Aero drag as a proportion of total drag starts taking off about 20MPH and by 29MPH is totally dominant.

Your chart is in kph. Wind is the dominant force starting at <10mph.

Sure, but *power* required is the product of velocity and Cd or - proportional to velocity *cubed* - so worse than you thought. So...the power you need to generate to increase your velocity is proportional to the speed difference *cubed*. Cycling at 20 mph vs 10 mph requires (20/10)^3 = 2^3 = 8x more power (all else equal). So, at 10 mph, 30 W = 240 W at 20 mph. Try that for 25 or 30 mph. Aero matters!

Assuming that you both start at the top together, absolutely. But if someone has chosen "Aero Magic Beans" to make up for the lack of solid, consistent training, they're not going to get to the top of the next hill together with the other, better trained cyclist. Nor the next, nor the next, ad infinitum.

Keep in mind that this thread is NOT "Aero sucks" - it's about this mind-set some people have that they can make up for mediocre training with aerodynamics alone. I'm looking to discuss the practical realities and limitations of aerodynamics.

Later!

Brian

.

---

Swim. Bike. Run. Repeat as necessary.
Welcome to the Church of Briantriology!

Where did this line even get started? I've never once seen someone say "I got Zipps and an aero helmet; I'm going to sit on the couch until race day". Not once. People train as much as they have time, energy, and motivation to. They don't train less with toys, even if they train less than you think they should if they have toys.

---

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.

OK!

You're talking about it as if one comes at the expense of the other. Why would that be so? Just because training is the low-hanging fruit for a lot of BOPers, it doesn't mean they can't simultaneously chase the higher fruit. Of course at some point, gaining 15 Watt at FTP is going to cost a lot more time and money (in training expenses) than saving those with proper aero testing.

Pressing "Buy" on a new helmet or skinsuit takes seconds, and can be done at work, on your tablet in bed, or while I'm supposed to be studying. Or, best of all, I can do my thinking while on the trainer or staring at the pool tiles, and then research and shop accordingly when I'm recovering from the workout.

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

Why do people have to choose between training more effectively, harder, longer, better and being more aero?

This is the worst argument on Slowtwitch, that for some stupid reason you can only be well trained or be aero.

-Scott

+1.

People take a stand on their positions but we all need to look at the complete package.

1 - Engine (biggest area for improvement for almost all of us on ST. Healthy fit engine goes a long way)
2 - Fit (everyone needs a good fit to stay as aero/comfortable for as long as you can)
3 - Aero/Crr (have the lowest rolling resistance you can while having the most aero goodies you can afford)
4- Weight (body and bike - they both save time but maybe not as much as the others above)

I think most on ST would agree that we all work towards this as much as possible and in that order.

Or, that you need to max out on the former before worrying about the latter :-/

It's not just on ST though...it's the dumbest argument in anything related to cycling.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

well put

Sure, that looks like a fine and ordered list, but as mentioned...a rider can work on all 4 at once! Get a good fit (2), then ride a lot (1). That will cut your weight (4a), and while you recover on the couch...research and buy better equipment (3 and 4b).