Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Macca's Wind Tunnel Test
Quote | Reply
A savings of 13+ minutes over 112miles seems like a lot.

Whither quicker? Macca’s Kestrel wind-tunnel test
By Jay Prasuhn


Chris McCormack, Kestrel’s longtime mainstay Talon SL rider, had oft wondered whether the seat-tubeless Airfoil Pro was faster than the aero-tubed Kestrel. So Kestrel gave him both bikes to test at the San Diego Wind Tunnel

February 10, 2006 -- On January 30, Australian Ironman powerhouse Chris McCormack paid a visit to the San Diego wind tunnel (http://www.lswt.com) to hone his position on the bike. Along to monitor the test was Kestrel’s Preston Sandusky, Profile Design’s Chris Travers and master bikefitter Craig Turner of Encinitas-based Nytro, one the country’s top tri shops.

Jay Prasuhn Nytro's Craig Turner, kneeling, helps to set up McCormack.
There were lots of micro-adjustments, such as hydration placement and head position, to Macca’s set-up on the carbon fiber Kestrel Talon SL Aero. Then Macca jumped on Kestrel’s Airfoil Pro (which was recently refined with a lighter carbon fiber lay-up) to see if he could squeeze any additional speed and efficiency out of his position atop a different rig.

The first test result came down from Dave Sanford and Dave King of San Diego Wind Tunnel: McCormack aboard the Airfoil Pro was 56 seconds faster per hour.

“Fifty six seconds?” McCormack said upon hearing the news. His gaze wheeled over to Sandusky. The decision was made. “Mate, I’m riding this bike in Hawaii next year.”

Once that baseline was established, Macca and the Airfoil Pro were tested in more realistic crosswind conditions as the team set bike and rider at a 10-degree yaw angle. This second test complemented the first and provided additional support for Macca’s earlier snap decision. With no seatpost to muddy the waters, cleaner air is able to pass through the rider’s legs and past the rear wheel, resulting in still greater aerodynamic advantage, according to the wind-tunnel results.

“The drag savings of the Airfoil Pro versus the . . . Talon SL in bike-to-bike testing just about doubled when tested at a 10-degree yaw angle versus a head-on wind,” Sandusky noted. “It would appear that the no-seat tube design of the Airfoil Pro is doing its job, allowing more, and cleaner, air to pass between the rider’s legs and past the rear aero wheel.”

Once on the Airfoil Pro, Macca gave Turner free reign to tweak his position – with the caveat that any changes would have to be sustainable for, and conducive to, 112 miles followed by a quick marathon.

“That’s what I like about dealing with Macca,” said Turner. “He had total confidence. And given that, I thought the gains would be pretty huge. I’d seen roadie-style [higher upper-body position combined with a slacker seat angle] triathletes for years, and no matter the level of athlete, [moving them] 5.5 cm forward and dropping the front [is] simply more aero.”

The numbers at the end of the day? A few things were kept under wraps, but here’re the findings for McCormack. “In round terms, it was almost a minute per hour [saved] going to the Airfoil Pro, and about two minutes per hour with position changes [for a total of three minutes per hour saved],” Turner said. “If he does a 112-mile bike, that’s a 13 and a half minutes of time savings in a 4:30 [bike split] for the same wattage output.

Which brought up an interesting question positioned by Turner. “What’s 13 and a half minutes in calories burned? If you don’t take the savings on the bike, how much is that in energy for the run? Of course, the strategy of the race determines everything.”

McCormack shook his head in near-disbelief at the final numbers. “It’s awesome,” he said. “I’ve always wanted to do it, seen all the bike riders do it. To be almost 14 minutes quicker by changing bike and position, it’s unreal. It’s a great tool, and this is a great place. I mean, Faris [Al-Sultan] was here, Michellie [Jones] was here, everyone’s been here. It’s one of those things you have to do to consider every part of your race.”






Photo by: Jay Prasuhn
Macca in the wind tunnel.

As for Turner, he was back at the wind tunnel just two days later with former Ironman Germany champ Katja Schumacher, who also underwent testing on her Airfoil Pro and a fit with Turner.

“I’m thrilled for Katja,” Turner said. “She did a long ride in the position we created for her, and she loved it. I’ll be curious to see if it translates for her this season in races.”

You can find more on Kestrel and the Airfoil Pro at http://www.kestrel-usa.com and more about Nytro at http://www.nytro.com.



Shawn
TORRE Consulting Services, LLC
http://www.TORREcs.com

Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Did Craig make a mistake and order too many airfoils???? Good hopes for Macca
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [KEAU] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
considering he already went 4h24 orso at roth ......

http://www.wimdedoncker.be
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The second picture appears to have Macca in a steep, big drop set-up. I thought he's always ridden a slack(73deg) set-up on his Talon SL. It looks like he has converted!! : ) He has to be reading ST.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wow. Very cool. This should be good for Kestrel (at least their sales of the Airfoil Pro).
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Is Under Armour moving out a bike/tri line? Or is Macca just wearing some of their skin-tight offerings?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Which brought up an interesting question positioned by Turner. “What’s 13 and a half minutes in calories burned? If you don’t take the savings on the bike, how much is that in energy for the run? Of course, the strategy of the race determines everything.” "

All the aerodynamic hoo-haa aside, this is the real issue in these competitive IM races. Craig Turner has hit the nail on the head - it's not how absolutely fast you go on the bike, it's how your own bike split sets you up for the run.

Fleck


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [matty1281] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
They are in the Tri business now.

http://www.chrismccormack.com/...wsDetail.aspx?id=149
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
13 minutes from where he used to ride is very believable. I would have guessed at least 10 just by changing position.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I doubt he will keep the same power output for 112 miles in that position.

Ruble Triathlon Coaching Average of 30 coached PR's per year
Florida Triathlon Camps Train in North Americas winter training destination
Ruble Racing Events Midwest Triathlon Racing
Ruble Timing Midwest Event Timing
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [wimothy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
excellent ! now I'm expecting a 4:11

numbers don't lie, do they?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
How does one go 56 seconds faster per hour?

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [BIGZACH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
I doubt he will keep the same power output for 112 miles in that position.


That's the point. If he can ride the same time (ie, with the leaders) at lower power, he'll run faster.

For reference, at those speeds, 13 minutes is 25-30 watts. A HUGE difference.

