Adding some additional thoughts I have had at the top of this post here. Original post begins below this new addition.
During my first watch, the introduction to the ERO video had me fearing the worst. So I was surprised to find, as I kept watching, that the results were actually great for VeloVetta. In summary, here are the outcomes:
· vs. S-Works Exos – VeloVetta wins by 1%
· vs. S-Works laceup, modified with integrated zip - VeloVetta wins by 1%
· vs. Shimano Velcro Tri shoe - VeloVetta wins by 1.9%
· vs. S-Works laceup with elastic laces - unresolved anomalous result (I'll explain below)
Sounds good to me. So I’m puzzled by the tone of the video, which leaves the viewer with the impression that the result is disastrous for VeloVetta even before any data is presented.
ERO’s outcomes confirm what our CFD and wind tunnel tests also found – that the shoe represents a reduction in aerodynamic drag, so everything seems to line up. In fact, VeloVetta beat even stiffer competition this time around than we did in the wind tunnel. In June, Jim told me that the Exos is one of the fastest shoes he's ever tested. So beating that shoe, even by "only" 1% of total rider drag, seems like a win to me. Same thing with the first modified S-Works laceup, though the video glosses over that result for some reason. Changing from laces to a well-integrated zipper does not affect the overall frontal area or shape of the shoe. This shoe has often tested very fast. So a 1% win is solid, as is a 1.9% win over the tri shoe. I’m very pleased by these outcomes, and I worry that the grim tenor of the video gives the impression that VeloVetta got walloped when Jim’s results actually demonstrate the opposite.
Additionally, I want to address the test that pitted VeloVetta against the S-Works laceup with elastic laces. This trial measured 3% lower drag and was described as a "trouncing" in the video. And, to his credit, Jim did run this one twice. But the result deserves more scrutiny before publishing. It suggests that swapping laces for a concealed zipper on the S-Works laceup, without changing any frontal area or overall shoe shape, increases total rider drag by 4%. Consider that frontal area for a pair of shoes is around 7% of the total. Is that credible? The laces as a boundary layer trip cannot explain that, even if it were more than just conjecture. Should we not look for other reasons? Power meter issues are a likely place to start. Two people so far have suggested to me that it appears that the shoe may be touching the pod on the pedal power meter - 9:47 in the video - maybe all the time, maybe just with some pedal float, which would invalidate the data. Q-factor issue? Rider position issue? When an outlier result that appears invalid on its face arises, it should be excluded until the cause can be determined. Actually, we faced a similar situation in the wind tunnel: one very surprising outlier cropped up and, after consideration, we opted not to publish it.
Original post:
Hi guys -
I figured I would post this here myself. Jim tested our shoes and published these results:
VeloVetta Vs. Specialized Exos - VeloVetta reduced drag by 1%
VeloVetta vs. S-Works laceup modified with a zipper - VeloVetta reduced drag by 1%
VeloVetta vs. Shimano strapped tri shoe - VeloVetta reduced drag by 1.9%
VeloVetta vs. modified S-Works laceup with toungue cut out and elastic laces - S-works reduced drag by 3% (EDIT: I previously erroneously said this was a Giro shoe)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOiMB1_TvEE
But perhaps the thing that was most troubling to me was that most of his riders reported pain in the medial arch area of the foot. This is very surprising for me.
I've sold somewhere around 120 pairs so far, and not a single person has complained of this to me. So I'm pretty puzzled by this outcome. It makes me worry that there is something wrong with the pair that were bought and was used for the test, but I have not had a chance to inspect them yet. Hopefully I will. I think this could also significantly affect test results because if your foot really hurts a lot, you are going to change something to make it feel better - either how you pedal, or hold your knee or something. Anyway, this aspect of the test is really boggling my mind as not a single customer has indicated this to be true for them.
Anyway, the results are what they are. Aero testing of a shoe can vary from rider to rider.
Ultimately I have created a shoe that is aerodynamic, comfortable and has a closure system that works great for triathletes. I'm proud of the product. It's not going to be the absolute lowest drag option for every single rider vs every shoe in the world. But I think we have a combination of features that make it the right choice for a significant number of triathletes to improve their performance. If the elastic laces and cut out tongue work for you, that is also great.
Cheers.
Edit - One point to make about the test vs. the Giro - The test did not have the same two models of shoes on all three riders so really this is 3 individual test, not a series of comparable tests. And because results can vary a lot from rider to rider, it can be hard to draw any hard conclusions from this test. The test vs. the Giro was one test with one rider. Therefore you cannot necessarily say someone else testing those same two shoes will have the same result.
