Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [furiousferret] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
furiousferret wrote:
Granted, we are talking 2-3 centimeters but after a few years and $500 in fitters fees it is dialed in. I know that position puts me in the most comfortable and efficient position and I can stay there for hours.

If it is actually impossible for you to get in your ideal position on any of the aero bikes on the market, then that is too bad.
That seems unlikely though given they are all offered in different sizes and you can put different stems on them =)



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
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jackmott wrote:
furiousferret wrote:
Granted, we are talking 2-3 centimeters but after a few years and $500 in fitters fees it is dialed in. I know that position puts me in the most comfortable and efficient position and I can stay there for hours.

If it is actually impossible for you to get in your ideal position on any of the aero bikes on the market, then that is too bad.
That seems unlikely though given they are all offered in different sizes and you can put different stems on them =)

Who was it who counter-pointed Tom Demerly's constant refrain of "it's all about the fit"*, with "bikes are adjustable and people are adaptable"? Was it Tom A.? Kudos to whomever it was.

*Damn you, Meghan Trainor and your catchy tune!
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Going back to the point about the Scott foil's airfoil, but that z plane'd geometry is totally wrong, which suggests the initial foil geometry in the model was wrong. Leading edge is way too sharp. That makes a huge difference. Also it is not mentioned (and is unlikely) that they are modeling the "freestream" quality of the air correctly. For a downtube, it ain't gonna be nice and clean...

3D effects will also take a role in addition to surface roughness.
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Don't remember.
"It's all about the fit" is a sales tool usually.
Yes the bike must fit your best position.
No it doesn't have to do so with 0 spacers and a 100mm stem


Andrew Coggan wrote:
jackmott wrote:
furiousferret wrote:
Granted, we are talking 2-3 centimeters but after a few years and $500 in fitters fees it is dialed in. I know that position puts me in the most comfortable and efficient position and I can stay there for hours.

If it is actually impossible for you to get in your ideal position on any of the aero bikes on the market, then that is too bad.
That seems unlikely though given they are all offered in different sizes and you can put different stems on them =)

Who was it who counter-pointed Tom Demerly's constant refrain of "it's all about the fit"*, with "bikes are adjustable and people are adaptable"? Was it Tom A.? Kudos to whomever it was.

*Damn you, Meghan Trainor and your catchy tune!



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
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A trivial aside: when replying to a thread in general, I think it helps to delete the name of the person to whose post you're replying (like I did for this post). That way people know that it is a general reply, and not directed at anyone in particular.

Just trying to avoid con-fusion...*

(*Name the popular media I'm channeling now.)
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
jackmott wrote:
furiousferret wrote:
Granted, we are talking 2-3 centimeters but after a few years and $500 in fitters fees it is dialed in. I know that position puts me in the most comfortable and efficient position and I can stay there for hours.

If it is actually impossible for you to get in your ideal position on any of the aero bikes on the market, then that is too bad.
That seems unlikely though given they are all offered in different sizes and you can put different stems on them =)

Who was it who counter-pointed Tom Demerly's constant refrain of "it's all about the fit"*, with "bikes are adjustable and people are adaptable"? Was it Tom A.? Kudos to whomever it was.

*Damn you, Meghan Trainor and your catchy tune!

I have been known to write that (with the word highly in front of "adjustable" and "adaptable"), but I think the original source for that was my buddy Jason Osborne :-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If you were going to put clip on bars onto either a aero vs light bike, which would be better if you were to only own one bike (do all training, racing and group cycling)
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [ENP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ENP wrote:
If you were going to put clip on bars onto either a aero vs light bike, which would be better if you were to only own one bike (do all training, racing and group cycling)



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Why resurrect this month-old thread? Because a few folks were contending that aerodynamics were of little importance in a draft-legal situation. It is nice to add evidence to this kind of discussion where there is some to be seen. See this video on the front page where those Specialized boys are looking at the relative effect of hand position in drafting and non-drafting situations. Very interesting. Frame aerodynamics may not impact on the same scale as position, but if they do matter at all then on the basis of these results they surely will still matter in the draft.

Summary - the % effect on drag going hoods to drops is HIGHER in the draft, whilst the absolute effect may be a bit less (because overall drag is less). Would have liked them to look at a "good" hoods position, ie forearms parallel to the ground.

And you also get to look at Gwen Jorgensen, who is very lovely.

http://www.slowtwitch.com/...the_draft__4742.html
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [knighty76] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I saw that video and I must say I was a bit disappointed, not with the outcome, but with the hand positions, both in the drafting video and the other video that looks at the hand positions in isolation. I remember hearing or seeing in other discussions that the hands on the hoods, but with elbows at a 90ish degree angle is actually faster than hands in the drops. I think it has to do with the body position, which in this position is about as low as when you're in the drops, except your arms create less drag as they're less stretched out. It is however more secure, and probably more comfortable (but also less aero) than the invisible aero bar position that they did test. Maybe I'm nitpicking here but the 90 degree hood position feels much more like a breakaway position than the drops position, which I'd use for short punchy attacks (or sprints ofc).
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [snaaijert] [knighty76] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
snaaijert wrote:
I saw that video and I must say I was a bit disappointed, not with the outcome, but with the hand positions, both in the drafting video and the other video that looks at the hand positions in isolation. I remember hearing or seeing in other discussions that the hands on the hoods, but with elbows at a 90ish degree angle is actually faster than hands in the drops. I think it has to do with the body position, which in this position is about as low as when you're in the drops, except your arms create less drag as they're less stretched out. It is however more secure, and probably more comfortable (but also less aero) than the invisible aero bar position that they did test. Maybe I'm nitpicking here but the 90 degree hood position feels much more like a breakaway position than the drops position, which I'd use for short punchy attacks (or sprints ofc).

The difference between a proper aggressive position on the hoods and being in the drops will be much less if any at all. She might as well be on the tops if she's sitting so upright. In the ITU peloton and for someone like Gwen the hoods are probably the safer choice as well.
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [Staz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I was thinking the same thing.
Of course her position is better in drops than hoods. In both positions her forearms are far from horizontal.
I am the same as her- much faster in drops than hoods.
I think for hoods to be fast you need to drop your forearms like Cancellara does.
This is highly individual but pretty easy to test if you have a powermeter.
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [bootsie_cat] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Would have been good to test the horizontal position in the hoods. I was thinking that when I saw the video.
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [BMANX] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yeah but obviously she does not ride that way.
It only matters if you can effectively morph into that position and put out an amount of power that gives you a new higher speed.
Not everyone does well with the horizontal arms.
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [bootsie_cat] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BUT I bet if is showed that it was faster she would adapt as she said she said she would for riding more in the drops.
Quote Reply
Re: VN: Aero bikes vs. Climbing bikes. GCN video [BMANX] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not necessarily.
I find that I cant hold on in that way.
Quote Reply

Prev Next