The difference between running 2:50 and sticking your head in a bucket of ice and walking.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
How does one go 56 seconds faster per hour?


I go about 140 seconds faster per hour than before I changed my bike setup (at the same power).

It's not hard to do if you're starting from an upright roadie position.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ashburn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Frank's point was that 1hr is 1hr...not 56min
although, if you get close to the speed of light, and change the referential, you will change time.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ashburn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I knew you were getting faster Rick, but apparently you are now approaching the speed of light.

I hope those clinchers of yours can take that kind of speed. Maybe you should go back to tubulars.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The time and wattage gains mentioned in these test almost always need to be taken with a massive grain of salt, say one the size of Mt. Everest. Remember the article on Peter Reid gaining 35 watts @ IM pace from changing his position working with Andy Pruitt?

There is obviously margin of error in addition to the consideration of how each split is calculated. Is it assuming he NEVER moves from position #2 for 112 miles vs. NEVER moving from #1 for 112 miles?

But considering how fast he has ridden, to assume that he would ride 13-14 minutes faster is pretty crazy. I guess we'll know soon enough though...

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm not sure I buy the math that says 13 minutes, but he sure does look much better on the bike. I hope he does well.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am a huge fan of Macca and am 100% rooting for him to win Hawaii, but why has he waited for now to switch to the Airfoil? I know he has ridden his Talon for a long time now and is used to it and has had great success with it, but it seems being sponsored by Kestel he would have tried it out before this. I know he just did this wind tunnel test and maybe they can see the numbers better, but real world experience has got to count to. Maybe he is just in a better position or I guess the bike helps too with that frame design. I hope this new set up helps. His run was awesome last year. I still think that race takes a couple of times though even for an elite athlete. Michellie Jones is as good as it gets and she almost won on her first try which is incredible, but N. Badman was just too strong on the run and definitely has the experience and know how of that race. Good Luck Macca.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Here's a pretty side profile of what looks to be a the new 'aero' set-up and what looks like his older set-up in the second one:











Shawn
TORRE Consulting Services, LLC
http://www.TORREcs.com

Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"no matter the level of athlete, [moving them] 5.5 cm forward and dropping the front [is] simply more aero.”

macca's been hearing this for years. i guess he just hasn't heard it from the right person. i'm glad he's finally seen the light. now maybe his massive potential will be realized in kona.

i might also point out that the reason i was compelled to stop writing bike reviews in triathlete magazine (on two different occasions) because i wrote that the bikes being reviewed in this magazine were road race bikes, with road geometries, and as such were not ideal for a certain segment of the triathlon bike buying population. the first such time was when i wrote this about the talon. apparently this caused a shit storm, resulting in my firing.

we see that kestrel itself, now that is has a very fine tri bike it can produce and sell, is okay with the truth being told about the talon, that it's nothing more than a very nice road bike. now macca himself sees this.

what i wrote was something to the effect of macca being able to successfully ride the talon, because of the position he chose, but peter reid would not be able to ride the talon, because his position required a retrofit that the talon would not accommodate.

ironically, macca appears ready to adopt a position that the talon cannot accommodate. this is not to cast aspersions on the talon, but to say that the talon cannot act as a tri bike any more than the airfoil pro can act as a road race bike.

i can safely write this now for two reasons. first, because kestrel now has nothing to lose when i write that the airfoil pro, not the talon, is its bike for triathletes. and second, because i'm not in any danger of firing myself.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Those are really cool photos. Macca looks more comfortable in the old set up than the new one, at least to me. Is his position on the bike his biggest savings?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
   

That lower shot seems to show a Cda number of .30. I'm amazed how high triathletes drag numbers often are. It should be pretty to improve on that.



-jens
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IMO, which doesn't mean much (I'm the shoe guy), the Airfoil is a nice bike but I think Kestrel would be better off (sell more) making the 52 a 700c rather than the current 650c set-up. I know it's probably the border line size where you could go either way, but with the trend leaning towards 700c, that would be my preference.

Shawn
TORRE Consulting Services, LLC
http://www.TORREcs.com

Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Looking at those side views, I wonder if Macca will really be able to ride 112 miles in this new position, where he probably can't see the road beyond more than 50 feet ahead and his knee is coming to within about 6 inches of his chest (probably robbing him of power unless he can ride his PowerCranks in this position) and his heavy head is further forward from his shoulders requiring more muscle force in the neck and shoulders to keep it up (with no break).

I suspect this position can save "56 seconds per hour" for about 20 minutes.

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]Frank's point was that 1hr is 1hr...not 56min
although, if you get close to the speed of light, and change the referential, you will change time.[/reply]

I had an uncle who was so fast he did the 30 minute run in 27 minutes.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Only 13 minutes? I'm pretty sure the person that wrote the pess-release can do better than that...
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
IMO, which doesn't mean much (I'm the shoe guy), the Airfoil is a nice bike but I think Kestrel would be better off (sell more) making the 52 a 700c rather than the current 650c set-up. I know it's probably the border line size where you could go either way, but with the trend leaning towards 700c, that would be my preference.


Shawn is right. Kestrel has an opportunity to tap a completely virgin, and frustrated, market: the guy who is 5'8" - 5'11", wants to ride steep, low, and on 700c.

How? Make a 52cm with their 7.6cm headtube. While they're at it, they should get the seat tube angle to 78-79* and lengthen the front end.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, Shawn...I'll second your opinion...I want the 52 in a 700 wheel setup...its purely economics. I don't want to own any more damn wheels, and I don't want to have to buy another PT hub to accomodate 650...

But with this thread, and the fact that I've recently changed my Talon to about a 77.25 deg setup (74cm saddle height...saddle tip about 1.5cm behind the bb centerline...)...I'm more sure than ever that I want to get on a 78+ deg setup...Probably another 2 cm forward will be the sweet spot for me...if that means 52cm Airfoil...with 650 wheels...then so be it. But I'd rather have 700
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
I knew you were getting faster Rick, but apparently you are now approaching the speed of light.

I hope those clinchers of yours can take that kind of speed. Maybe you should go back to tubulars.


D'oh! You guys are too sharp for me. Of course, I mean I can travel in <58 minutes what used to take an hour.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Looking at those side views, I wonder if Macca will really be able to ride 112 miles in this new position, where he probably can't see the road beyond more than 50 feet ahead ...

