The power data and scientific findings are already out there and widely publicised. QED indeed.
Unless of course you have done your own scientific testing to prove otherwise. In which case, perhaps you would let most of the Pro Tour teams know your priceless findings so they can finally stop wasting their time and money on aero bikes.0 -
Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Aero frames are 100% a marketing gimmick.
Add in the often unreliable braking and they're probably slower on the open road day in day out
Obviously you haven't got one. Or if you have it's not very aero..
Mine is consistently nearly 1mph faster (8 x rides now) over a regular 30 mile route than my other carbon bike. Wheels are the same between bikes.
After your scientific testing and power data you have convinced me. Quod erat demonstrandum.
The power data and scientific findings are already out there and widely publicised. QED indeed.
Unless of course you have done your own scientific testing to prove otherwise. In which case, perhaps you would let most of the Pro Tour teams know your priceless findings so they can finally stop wasting their time and money on aero bikes.
I'm not suggesting that aero frames are a gimmick or not, but if you look at the riders who, more often than not ride them on the pro circuit, the majority will spend 99% of the race tucked inside the peloton where the aero benefits are negated. They only get the aero benefit for the 400 metres or so of sprinting.0 -
And I don't think many pro teams pay for their bikes...0
-
What I find interesting is that in the TdF and other races, riders who decide to make a break for it in the early part of the race, do so in the full knowledge that they may be out front on their own or with 1 or 2 others for hours on end. And yet, in this year's TdF, many times, the bikes in those breaks were non-aero, eg. Tarmac, SuperSix Evo, etc. Why would they not have chosen the aero option?0
-
Because their personal preference trumps what tiny aero advantage there is on an aero bike?
I'm still not buying that an aero bike is worth almost an extra mph.0 -
Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Aero frames are 100% a marketing gimmick.
Add in the often unreliable braking and they're probably slower on the open road day in day out
Obviously you haven't got one. Or if you have it's not very aero..
Mine is consistently nearly 1mph faster (8 x rides now) over a regular 30 mile route than my other carbon bike. Wheels are the same between bikes.
After your scientific testing and power data you have convinced me. Quod erat demonstrandum.
The power data and scientific findings are already out there and widely publicised. QED indeed.
Unless of course you have done your own scientific testing to prove otherwise. In which case, perhaps you would let most of the Pro Tour teams know your priceless findings so they can finally stop wasting their time and money on aero bikes.
Mate they ride 'aero' bikes so people like you think its necessary to buy an aero bike.
Half of Giant choose to ride on their TCR's not propels anyway, same with Astana on Tarmacs instead of the Venge.0 -
LanterneRouge010 wrote:Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Aero frames are 100% a marketing gimmick.
Add in the often unreliable braking and they're probably slower on the open road day in day out
Obviously you haven't got one. Or if you have it's not very aero..
Mine is consistently nearly 1mph faster (8 x rides now) over a regular 30 mile route than my other carbon bike. Wheels are the same between bikes.
After your scientific testing and power data you have convinced me. Quod erat demonstrandum.
The power data and scientific findings are already out there and widely publicised. QED indeed.
Unless of course you have done your own scientific testing to prove otherwise. In which case, perhaps you would let most of the Pro Tour teams know your priceless findings so they can finally stop wasting their time and money on aero bikes.
Mate they ride 'aero' bikes so people like you think its necessary to buy an aero bike.
Half of Giant choose to ride on their TCR's not propels anyway, same with Astana on Tarmacs instead of the Venge.
Douchebag reply.
They are just a marketing gimmick then?
Same as deep section wheels, aero helmets, skinsuits I guess... :roll:0 -
Clear advantage with a skinsuit (because the body represents such a significant proportion of the aerodynamic resistance) - less so with wheels, helmets and frames...0
-
You can't compare times on two different bikes you have and conclude the aero one is faster, this is because the bikes are different in other ways, such as power transfer and stiffness. Wind tunnel testing can go most of the way to saying which is more aero between two bikes and even that has is not all wrapped up and simple.
Most people buy into it for the look and the marketing really, that's certainly one thing that's true.0 -
Just look at a head on shot of a bike. There's not much to it. Now put a rider on it. Much more bulky.
A small change in position can make a big difference in your aero position.0 -
Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Semantik wrote:LanterneRouge010 wrote:Aero frames are 100% a marketing gimmick.
Add in the often unreliable braking and they're probably slower on the open road day in day out
Obviously you haven't got one. Or if you have it's not very aero..
Mine is consistently nearly 1mph faster (8 x rides now) over a regular 30 mile route than my other carbon bike. Wheels are the same between bikes.
After your scientific testing and power data you have convinced me. Quod erat demonstrandum.
The power data and scientific findings are already out there and widely publicised. QED indeed.
Unless of course you have done your own scientific testing to prove otherwise. In which case, perhaps you would let most of the Pro Tour teams know your priceless findings so they can finally stop wasting their time and money on aero bikes.
Mate they ride 'aero' bikes so people like you think its necessary to buy an aero bike.
Half of Giant choose to ride on their TCR's not propels anyway, same with Astana on Tarmacs instead of the Venge.
Douchebag reply.
They are just a marketing gimmick then?
Same as deep section wheels, aero helmets, skinsuits I guess... :roll:
Sorry to burst your bubble.
The link in the OP found that skinsuits and wheels do have a significant effect, aero frame was negligible.0 -
First we have to assume the position of the rider on all three bikes in that video is the same. Even small difference (and there will be small differences) will affect the results of the aero bike test compared to the wheel test where the bike remained constant.
If the positions where identical then the results as are I expect you get a similar effect from a decent set of aero wheels as you get from an aero frame but the wheels do give more of a benefit. To say therefore that aero frames are marketing is bogus. They make a difference but is that difference worth it to you. i know when I ride my Look 795 compared to my round tubed 90's bikes the Look 795 is noticeably quicker.
