My 40K PR occurred with yaw never dipping below 10 degrees (according to BBS). Not sub-50. But not far off. >29MPH average speed. Square course. I had a low-yaw setup. If I'd had a high yaw setup, I might have broken 50.

Sometimes mother nature doesn't read Slowtwitch and throws very non-average conditions at you. More often for me last year than I'd expect. And there can be *huge* differences in drag at higher yaws. That's why, though I'll weight low yaw very highly, I'm starting to refuse to use equipment that throws in the towel at higher yaw.

The H3+ is worse at low yaw than H3, if I remember correctly. Unfortunately HED seems to have gotten rid of their little HED vs. HED comparison graphs on their site.

Well ya asked. :-). I was bummed to miss out on Moriarty this year. Sunday didn't sound great, but Monday was a really fast day and Kevin Nickel went 49:30ish, which probably a solid 1:15 to 1:30 faster than his times the last few years.

Depends on the frame and fork as well as tire/tub. Arguing absolutes just doesn't work.

small sample sizes and/or financial motives can also lead to these sort of statements.

---

=================
Kraig Willett
http://www.biketechreview.com - check out our reduced report pricing
=================

Ha! You have like two posts ready to cut-and-paste. You have the "depends on frame and fork post" and you have the "WAAAA, this frame is too short and high for me!" post. Personally I've found frame and fork to have very little effect, at least amongst my 3 bikes (TT, track, aero road) as tested by velodrome Chung testing. And until we can demand that every wheel test buy 1000 hours of wind tunnel time to handle the combinatorial explosion of 5 representative forks x 5 representative frames x 5 representative tires we're going to have to accept standalone tests as reasonable proxies.

That said, I agree, those with the time and inclination should absolutely test the whole system as one.

I sold my tubular (classic) H3 after Chung testing myself.

You posted the combined CDA+CRR graph... my thought was that the H3 plus loses some in the low yaw drag but gains more back in CRR. Still the greatest unknown is how much the H3 plus gains in power to rotate over the over wheels. Likely only velodrome testing would tease this out.

you just need a slightly short course ;)

like double bong in WI

my not controlled enough coast downs don't agree, but that was with a jet9+ and not a flo

Remember that the H3 rotates forward in crosswinds above about 5 degrees yaw (I assume you have seen the BikeTechReview video showing negative watts to spin). Rotation drag for an 808 is in the neighborhood of 18 watts at 0 yaw, compared to 11 for a n H3 from the New Zealand study. There are all sorts huge drag differences that tunnel data doesn't capture, so I am not sure I would say the H3 isn't still a good crosswind wheel, though it doesn't handle very predictably on my bike.

I am still waiting for someone to set up a windtunnel that measures rotational drag for a wheel in a frame. Until then I don't think anyone really knows the answer, unless those aerostick things can figure this out.

I have yet to find a thread where a different answer is required. :P

I know and have raced against grumpier mike and there is not a bragging bone in his body. He was stating his very realistic goal.

---

BoulderCyclingCoach.com

That was with an older, slower 20mm SS. See here: http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ost=6122531#p6122531

That's interesting, thanks. Still clearly in the conversation as a fast wheel. But for me personally, I'm not going to roll 20mm again unless it's a clear, unambiguous win.

that chart doesn't account for watts to spin, so if you believe that is >=1.5w @ 0 and >=5.0w @ 10* (if one cares about 10*), then the h3 is a winner.

OTOH, there are some combinations one can infer (i.e. wheels that were tested with slower-rolling tires) might have been faster than the FLO 9/SS 23 combo as presented -- 4w swings.

Or the new Flo being even faster....

yes. there is always something new/different/faster, of course, but some of those wheels in that test were not testing with tires that would likely produce the fastest combined results, and they are compared against wheels that DID have those tires.

obviously the charts can only show what was actually tested, but the astute observer might notice some opportunities.