I suspect this position can save "56 seconds per hour" for about 20 minutes.


Why not? Hundreds of other people do it. Hell, I can do it. I've ridden an hour longer than he ever will in a position like that, holding exactly the same power I can hold sitting up in a roadie position.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [caleb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
there are no bikes for the guy between 5'8'' and 5'11'' who wants to ride low and steep????

You live where?

How about the lucero (S or M) and the new QRs that came out? How about the Tiphoon?

How about a P2SL or P3C?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ashburn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply][reply]
Looking at those side views, I wonder if Macca will really be able to ride 112 miles in this new position, where he probably can't see the road beyond more than 50 feet ahead ...

I suspect this position can save "56 seconds per hour" for about 20 minutes. [/reply]


Why not? Hundreds of other people do it. Hell, I can do it. I've ridden an hour longer than he ever will in a position like that, holding exactly the same power I can hold sitting up in a roadie position.[/reply]

Hundreds? Exactly the same power? OK, if you say so.

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dan-

You've just described my biggest beef with Triathlete and Inside Tri Magazines and why my subscription to both has been allowed to expire. I have yet to ever see a negative review in either, which means they have never reviewed a bad product or the review pages are all just advertisements. Your reviews were the best, but even they seemed slightly toned down from what we on ST have become used to. It's too bad, I know it's all about economics, but what a joy it would be to have a magazine with the balls to print honest reviews. It's even more disappointing to hear the reason from you, although I suspected something of the sort was to blame for the drop-off in your articles.

In the meantime, I'll continue to visit ST.com for less "edited" content.

BK
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
that position isn't extreme at all. It will likely take a few weeks to adjust to it, but it's just a good TT position. He is not emulating Chris Boardman.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]that position isn't extreme at all. It will likely take a few weeks to adjust to it, but it's just a good TT position. He is not emulating Chris Boardman.[/reply]

It may not be extreme compared to some but it is pretty extreme compared to his other position, especially the head position. Whether someone can adapt to such a change for 112 mile race in just a few weeks may or may not be true. I do know the physics of levers though. An inch or two further out is a big deal here. It is going to take substantially more muscle force to hold his approximate 10-15 lb head (think bowling ball) for 4+ hours in that position than in the former. I don't think someone can easily adapt to that in just a couple of weeks.

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
It is going to take substantially more muscle force to hold his approximate 10-15 lb head (think bowling ball) for 4+ hours in that position than in the former. I don't think someone can easily adapt to that in just a couple of weeks.


Speed hurts. Guys gotta decide how fast they want to go.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [BK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"You've just described my biggest beef with Triathlete and Inside Tri Magazines"

i'm writing a lot of the reviews for IT, and you're right, you're pretty much not going to see much that i write that is bad in that mag. that's because i have a lot of input on what it is i write about, and i just don't choose bad bikes to review.

as for triathlete mag, i like it a lot. i think the editorial is good, and i think an example of that is the article that has spawned this thread. but yes, the mag's mission is not consistent with hard-hitting reviews, imho. the only problem, which the magazine fixed, is the model of having a guy like me write about bikes that were placed in front of me. were i allowed to just choose the bike, a mag can sidestep these problems. or, have someone other than me write about the bikes (which they have done). this doesn't change my view that both mags are really very good, as niche consumer mags go, they're just not consumer reports.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ashburn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I love Macca, but I don't think his new position is very realistic. If he was riding a pursuit on the track, I would buy it, but it looks to me like he is working hard in keeping his position. Four hours plus is a long time to be that scrunched up. I guess we will have to wait and see how he does, but I bet the films at Ironman show him a bit higher in front. The "bad " position looks like he could sit like that for hours. I think they should split the difference and move him forward a bit and a tad higher in front.
Hope I am wrong, as I would live to see him smoke a good Ironman Hawaii.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Craig Turner is cool.

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]How does one go 56 seconds faster per hour?[/reply]

I think this has to do with Einstein's 2 twin brothers, one travels at light speed, thing...

Actually, I think had the same reaction as you. I see how you could go 56 seconds faster per mile, or 56 inches/feet/yards/etc per hour... but an hour is an hour, right?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dan, any particular reason the link to get to the ST wiki from the main ST page is so tiny ?

and any chance you will add a wiki link on to the ST forum page?





Where would you want to swim ?
Last edited by: Greg X: Feb 11, 06 14:25
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [urbanrider] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
t' = y.(t-vx/c^2) with y = 1/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2

Ref 1: x,y,z,t
Ref 2: x',y',z',t'

my guess is that the airfoil will melt before that...
and you'll see how white macca's teeth are after that trip.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Wells] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As I said before, from when is riding in the aero postion about comfort ? It is about speed. You should pick an aero position that you can hold for 112 miles for max sustainable power and still have strength and energy to run a marathon. Being comfort is something that you get while sitting on a couch, not during an Ironman. Comfort comes after you cross the finish line. Positions need be be those that are sustainable over a long period. I don't think Faris looks "comfortable" riding that fast in a speedo, but he can hold it and still run. This is what it is about. Its great that Macca is trying something different. I hope he can win Kona!

Speed and comfort are mutually exclusive :-). Anyone who believes that comfort can coexist with speed is taking it too easy :-)
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [caleb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ha ha... caleb just called all you 5'8" - 5'11" guys who want to ride steep, low, and on 700c frustrated virgins.


<If you're gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough>
Get Fitter!
Proud member of the Smartasscrew, MONSTER CLUB
Get your FIX today?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [devashish paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"""""""""As I said before, from when is riding in the aero postion about comfort ? It is about speed. You should pick an aero position that you can hold for 112 miles for max sustainable power and still have strength and energy to run a marathon. Being comfort is something that you get while sitting on a couch, not during an Ironman. Comfort comes after you cross the finish line. Positions need be be those that are sustainable over a long period.""""""""

Dev, you contradict yourself. You mention sutainable positoins and max sustainable power positions. Let me ask you this. two people, both having the potential to ride at max sustainable watts for 112miles. One rider, rider A is comfy, rider B is not. Who is going to go faster?