-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook
During my first watch, the introduction to the ERO video had me fearing the worst. So I was surprised to find, as I kept watching, that the results were actually great for VeloVetta. In summary, here are the outcomes:
· vs. S-Works Exos – VeloVetta wins by 1%
· vs. S-Works laceup, modified with integrated zip - VeloVetta wins by 1%
· vs. Shimano Velcro Tri shoe - VeloVetta wins by 1.9%
· vs. S-Works laceup with elastic laces - unresolved anomalous result (I'll explain below)
Sounds good to me. So I’m puzzled by the tone of the video, which leaves the viewer with the impression that the result is disastrous for VeloVetta even before any data is presented.
ERO’s outcomes confirm what our CFD and wind tunnel tests also found – that the shoe represents a reduction in aerodynamic drag, so everything seems to line up. In fact, VeloVetta beat even stiffer competition this time around than we did in the wind tunnel. In June, Jim told me that the Exos is one of the fastest shoes he's ever tested. So beating that shoe, even by "only" 1% of total rider drag, seems like a win to me. Same thing with the first modified S-Works laceup, though the video glosses over that result for some reason. Changing from laces to a well-integrated zipper does not affect the overall frontal area or shape of the shoe. This shoe has often tested very fast. So a 1% win is solid, as is a 1.9% win over the tri shoe. I’m very pleased by these outcomes, and I worry that the grim tenor of the video gives the impression that VeloVetta got walloped when Jim’s results actually demonstrate the opposite.
Additionally, I want to address the test that pitted VeloVetta against the S-Works laceup with elastic laces. This trial measured 3% lower drag and was described as a "trouncing" in the video. And, to his credit, Jim did run this one twice. But the result deserves more scrutiny before publishing. It suggests that swapping laces for a concealed zipper on the S-Works laceup, without changing any frontal area or overall shoe shape, increases total rider drag by 4%. Consider that frontal area for a pair of shoes is around 7% of the total. Is that credible? The laces as a boundary layer trip cannot explain that, even if it were more than just conjecture. Should we not look for other reasons? Power meter issues are a likely place to start. Two people so far have suggested to me that it appears that the shoe may be touching the pod on the pedal power meter - 9:47 in the video - maybe all the time, maybe just with some pedal float, which would invalidate the data. Q-factor issue? Rider position issue? When an outlier result that appears invalid on its face arises, it should be excluded until the cause can be determined. Actually, we faced a similar situation in the wind tunnel: one very surprising outlier cropped up and, after consideration, we opted not to publish it.
Original post:
Hi guys -
I figured I would post this here myself. Jim tested our shoes and published these results:
VeloVetta Vs. Specialized Exos - VeloVetta reduced drag by 1%
VeloVetta vs. S-Works laceup modified with a zipper - VeloVetta reduced drag by 1%
VeloVetta vs. Shimano strapped tri shoe - VeloVetta reduced drag by 1.9%
VeloVetta vs. modified S-Works laceup with toungue cut out and elastic laces - S-works reduced drag by 3% (EDIT: I previously erroneously said this was a Giro shoe)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOiMB1_TvEE
But perhaps the thing that was most troubling to me was that most of his riders reported pain in the medial arch area of the foot. This is very surprising for me.
I've sold somewhere around 120 pairs so far, and not a single person has complained of this to me. So I'm pretty puzzled by this outcome. It makes me worry that there is something wrong with the pair that were bought and was used for the test, but I have not had a chance to inspect them yet. Hopefully I will. I think this could also significantly affect test results because if your foot really hurts a lot, you are going to change something to make it feel better - either how you pedal, or hold your knee or something. Anyway, this aspect of the test is really boggling my mind as not a single customer has indicated this to be true for them.
Anyway, the results are what they are. Aero testing of a shoe can vary from rider to rider.
Ultimately I have created a shoe that is aerodynamic, comfortable and has a closure system that works great for triathletes. I'm proud of the product. It's not going to be the absolute lowest drag option for every single rider vs every shoe in the world. But I think we have a combination of features that make it the right choice for a significant number of triathletes to improve their performance. If the elastic laces and cut out tongue work for you, that is also great.
Cheers.
Edit - One point to make about the test vs. the Giro - The test did not have the same two models of shoes on all three riders so really this is 3 individual test, not a series of comparable tests. And because results can vary a lot from rider to rider, it can be hard to draw any hard conclusions from this test. The test vs. the Giro was one test with one rider. Therefore you cannot necessarily say someone else testing those same two shoes will have the same result.
-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook