Which makes it important to choose the correct leg position for a non-pedaling mannequin. Several studies (both published and unpublished) have examined parts of this question, including Blair et. al. in article 14, issue 04 of the 2007 Human Power eJournal (http://www.hupi.org/HPeJ/0014/0014.html)

As a result of all this, DZ’s cranks are positioned in the pedal stroke so the drag measures the same as the average of all crank positions.

I would like to see an arm rest pad width for each bike if that is not too much trouble

"Has anyone ever done specific tunnel testing with the front wheels turned 5 or 10 degrees off axis of the top tube simulating turning a bicycle?"

i've been waiting for someone to get around to this question. this is why down tubes that fair the back of the front wheel don't work. however, we don't test these bikes with the front wheel turned. however, it seems to me a pretty valid testing protocol.

Ok, I am going for a P4 with a Tektro 726R front brake, Scott 100K bars, and 808 Firecrests with a taped disc cover and Bonty aero R4s.

What do I win?

Damon,

Would you let us know whether a 3T Ventus will work on a 2011 P4? One of the forum members mentioned that it might not due to cabling issues.

Thanks.

DZ's elbow bolts are 165mm apart. Elbow pads on each bike were adjusted to support this.

2.) Don't overcomplicate simple problems. Let's look at this from a first order principals perspective. What does a simple cylinder (calf) look like in a flow stream? How fast is the leg moving compared to the flow stream? (roughly 1.1 m/s at 100 rpm and 175mm crank) How is it going to be markedly different than a static leg's interaction with the seat tube? A bike is translating at ~11.1 m/s at 25 mph, just to help. Not complicated cfd interactions dude.

The way the DZ model is built (right leg forward), any material effect of the front leg's effect on the downtube will be manifest in the difference between the left and right sweeps in yaw, and those differences look pretty small.

My, admittedly condescending, point is thus: [snip]

word

What I think is interesting is how everyone is passing over the the thing that jumps out in the bare bike vs. DZ plots...DZ "sails" REALLY well at high yaw angles ;-)

The drag differences are big between dummy on and dummy off data...and the pedalling test could make these differences even bigger

My last word:

How can you say that X bike is faster than Y only with the data of the static test if when you face this bikes to a pedalling test (what everyone do in the road) the data that you get is so unreliable and unrepeatable? How can you say that X bike is the fastest in the road like many companies say when the only type of test that they do is a static one and like the Cervelo engineers have pointed out the pedalling motion causes so many variations in drag readings?