I can't seem to find the article on pezcycling, but they said it was much more significant to have aero wheels, then helmet, then a distant third was the frame. Some people think aero frames look cool, so they sell like crazy these days.

Chad

No news here, although if you stand on the side of the road at just about any triathlon, you will see that many people have not heard this news, just don't get it or prefer to toss common sense along with everything else right out the window!

1. Body postion is of highest importance

2. Then wheels

3. Then the bike itself.

Strange then, that if you do stand on the side of the road at many triathlons, big IM's in particular you will see many very aerodynamic bikes, many so-so aerodynamic wheels and many people with terrible bike positioning. Throw in some aweful aero choices of clothing and those wonderful aero bikes festooned with all kinds of strange accessories nullifying any aero-gains and you wonder what all the obsession was about aerodynamics in the first place!

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

It is all important.

Position, wheels, frame, helmet, etc.

Position is king however.

With the position importance in mind I am thinking that there could be way different positions for an Ironman vs International Distance ideal for the same rider. Every year without fail when I am out by the Kona airport watching riders come home, I bet of the over 6hr riders that 1/3 of them are sitting up on their aero bikes with a head or tail wind. Now a lot of these folks aren't slouch racers, and they are on really nice rides. I just don't think they can handle the really agressive position they have been fitted for. I hope the fitters are taking the time factor in their fits, as anyone can get good numbers on an hour ride, but 51/2-6hr is a whole different story.

I don't think there was ever an obsession over aerodynamics per se, just an obsession with buying the flashiest, most expensive stuff. Perceived aerodynamics and an understanding thereof was just the rational justification because people feel silly being shallow and materialistic.

Got these numbers in the course of developing a Tri Bike Fit brief (PM me for references):

–Aerodynamics Total (combination of rider aerodynamics and bike aerodynamics) = 65% of total power consumption (rider 50%, bike 15%)

–Bicycle Aerodynamics: 25% of total aerodynamics •Wheels: 7-11% of total aerodynamics •Fork: 6-9% of total aerodynamics •Frame: 4%-9% of total aerodynamics •Other: 2-4% of total aerodynamics

–Aero position for a rider will save anywhere from 20 – 40 watts or about 25-30% drag compared to an upright “road” position –The bottom line: In a solo event or triathlon, lowering total aerodynamic drag by 10% (from 7lbs of drag to 6.3lbs), without changing power output, will cut 21 minutes of time (7%) from a rider who averages 20mph over 100 miles. Time will drop from 5 hours to 4 hours and 39 minutes and average speed will go up to 21.4mph. (Ironman bike split time from 5:36 to 5:14). –For my size and power output, I would save 27.5 min in an IM for an aero position compared to a “road” position. Reference: Jim Martin Ph.D study.

Older article but still relevant today. This is the article that Cervelo bases the info on their website from.

http://home.hia.no/~stephens/aero.htm