Thanks.

Drag doesn't disappear just because you're drafting. Given a choice, I'd rather pedal less, pedal less hard, and have more in the tank for when it counts.

Did you mean should?

If not, then Coggan found what he found. Why shouldn't he have found that?

we haven't had a good aero idiot thread in a while. this one entertains.

that said, and knowing what I know about aero, I've considered getting a 2nd screen name and doing what this guy is trying to do in order to get a leg up on my competition and keep new people from discovering the secrets ;)

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

I don�t do a lot of fast group rides and I have only done one draft legal race. In the fast group rides I have done I have no problem sticking with the fastest guys on my non-aero road bike until we hit a significant hill. In the draft legal road race I did I stuck with the lead pack until we hit a significant hill 14 miles in. For most of that 14 miles I felt like I had no problem keeping up with the group.

To use your example on http://bikecalculator.com - A three pound weight difference on a 1 mile hill averaging 5% grade is about 6 seconds. At the top of the hill when everyone gets back up to speed that�s about 200 feet. If you are 200 feet behind the pack you are well out of the draft, the advantage of an aero road bike is much less than riding in the pack.

If I do upgrade my road bike I am still undecided on if an aero bike is worth it. If there is no compromise on weight, ride or price than an aero bike is a no brainer.

For a solo effort I will use my tri bike every time and not worry about a few pounds.

First, I would be careful using using a calculator that changes the times based on using clincher and tubulars. Second, notice that riding in the drops saves as much time as 3 lbs up the same climb. Third, the calculator does not figure in the drag savings of the aero bike, as shown drag still matters on this climb. Fourth, the weight difference is closer to 1 lbs, so more like 2 seconds.

The reason that it got harder on the hill was because the pace was pushed on the hill. Even on a lighter bike, going up the hill was going to be harder.

Unlike some I don't always jump to an assumption people are idiots to begin with. In my world they have to earn that. Some earn it faster than others, while some are not idiots, just misinformed or need help to learn. Some of the best questions come from those who are misinformed or don't understand. They often ask the questions others are too afraid to ask.

No, reread my post

---

http://cds-0.blogspot.com

That's where you appear to have things backwards.

If one is looking at the bike properties that actually make one faster, then aero should be the driver and the compromise should be made in the other 3 categories...with weight actually pretty much coming in last (although "ride" is probably tied with it for last since you can change the "ride" of a bike more with tire and pressure choice than with frame properties, short of adding a MTB-style suspension).

In other words, get the most aero bike you can afford. Don't worry about the rest.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

If you had to "short list" 3 aero bikes under $5000, what would they be?
1. Cervelo S3
2. ?
3. ?
Also, if anyone has any data on the new Ridley Noah SL series with their patented F-split fork F-surface technology, I'd like to see it.

1. S3 Ultegra
2. S2 + really nice wheels
3. Venge Pro Race (you'll have to come up with another $500, but it comes WITH Roval 60 carbon clinchers AND their aero road bar)...or, perhaps the Felt AR3?

The Venge looks like a really good deal, actually...

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I would say the Giant Propel Advanced Pro looks pretty good for the money. You get a set of 55mm carbon clinchers with the price built in and you can pick your build. Cervelo is a classic and the Venge looks pretty enticing too.

+1. you make no effort to normalise the power at which everyone was riding. Roadies attack on hills to drop people, not riding steady state. in fact even if you're riding normally it's quite common to have power go up when riding uphill.

if you were going for most budget I'd say the Giant propel, Avanti Corsa DR and the Neilpryde alize are worth a look as well

I did. It still doesn't answer the question as to why it shouldn't, when in fact it does.

This is exactly my point, on a group ride/race it is easy to keep up on the flats when riding in a pack with or without the added advantage of an aero bike. On the hills where the pace is pushed the advantage goes to the lighter bike.

There can't be much aero advantage at 10-11 mph, can there?

You ain't doin' the same rides/races I am, that's for sure.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

What races are you doing?

Ever been attacked (or have you ever attacked) at 50 km/h in a crosswind? That aero bike will make a difference. When you're biting your stem in a gutter you'll know just how much power gets pushed on the flats.

Ever been attacked (or have you ever attacked) at 75 km/h on a downhill? That aero bike makes a difference.

And at 20 km/h uphill the aero might make a difference too, but significantly less. However, even if you only save 5 watts, you're now saving 5 watts for 20 minutes.

Indeed, this is what I aspire to. If my lack of knowledge grants idiocy, I'm ok with it!

My point has never been that aero bikes do not offer an advantage. My point has been, HOW CAN ONE DIFFERENTIATE **WHICH** aero bike offers more benefits.

I will give two examples of what I am trying to communicate!

Take helmets for example...ones like the Lazer Wasp. When it debuted, it was the shiz, razzle dazzle CDa numbers and all the rest of it. Clearly faster, so the aero experts all declared...just look at the data. And then this little thing called a rider entered the picture...and he looked left, and he looked right, and sometimes, god forbid, he even looked down as he suffered and ground out his 350W performance. The massive tail and its exquisite laminar flow suddenly had the properties of a 15cm square in the breeze. And all of a sudden those numbers blew away like fairy dust in the reality...and the engineers went back to work re-designing a new generation of aero helmets that are truly aero when riders do what riders do when they wear them. This is progress...CFD-Tunnel-Real world and back. So I'm getting at that aspect of aero as well as aero claims not backed by data and real world data.

The other point I would make is this. According to the report, the S5 is absolutely the fastest bike in the test protocol. I do not dispute that at all. BUT....and I do not know the answer to this....would the S5 really be the fastest? As we know, the previous generation S5 was not very stiff in the front end...would that mean even an elite rider would not be able to ride the frame to its fastest speed on a descent because he also needs the bike to hold a line through a curve? I'm not expert; but I do notice the riders on Garmin-Sharp must think a little like me...they generally do not ride the "fastest" bike...they rode the S3 and the R5. Why? They are just stuck in their old ways or are other factors at work? This is an honest question and I'm not on my soap box here!


Here is the famous report I am referring too. I also take great satisfaction that in the end, they say the Scott Addict SL and Canyon are great overall choices....I merely have an Addict Team Issue as my road bike...but damn do I ever love that thing! :)

And...on a final note...for those my ignorance has insulted, I beg your indulgence and sincerely appreciate everything I am learning throughout this thread. I can ride a bike fast, but I truly have no idea why other than I love to ride and love to suffer. Learning the hows and whys of training and equipment is a huge plus of this community.

And...for all the aero schooling I am getting...I thank you too...as I have ammo for my "stiffness" is king friends who cherish their beloved "stiffest road frame" machine; just so I can give them a ribbing. I don't care what bike anyone rides....I just love to ride...simple instinctive joy...but I'm glad there are the numbers guys who are keep making bikes better and better!

All the best to everyone, and by all means, keep at it in this thread. I have literally made notes on what I'm learning here...it has been enjoyable and I am sorry again if I inadvertently sounded like a jack ass....I try to hide this aspect of my personality to the areas of life where I have true expertise but I occasionally fall short!

Crr on smooth rollers should be quite different to Crr in field testing due to the effect of normal load fluctuations and road roughness

---

http://cds-0.blogspot.com

In a group ride, yes having an aero bike is pointless.

In a race if it is always easy to keep up on the flats you will cat up soon and then it won't be.

When you push the pace on short to medium length hills the speed is often pretty high despite it being a hill, often in the 20s.

There isn't much drag at 11mph no, but there is some. The difference in mass between an aero frame and a light one is also very small, usually 100 to 300 grams. GRAMS guys. grams.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

You can field test it and find out. I field tested it with a power meter using the Chung Method against the Boardman AiR on a twisty loop and it was faster.


You might recall Thor rode an S5 to two tour de france stage wins, both wins included a big climb, a huge descent where he had the highest descending speed of the entire pro tour, and a final sprint. Seemes like the bike did not hold him back, despite being a bigger guy where frame stiffness would be more likely to matter. (he also won a cobbled stage on an S3 prior to that!)



I think generally people make a bigger thing of stiffness that it really is, here is a fascinating example of that:

http://www.slowtwitch.com/...perception_4571.html

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Don't know if it would be in the top 3, but the new Fuji Transonic deserves consideration.

sigh. no no no no no.

If someone rides 400 watts on the flats or the hill, its going to be tough for you to keep up either way. you made no mention of what power people were putting out on the flat or the hill. if in your group ride people were ambling along at 200 watts and then suddenly went off at 400 watts of course you'd be dropped on the hill and find it harder- in fact it's very common! the aero bike or the light bike is not going to help you with 200 watts either way! get a powermeter and ride in your next group ride. I guarunteee you the power ramps up once you hit any hill.

seems you don't exactly how aero works, so this is a VERY SIMPLIFIED analogy

an aero bike might save you somewhere around 10 watts ( comparing best and worst) at say 40kph. drag squares with speed, so a doubling in speed gives 4 times more drag. at 20kph you would be saving somewhere around 3-4 watts ( comparing best to worst). maybe. aero is always 'on', even if you're drafting. the wats savings are slightly less, but it's there.

so say you have an identical twin riding with you in a race. you're on the light but absolutely un-aero bike. he's on the aero bike. you're both in the same race.
Now let's say the race is 'on' with lots of attacking going on around 40-45kph. you see this at critical points in races- just before a decisive corner, hill, the finish line etc. suppose 20% of race time is spent when the race is 'on' . in a 3 hour race thats about ten minutes your twin is pushing ten watts less than what you need to keep up to the peloton's speed. 10 minutes at 10 watts above your FTP could be enough to cook you, while ten minutes at FTP is pretty much sustainable if you have the fitness.

An aero bike won't automatically make you a winner but it can make those 'hard' moments just abit easier, and saves you energy so that you're fresher at the critical moments.

It IS different (in scale, as one would expect with the additional energy being dissipated)...but it correlates (i.e. behaves similarily across tire models).

Here's what Andy said earlier:


Maybe you should look at that link again.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/