The comfy rider, b/c the other one wil be moving around trying to get comfortable, trying to find relief. Rider A will be able to maintain a steady output, ride B will be standing to get relief, and sliding back and forth much more. For IM dialing in your position involves both power and comfort unless you have a taint of steel.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Last edited by: desert dude: Feb 11, 06 17:01
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ashburn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Speed hurts. Guys gotta decide how fast they want to go.'

Yeah, and it's all about pushing 58+ big rings as well.

Sing along "macho, macho man, I wanna be a macho man" :-)

If you want to be fast you have to be comfortable. An uncomfy position is going to take a hell of lot out of you.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [G-man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
I love Macca, but I don't think his new position is very realistic.
I'm not going to suggest he has it dialed in, but at least he's starting to think outside his box and that maybe, just maybe, there is something to this aerodynamic stuff after all. I'd love to see it because I like the guy and I love to see guys reach their potential.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ashburn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"I love to see guys reach their potential."

Yeah, but let's see him do this first in his new position before we start awarding him with better results.

Slowman, are you listening?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
"Speed hurts. Guys gotta decide how fast they want to go.'

Yeah, and it's all about pushing 58+ big rings as well.

Sing along "macho, macho man, I wanna be a macho man" :-)

If you want to be fast you have to be comfortable. An uncomfy position is going to take a hell of lot out of you.


Well, I turn a 50 ring, so I wouldn't know about that...

What does the concept of "comfort" even mean in a sport where the trophy often goes to the guy willing to suffer the most? When did cycling and triathlon become "comfort" sports?

I think a TT and triathlon bike position should be "tolerable." Give me one that's comfortable on which I can ride 21 mph and another that I can hardly stand, yet ride 22 mph...guess which one I choose?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ashburn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My point is if somebody is on a bike for 112 miles and then has to run a marathon then IMO comfort should take precedence over a bit of bike speed in an IM. This has been proven many times. Many people wonder if Bjorn's over all times might be better if he changed his position. Of course we'll never know unless he ever does.

Different situation in a 20 or 40 km TT however.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Desert Dude, I agree with you. The position should be one that you can hold (ie you are not squirming around searching for a better spot to sit). My main point is that it is unlikely that you will get as comfortable as in the road position (although I have come quite close to being just as comfortable, but not quite), when you go aero. So to some extent we have to just suck it up and deal with it. There is a cost to speed. The other thing is that when you go hard in the aero position, there is less pressure on your seat than when you putter around at 12 mph to the 7-eleven.

Let's put it another way. You want an 'ergonomic position" one that optimizes your personal bone geometry while sustaining max sustainable power output. It likely will not be the most comfortable postion you can find on a bike, but as long as you can get used to it, that is all you need. There are more comfortable positions, but they won't be conducive to going fast...after all there is a cost to speed. May as well accept this fact :-)
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for your insight Dan. I'm glad to hear you still have reviews coming out in IT, perhaps I'll have to check out the latest copy of that one.

I realize I'm asking for a lot from the publications for such a small sport and perhaps I'm a bit naive as well. The economics may not be there to support it, but I still maintain that I'd love some hardcore reviews and real product comparisons from time to time. Triathlete does do a good job overall and does provide good editorial stuff, but to me, the "reviews" start to feel like marketing copy.

Alas, I guess that's the niche you and others fill with sites like Slowtwitch, so I should be happy I can get what I want for free :) - thanks.
Last edited by: BK: Feb 11, 06 18:59
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ashburn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:
I doubt he will keep the same power output for 112 miles in that position.


That's the point. If he can ride the same time (ie, with the leaders) at lower power, he'll run faster.

For reference, at those speeds, 13 minutes is 25-30 watts. A HUGE difference.

The difference between running 2:50 and sticking your head in a bucket of ice and walking.


Yes, but it will be just as tiring for him to put out 25-30 less watts in that position....plus he may feel worse from being scrunched in an unatural position....so he could run worse.

His old position was fine...I think

Ruble Triathlon Coaching Average of 30 coached PR's per year
Florida Triathlon Camps Train in North Americas winter training destination
Ruble Racing Events Midwest Triathlon Racing
Ruble Timing Midwest Event Timing
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [BIGZACH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Yes, but it will be ...


"Will" be...?

Really? You know that? As, like, a fact and stuff?

I'm not saying everybody can go forward and low and not lose power, but doesn't anybody notice how many people try it and don't? Pros, AGrs, world-class TT racers, pursuit specialists,... all sorts of people.

I know guys who say they won't try it because they won't run as fast. Not that they've ever tried it. They just know it to be true. Without having tried it. Ever. Even for one race. But it's true because a famous triathlete from the early 90s said it was true.

But he never tried it either. But because he could beat everyone his way, then gosh dang, everyone else should be able to as well.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Who says Bjorn is uncomfortable? I betcha he's damn comfortable in his position...
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [BIGZACH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]His old position was fine...I think[/reply]

In view of the fact he has gone sub 8 once or twice his old position couldn't have been too bad.

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [synchronicity] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well... I hear he suffers a lot from back pain (injuries?) so maybe he's not that comfortable.


http://twitter.com/krepster || http://www.pedro-gomes.com || follow all the action on facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [BIGZACH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"from being scrunched in an unatural position...."

I don't really see him being any more 'scrunched' than in his old position...
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"In view of the fact he has gone sub 8 once or twice his old position couldn't have been too bad."

But so have Peter and Faris and they finished in front of him in Kona. Sub-8 and Roth isn't so impressive anymore, that's just part of what it takes to be a contender at Kona. If you want to WIN Kona, you have to be even better than that.


----------------------------------
Justin in Austin, get it? :)

Cool races:
- Redman
- Desoto American Triple T
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [synchronicity] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Who says Bjorn is uncomfortable? I betcha he's damn comfortable in his position..."

Yes, and he runs so well out of it.

---------------------------
''Sweeney - you can both crush your AG *and* cruise in dead last!! 😂 '' Murphy's Law
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
All the pro's are on Profile T2's! Macca, Faris, Peter Norman (I think), now Gordo too.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [gregk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In the "new more aero" position, does anyone know how much drop he has from the top of seat to top of arm pads? 20 cm? thanks

-------------------------------------------------
Latest Duct tape QR Superfull fashion model
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [vintagetri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Macca switching and being able to tloerate his new position is all fine and dandy, anything he can do to get an advantage is great. I don't think that this new position is his answer to winning kona. This position will help, but I believe that his major troubles have been dealing with the heat and his nutrition. Obviously he ran just fine this year once he stopped throwing up. Just my thougths.

Matt
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [gregk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
greg,

I know that guys like Peter, Macca, and Norman just used the extensions with their crabon x base bars. I also wonder if these are the bars that bike companies have been choosing to spec. their bikes with and they are just on there for the testing or profile is paying these people to use them. I am not sure how tunnel testing goes, but my guess is that the company wants to test their bike, so they call their high profile athlete to be the subject. It is like killing two birds with on stone. Steve Larsen also had the profile bars on the Scott Plasma. Let me know what your thoughts are on the subject.

Matt
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ashburn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Quote:

Really? You know that? As, like, a fact and stuff?

I'm not saying everybody can go forward and low and not lose power, but....


You said in another post that he didn't have to maintain the same power because he could put out 25-30 less watts and still go the same speed....sounds like you were expecting some loss of power there.

and stuff

Ruble Triathlon Coaching Average of 30 coached PR's per year
Florida Triathlon Camps Train in North Americas winter training destination
Ruble Racing Events Midwest Triathlon Racing
Ruble Timing Midwest Event Timing
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [MStein] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't think that many bike companies spec the Carbon X any more. My only guess is that these pro's are just used to using them. They're probably sponsored by Profile, who wants to get their new product visible, so they give them the T2+. I don't understand why none of them ride the T2 aluminum wing- it is kept separate from the stem (more adjustability). Then there is the CBX carbon bar and the AluminX wing, which no pro's seem to ride... I don't know...

Yeah, it is pretty clear that bike companies want high-profile athletes to be aboard their bikes during wind tunnel testing (rather than just some guy), just for credibility purposes.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]"no matter the level of athlete, [.moving them] 5.5 cm forward and dropping the front [.is] simply more aero.”

macca's been hearing this for years. i guess he just hasn't heard it from the right person. i'm glad he's finally seen the light.

surroy, but the aerodynamic gains are made almost soley in the DROPPING the front part...

g


greg
www.wattagetraining.com
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [gregclimbs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"surroy, but the aerodynamic gains are made almost soley in the DROPPING the front part..."

so, then, why didn't he just move the bars down and keep the saddle where it was?

you can't drop the front part unless you move the saddle forward. that's central to the dynamic. it's not just moving the saddle forward, it's rotating the body complex forward. this is not something new. there's been a link to this knowledge based article on slowtwitch since its inception since 1999, and it's the basis of the tri bikes i desiged a decade prior to that. from the slowtwitch bike fit article:

"...as you rock yourself back in the saddle you're rocking yourself up in front, that is, your back will not be as flat and you will probably be punching a larger hole in the wind as you propel yourself forward."

yes, i believe there are other benefits to riding steep that are compatible with the aero benefit you speak of. apparently most of the rest of the world's best bike racing time trialers and triathletes agree with me. but at a minimum riding steep is not going to be any worse for chris, because if it were he would eschew the lower front end for a more comfortable, powerful position.

i doubt he'll be able to sustain the position he held in tunnel (at least the position as represented by that photo). but i would guess he'll rotate back to somewhere in between where he was and that tunnel pic.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]you can't drop the front part unless you move the saddle forward.[/reply]

yes you can. I have 5.5cm saddle BEHIND the bb, and a 19.5cm drop. takes practice and stretching (and/or a flexible lower back), but it can be done. and no, it does not compromise my power (I could provice you with my Vallyeof theSun file from last year putting out 330Wave as evidence).

I am not saying that for most triathletes a forward position isn't good (for those other things you allude to and I agree with).

Just don't associate forward with aero. they are not the same thing. narrow and low are aero. forward helps MOST people achieve that. there is a difference between causation and causality.

and btw, all this with a BIG :D

g


greg
www.wattagetraining.com
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [gregclimbs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
can you run well after that slack position? do you have any pics? i would imagine it would leave you with a very acute femur, hip, torso angle.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Flanagan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I personally don't run (except in cross races)...but I do work with athletes that do...but that is besides the point. as I also mentioned, dan's comments about other reasons a triathlete would want step are valid.

I just hope that people will disassociate the concept that STEEP=AERO. When in fact NARROW+LOW=AERO. Steep just helps a lot of people get to narrow+low.

pics are here:

http://wattagetraining.com/ttSetup/ (posted previously)

angle is acute, sometimes hit my chest with thighs, but it does not effect power output because I TRAIN in this position and am able to sustain threshold power (same as on the road bike).

g


greg
www.wattagetraining.com
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [gregclimbs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The smaller front wheel makes everything completely different. If the wheels were the same size, then you would be a sail in the wind like Macca and his old position. I would imagine you could actually get lower and more aero if you rode steeper. You have a number of spacers in your current setup. Also, comparing your actual race picture from state to your pictures of your setup when you have jeans and sandals on doesn't make any sense what so ever. You position seems good, but it could be better and more efficient. I have recently slammed my saddle to its foremost position and taken out my spacers on my p3c; I do not feel I have lost any power from my position on my road bike. I had attempted this before simply by removing the spacers without moving the saddle forward. This left me without optimal power output. You will be able to get your head lower if you slide forward and lower your front end.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Flanagan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
no it doesn't. how do I know? I have 2 dual 700c bikes tt bikes as well. both with the EXACT same position (saddle to bb and hbars to saddle dimensions).

http://wattagetraining.com/relativePositions.jpg - you can see the trektt (which the saddle isn't adjusted yet) bars are exactly the same position as the hookers, which incidentally is the bottom of the drops on the road bike.

trust me, the HEDcx 24" is PLEANTY hard to control... about the same as the 700c wheels.

steeper actually RAISES your hips above the bb, not lowers them, and INCREASES your FA (albiet very small amounts, but you brought it up).

lower than 19.5cm? WHY? my shoulders are EVEN with my hips. my back is flat.

I have no spacers in this setup, it is a 1" quill stem, rise 25degrees 120mm long. why? because the headtube is abou 5cm long. on the 700c bikes, I have to run a -25degree 120cm stem to get to the same place (seepic above).

the jeans/sandles pics are just an initial assesment that I published. I did a much more accurate analysis but didn't write it up as all it did was support what I had already done. the statett pic is a different bike on an uphill in a 40km tt. my position was changes ever so slightly since then.

you "feel" you power hasn't dropped? well, that mean bupkus. unless you MEASURED it, it is just a guess and one that is influenced by your emotions. test it with a powermeter or CT or it is meaningless... and don't take offense at that, anyone with a powermeter will tell you the same thing....

oh, and I wasn't asking for a critique of my position and how to lower my head... :P

but since you mention it... I can't think of a reason why to - my head is BELOW the small of my back (WITH A HELMET ON):

http://wattagetraining.com/ttSetup/images/hSide.jpg

so any lowering will not reduce FA and just increase strain on the neck.

FWIW....

g


greg
www.wattagetraining.com
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Flanagan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
" The smaller front wheel makes everything completely different. If the wheels were the same size, then you would be a sail in the wind like Macca and his old position."

huh?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [gregclimbs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Just don't associate forward with aero. they are not the same thing. narrow and low are aero. forward helps MOST people achieve that. there is a difference between causation and causality.

and btw, all this with a BIG :D

g


Excellent point.

And yes, we appreciate you. ;-)
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Touche!

I too looked at the pics and can understand how he can ride so well in the old position. He looks confortable, particularly with fairly open hip angle. Might not be the most aero, but may be HIS fastest way to get to T2.

I too could be more aero in my position, but I can't hold that for long (broken back and neck years ago) so I ride fairly un aero, but at least I get to T2 eventually.

Macca MAY even save those alleged 13 minutes but it might cost him more on the run.

Best he tries it in training before he races like that :-)

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [tridork] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Max Testa is probably rolling his eyes at this...
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:


I suspect this position can save "56 seconds per hour" for about 20 minutes.


I concur ......at face value. It's extreme and it looks torturous but we don't know if he can adapt to it yet. Bjorn or Larsen both ride more extreme and whilst neither at this point in time (yet in Bjorns case) are exactly reputed for their run, both have enjoyed fantastic successes as a result.



It does look painful though.........
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [devashish paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]Desert Dude, I agree with you. The position should be one that you can hold (ie you are not squirming around searching for a better spot to sit). My main point is that it is unlikely that you will get as comfortable as in the road position (although I have come quite close to being just as comfortable, but not quite), when you go aero.[/reply]

Actually I find the exact opposite to be true. When I am pushing high wattage the roadie position is way more comfortable (say above 400W) but at normal IM power levels I am *way* more comfortable taking weight off of my wrists, elbow joints and associated muscles and resting on the pads. There is no way I could do 100 miles in a roadie position. Now if you mean a roadie seat angle and still on the aerobars I am still more comfortable forward and aero, it's much easier for me to spin 95+ forward than sitting back.

Oh, and does anyone else think that the double pictures posted at the bottom of the first page are not good comparison pics? It looks to me from his hip height and position on the seat that he isn't actually sitting on the seat. Or if he is it's on the front inch of the seat. Just a thought.


Mad
Last edited by: triguy42: Feb 13, 06 10:56
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman,

I have a Talon, I like it, but I dont doubt your knowledge of geometry, tri and worldy things.... My question to you is, if you put the sear in the forward setting of the multi setting seatpost wouldnt it be considered steep geometry and an acceptable tri position? I was fitted by a professional fitter and the fitter put me in the back setting of the seat post, I originally questioned this, but after riding for awhile I noticed I was a bit faster.

When will someone take different frames(cervelo, kestrel, felt, softride, etc...) and do the wind tunnel tests and document the differences so we know which frams are the most aerodynamic?

Thanks!
Ed


-----------------------:)
SUPPORT OPERATION REBOUND:
http://www.operationreboundcalifornia.kintera.org/ejs3

Kestrel Syndicate
Macca Fan Club
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ed in IL] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ed...I'm on a Talon SL at the moment. For me, with my body weight distribution (a fairly light 160-165lbs and ~6%bf in racing trim)...I can't go further forward than having a SLR saddle tip ~1.5cm BEHIND the bb centerline...at my saddle height, that corresponds to ~77.25 degrees. If I go any further forward, the handling is compromised to a degree that I don't like. I could probably ride it at a straight up 78 degrees, IF the course were flat, with no tight turns... The bike is a road bike, like Slowman said. If you want steep...you really need a different frame. I'm looking at either the Airfoil Pro or Cannondale Ironman 1 myself this year.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [TriBriGuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]Ed...I'm on a Talon SL at the moment. For me, with my body weight distribution (a fairly light 160-165lbs and ~6%bf in racing trim)...I can't go further forward than having a SLR saddle tip ~1.5cm BEHIND the bb centerline...at my saddle height, that corresponds to ~77.25 degrees. If I go any further forward, the handling is compromised to a degree that I don't like. I could probably ride it at a straight up 78 degrees, IF the course were flat, with no tight turns... The bike is a road bike, like Slowman said. If you want steep...you really need a different frame. I'm looking at either the Airfoil Pro or Ca
nnondale Ironman 1 myself this year.[/reply]

-------------------
Ive noticed its a little wobbly when riding steep. I am keeping the Talon for now, but after reading that article the Airfoil Pro is very appealing!


-----------------------:)
SUPPORT OPERATION REBOUND:
http://www.operationreboundcalifornia.kintera.org/ejs3

Kestrel Syndicate
Macca Fan Club
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Ed in IL] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am guessing that different bikes, might suit different rider aero positions - depending on their size flexability etc.

I guess you could test them with differnt sized riders so you could aproximate which bike would be most aero for your size, though of course this wouldn't account for flexabilty etc.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [KEAU] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Very good question Keau, I'll have to visit Nytro to check. My question is did they put the bike into a 30-60mph crosswind to check the real world aerodynamics in conditions that are typical of Kona? Because no matter what he isn't going to go that much faster at Kona because of his bike frame. I think we'd be more successful at making a wind tunnel by blowing talcum powder out of our asses than any of the frames that go into the tunnel actually making that big a difference in a real world environment.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]I think we'd be more successful at making a wind tunnel by blowing talcum powder out of our asses than any of the frames that go into the tunnel actually making that big a difference in a real world environment.[/reply]

if you really feel that way, then why is it you continue to chime in on these aero threads?

to convert us all to your ideology?

just curious...

g


greg
www.wattagetraining.com
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [gregclimbs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
XOXO, because nobody seems to think about what they actually test in the wind tunnel. What they test is a fixed bike in a controlled environment, how is that a real world situation? Maybe it will tell you how your bike rides on top of your car mounted on a roof rack, but it doesn't tell you shit about what it will ride like for real in a race. I suppose if you wanted to truly test my theory, go sit on top of your bike which is mounted on top of your car which is mounted to a roof rack, have your driver drive 30mph and then report back to me what you find. Maybe your driver could throw some leaves out of the sunroof so we can see how well they flow around you and your bike. Or maybe your driver can fart talcum powder to get the colored smoke effect, we can't rob you of your reality.

Airplanes go through a wind tunnel to test efficiency of the wings and fueselage shapes, but the efficiency varies greatly when the plane is flying into turbulance etc.. etc.. plus the speeds are much much higher with an airplane than on a bike struggling into a 50 mph cross wind at 8 mph, so if you were to "buy" all the snake oil that comes out of a wind tunnel, that would mean that without an aero bike and in the same 50mph cross wind you would be riding....2mph? Oh I forgot you have the aerobars that save you a minute over the 112 miles, so that would be a speed of 2.2 mph, oh yes, I can't forget the wheels, they save you 40 seconds over 40km, so now we are up to 2.4 mph. What it boils down to, is how well you ride into the varying wind conditions, competency when it concerns bike handling, and the aerobic ability to ride at speeds that will increase your chances of a better result and not whether or not something will save you 13 minutes while riding in a perfectly stable and controlled environment such as a wind tunnel. I will agree and say that in this environment the results are astounding and I am curious about what products are very well designed, but how do these products result in a real world savings of 13 minutes when the conditions are anything but ideal and will never be same as in the wind tunnel. That is why I chime in. I have yet to see anyone who is willing to or able to answer this question. Mr. Cobb, said anything that is aero save watts which is great but wouldn't agree that if joe blow and some high tier age grouper had the exact same bike that the results would be different? Yes and you can't argue with me on that, what's the difference? Both bikes were said to result in a miraculous 13 minute time savings but both of the men or women are slower than there previous best time, oh my god!! Why? I think people should pay less attention to what goes in and out of the wind tunnel and more on their training. I admit I like the cool aero things too, but I also know the realities of racing and the varying conditions and fitness levels. So this year when Mcormack goes slower than last year, what will be said? What if he only goes 2 minutes faster? What if he quits because his position was too agressive? The fact of the matter is that there are various ideologies out there inthe world, one being similar to mine, one being opposite of mine, I could care less who thinks what I say is BS, I just wonder how people could disagree with me. Until I hear or read somewhere that there has been proof that what results we get in the wind tunnel we will see in the real world, I will continue with my opinion. I would never try to change anyone's ideology as I believe in the freedom of thought for all parties involved, but don't tell me I am wrong, or that I know nothing about the topic I discuss and don't question my involvement with any of the threads here, just prove me wrong if you feel so strongly about me or what I have to say.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
or the short answer is "yes, you are trying to convert us to your ideology"

you feel it is bunk and not transferrable to reality, but there are more than enought ata points that show that filed trials with a powermeter and wind tunnel data concur.

I just hope you ride a 35lb round tube steel frame, 36h 3x box section wheels and drop bars.

g


greg
www.wattagetraining.com
Last edited by: gregclimbs: Feb 14, 06 12:47
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Very good question Keau, I'll have to visit Nytro to check. My question is did they put the bike into a 30-60mph crosswind to check the real world aerodynamics in conditions that are typical of Kona?
You're funny.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [gregclimbs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
now we are talking. Since when did weight have anything to do with aerodynamics? Unfortunately it's hard to buy a 35 pound round tubed steel bike nowadays, but triathletes seem to have it down to a science how to get there 17 pound carbon superbikes to weigh 25 pounds, what is your point? Now how do they figure that field tests and power concur? Do these field tests equate to the 30mph that they see in a wind tunnel? If you can tell me who rides 30 mph in even a 30 mph crosswind at Kona without drastic wattage differences I'll show you big foot. Your argument still doesn't show me how there will be 13 minutes saved at Ironman because of a bike frame.

And no, I am not trying to convert anybody.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes but I also forgot to ask for someone to show me the results of the real world environment of a calm windless day where we ride 30 mph without any deviation, so typical of where I am not too sure.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wow. I'm guessing your profession isn't involved in any of the science-related fields, is it? Just a hunch. I'm not trying to start anything, and I see a small little glimmer of something I agree with in there (re: conditions in the real world are not the same as a windtunnel). I also concede that by looking at parts in the wind tunnel and saying you will "save XX minutes in the _____ triathlon" is a silly idea. However, these data are extremely valuable at determing optimal set up for various parts for various riders for various racing needs. It takes the intelligent triathlete to look at these data and determine what components would be of most value to him/her given their racing goals and conditions. Your diatribe makes this to be a total waste of time though, which it is not.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You didn't read closely...the report DIDN'T say the 13 minutes 'saved' was due entirely to the bike frame. Only about 1/3 of the time savings could be attributed to the bike, according to the article... The REST is due to the position change.

You might want to work on that reading comprehension. It might help you with your understanding of scientific method and principles.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [KarstenKB] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No I am not a scientist. Do you know Jimmy at the Bicycle Store? just curious

I don't think wind tunnel testing is a waste of time, I just disagree with the amount of emphasis that is placed on the "benefits" becuase these "benefits" in the tunnel do not and will never result in equal amounts of benefit in the real world environment.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:

Airplanes go through a wind tunnel to test efficiency of the wings and fueselage shapes, but the efficiency varies greatly when the plane is flying into turbulance etc.. etc.. plus the speeds are much much higher with an airplane than on a bike struggling into a 50 mph cross wind at 8 mph, so if you were to "buy" all the snake oil that comes out of a wind tunnel, that would mean that without an aero bike and in the same 50mph cross wind you would be riding....2mph?
By the way you talk, the things you say... I can tell...
Quote Reply
Post deleted by cochise [ In reply to ]
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You good sir, are an idiot. Good day.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
No I am not a scientist. Do you know Jimmy at the Bicycle Store? just curious

I don't think wind tunnel testing is a waste of time, I just disagree with the amount of emphasis that is placed on the "benefits" becuase these "benefits" in the tunnel do not and will never result in equal amounts of benefit in the real world environment.


Fair enough. I agree that they are not in equal amounts of actual time benefit, and I would guess most people on here wouldn't object to that statement too much. But, you can clearly see what positioning will work best in terms of aero and power maximization, thus useful. I think that your idea got lost in your somewhat tangential scorning of aero data. I doubt everyone would have been so worked up if you would have just said what you posted here.

I don't know Jimmy by name, but I probably recognize him by face. I don't go the Bicycle Store too often as I do most of my stuff at home. But they are a great store to go to when I need obscure, small parts. They always seem to have every little odd part.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Using this reasoning, we should drop any type of theoretical research...
I'm sure scientists throughout the world will be happy to know that. Evenmoreso will be the funding agencies.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Theoretical? Is this what you think of Wind Tunnel testing? Something without conclusive evidence or incomplete evidence and full of speculation, conjecture and guess work. Interesting Francois, we may see things more similarly than you think.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
???????????????????
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
we'll talk when you know what theoretical research means
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [ShawnF] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Back on subject. This is from Macca's website:

"I spent some time in the wind tunnels in San Diego trying new things with my bike position. It really was interesting stuff and i learned a lot of valuable information. I will slowly make some incremental changes to my bike positiion this season to prepare for the winds of Hawaii." - Macca

Shawn
TORRE Consulting Services, LLC
http://www.TORREcs.com

Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
to take these results purely on the numbers they give you and think that they will save you 13 minutes by doing this is moronic, the best you can presume is that with the model they are using, and the assumed power output macca is putting to the road through the rear wheel that some increases in efficiency would mean macca should be able to ride 13 minutes quicker in their scenario/mathematical model. So this model may not be 100% accurate, who cares really as long as there is a strong correlation between the data gathered and a real improvement in efficiency its mission accomplished for macca.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Something without conclusive evidence or incomplete evidence and full of speculation, conjecture and guess work"

Do you mean like your logic?
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [TriBriGuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
this is what people who don't know science mean by 'theoretical'...theory equates to guess (at best) for them...says a lot.

As ShawnF posted, Macca has plenty enough experience to not go try his new position in his next IM. The guy has gone under 8hrs twice, won the worlds and pretty much everything there is to win but Kona...looks like he knows what to do to win.

Always makes me laugh when here people give advice to guys like Macca and Lessing
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
  1. Of, relating to, or based on theory.
  2. Restricted to theory; not practical: theoretical physics.
  3. Given to theorizing; speculative.


Definition of theoretical is above. Definition of research is below
  1. Scholarly or scientific investigation or inquiry.
  2. Close, careful study.


Speak up Francois.
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply] The fact of the matter is that there are various ideologies out there inthe world, one being similar to mine, one being opposite of mine, I could care less who thinks what I say is BS, I just wonder how people could disagree with me. Until I hear or read somewhere that there has been proof that what results we get in the wind tunnel we will see in the real world, I will continue with my opinion.[/reply]

I already posted that I know for a fact that I gained close to 2mph switching from my ancient 1985 Cannondale to the BP Stealth BP-2. I can attribute a small percentage of that gain to the new drivetrain, but I've done enough on the same TT course with and without my Renn and Spinergy Tilium to know there is a substantial difference there too.

Cochise, give me a break...seriously. If you remember geometry from grade school you will remember vector addition of a right triangle. If you ride 23mph with a crosswind of 20mph the vector sum is a ~30mph wind from 40 degrees. If you ride 25mph like the average pro at Kona last year it only takes a 16.5mph direct crosswind to equal a 30mph wind from 33 degrees...and obviously only 5mph if it is a direct headwind. Any of these could be real conditions at Kona or any other race.

Your real argument distills down to "you won't gain 13 minutes and because it isn't exactly 13 minutes then aero testing is BS and useless and everyone should just go train harder, not ride smarter." Funny. Stupid, but funny.


Mad
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Based on my two short years at the Boeing Wind Tunnel during the developmental years of the 757/767 here are some general observations on testing. We did a lot of comparitive analysis. The information from the 707, 727, 737, and 747 wind tunnel tests were correlated with their respective actual flight performances. Based on the differences between W/T models and actual operational performance we were able to make accurate performance predictions for the 757 and 767. The amazing thing was that the test pilots were able safely fly these new aircraft within the predicted flight envelope.

Flight is is still a theoretical science because there are still anomolies observed at the edges of the flight envelope.

Theories have withstood the test of repeated observations but still have some unknowns or some anomalies. Bicycle aerodynamics is still in the early phases of building the comparitive database and there is a lot of room for diverging conclusions based on the same observations.

The Macca tests are good comparative tests. If somebody else was to perform exactly the same test but came up with different results then it would allow a researcher to observe the differences and, perhaps, isolate the cause.

Jay
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply][ol][li]Of, relating to, or based on theory. [li]Restricted to theory; not practical: theoretical physics. [li]Given to theorizing; speculative. [/li][/ol]

Definition of theoretical is above. Definition of research is below [ol] [li]Scholarly or scientific investigation or inquiry. [li]Close, careful study. [/li][/ol]
[/reply]

You need a new dictionary. Webster's says for theory:
"a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena ", or
"a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation".

More on 'hypothesis':
In a modern professional vocabulary a hypothesis is an imaginative preconception of what might be true in the form of a declaration with verifiable deductive consequences. It no longer tows 'gratuitous,' 'mere,' or 'wild' behind it, and the pejorative usage ('Evolution is a mere hypothesis,' 'It is only a hypothesis that smoking causes lung cancer') is one of the outward signs of little learning.
Peter Medawar, "Hypothesis and Imagination"
(Times Literary Supplement, 25 Oct 1963)

This is what a scientist means by 'theory'. What you mean is clearly not the same thing at all, so it's not possible to argue about it.
Last edited by: doug in co: Feb 15, 06 8:22
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Always makes me laugh when here people give advice to guys like Macca and Lessing
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
exactly what I meant...clueless...read doug's post...this is what theoretical research means
Quote Reply
Re: Macca's Wind Tunnel Test [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Cochise, you are right on. This is why they should stop teaching evolution in school - it's just a THEORY!
Quote Reply