There is alot of faulty logic in this thread. Aero frame help if you are competing and are prone to going solo. Just because Pro's dont all use them means nothing. Do you honestly think most pro riders know anything about bike physics. all they have is natural talent. If aero frames dont work all TT bikes would have round tubes but they dont do they. Aero frames help but your position and clothing are more important.
The question is not are areo frames a gimmick - they are not but are they worth the expense to you.http://www.thecycleclinic.co.uk -wheel building and other stuff.0 -
thecycleclinic wrote:First we have to assume the position of the rider on all three bikes in that video is the same. Even small difference (and there will be small differences) will affect the results of the aero bike test compared to the wheel test where the bike remained constant.
If the positions where identical then the results as are I expect you get a similar effect from a decent set of aero wheels as you get from an aero frame but the wheels do give more of a benefit. To say therefore that aero frames are marketing is bogus. They make a difference but is that difference worth it to you. i know when I ride my Look 795 compared to my round tubed 90's bikes the Look 795 is noticeably quicker.
There is alot of faulty logic in this thread. Aero frame help if you are competing and are prone to going solo. Just because Pro's dont all use them means nothing. Do you honestly think most pro riders know anything about bike physics. all they have is natural talent. If aero frames dont work all TT bikes would have round tubes but they dont do they. Aero frames help but your position and clothing are more important.
The question is not are areo frames a gimmick - they are not but are they worth the expense to you.
So the average weekend warrior cares more about bike physics than a Pro who's ability to feed his family and educate his children depends on that extra second?
Unless you've done a 20km TT with a power meter on the two different bikes with same position, power output, wheels, clothing etc, you're not even 10% the way approaching a valid test comparing the aero benefit of the look 795 frame over your 90's bike.
Lance lived in the wind tunnel adjusting his position. Position is the biggest difference you can control.0 -
thecycleclinic wrote:Just because Pro's dont all use them means nothing. Do you honestly think most pro riders know anything about bike physics.
I would imagine they do, yes - although they probably don't all have degrees in aeronautics. Either way, I would imagine someone else on the team probably knows a thing or two, as it's quite important these days.
Suggesting that the pros don't use aero frames because they may be unaware of the benefits is slightly amusing though.0 -
Undeniably true that some of the Pro peloton choose not to ride an aero frame.
Their motivation for this?
Choose ONE of the following:
1) Their TCRs, Tarmacs etc ride faster up hills, go just as well in the bunch they ride in most of the time and have some slight advantage in terms of handling/ride quality.(more than likely correct)
or
2) They have some non-conformist belief that aero frames are in fact sh*t and pointless.(unlikely to be correct)0 -
or, as plenty of pros have actually stated, particularly in regard to the Venge:
(3) rubbish brakes - unsurprisingly, staying upright is a key part of racing well and when you're riding with 200 other people and regularly descending at 50 mph, having some brakes that actually work well is desirable.0 -
Semantik wrote:Undeniably true that some of the Pro peloton choose not to ride an aero frame.
Their motivation for this?
Choose ONE of the following:
1) Their TCRs, Tarmacs etc ride faster up hills, go just as well in the bunch they ride in most of the time and have some slight advantage in terms of handling/ride quality.(more than likely correct)
or
2) They have some non-conformist belief that aero frames are in fact sh*t and pointless.(unlikely to be correct)
Handling/ride quality/braking all contribute to speed and watts you have to expend.0 -
BuckMulligan wrote:or, as plenty of pros have actually stated, particularly in regard to the Venge:
(3) rubbish brakes - unsurprisingly, staying upright is a key part of racing well and when you're riding with 200 other people and regularly descending at 50 mph, having some brakes that actually work well is desirable.
+1
Not a fan of concealed brakes at all.0 -
Semantik wrote:BuckMulligan wrote:or, as plenty of pros have actually stated, particularly in regard to the Venge:
(3) rubbish brakes - unsurprisingly, staying upright is a key part of racing well and when you're riding with 200 other people and regularly descending at 50 mph, having some brakes that actually work well is desirable.
+1
Not a fan of concealed brakes at all.
Venge Vias Disc.
It's the future.
As is all the other aero disc bikes coming out
0 -
thecycleclinic wrote:First we have to assume the position of the rider on all three bikes in that video is the same. Even small difference (and there will be small differences) will affect the results of the aero bike test compared to the wheel test where the bike remained constant.
If the positions where identical then the results as are I expect you get a similar effect from a decent set of aero wheels as you get from an aero frame but the wheels do give more of a benefit. To say therefore that aero frames are marketing is bogus. They make a difference but is that difference worth it to you. i know when I ride my Look 795 compared to my round tubed 90's bikes the Look 795 is noticeably quicker.
There is alot of faulty logic in this thread. Aero frame help if you are competing and are prone to going solo. Just because Pro's dont all use them means nothing. Do you honestly think most pro riders know anything about bike physics. all they have is natural talent. If aero frames dont work all TT bikes would have round tubes but they dont do they. Aero frames help but your position and clothing are more important.
The question is not are areo frames a gimmick - they are not but are they worth the expense to you.
Even if the rider isn't clued up on physics/aeronautics, you can sure as sh*t bet that someone in the team is. Teams want to win. Desperately. They will do whatever it takes to do so. If they thought putting someone on a Venge instead of a Tarmac will produce a win, then that is what they will do. So again, surprising to see so many Tarmacs out there, which has to make you wonder at the OVERALL benefit of an aero frame for racing.
(By the way, I'm glad you were a physics teacher and not an English one).0 -
Pretty sure the riders want to win too....0
