Nigel wrote:
The writing is unclear, but it seems those numbers are just the total drag of each part (presumably on an S5). It says nothing about where the savings of 21.3 watts come from outside of the 4.4 watts on the handlebars. The handlebars account for 20% of the of 21 watts. I would guess much of the rest comes from the wheels.Hi Nigel, Yes, it's not easy to get the meaning, but you nailed it. And the numbers are from an S5 with rider and normal drop bars.
Quote:
Also, I wonder if the lower headtube accounts for much of the change (in new vs. old s5).
Good thinking, but we normalize Foam Dave's position, so in this case a rider who wants to go lower might expect another incremental improvement.
Quote:
It really seems like a much better race bike (stiffer in all areas, and much better looking) but with marginal gains in aero. Tip of the hat to Cervelo for creating a faster, more complete bike even if they were a bit loose with their numbers.
Very good summary. Thanks for the compliments, and I'll pass them along to the design team.
Cheers,
Damon Rinard
Engineering Manager,
CSG Road Engineering Department
Cannondale & GT Bicycles
(ex-Cervelo, ex-Trek, ex-Velomax, ex-Kestrel)
Last edited by:
damon_rinard: Aug 29, 14 13:26