In Reply To:
All,
Sorry for the chirp chirp as you like to say...
No problem...you're a busy guy after all ;-)
In Reply To:
So, let me explain how Kestrel does our testing and why I feel that a complete bike test benefits the consumer.
First, all my design and testing is done @ the A2 Tunnel. I feel that it is the one of greatest assests I have that there is a tunnel with expertise available.
Mark Cote speaks highly of them as well...
In Reply To:
Testing was done on all bikes with Zipp Disc ad Zipp 404 and also tested with Zipp 404 and 808's.
So...what wheels were on the particular bikes in the plot shown in the first post in this threas?
In Reply To:
The goal was to see how each wheel affected the bike. We also tested multiple bars on each bike along with specific components. Again, how do parts change the data on the complete bike.
I tested the same size bikes, same saddle height, same bar height.
Do you mind if I ask how the saddle heights and bar heights were measured?
In Reply To:
Bars tested were what I spec on bikes. 3T Mistral Pro, Zipp Vuka, and Profile Cobra Wing with T-1 Viper Extensions. Each bike was tested with the same bars since I know that this would affect the test.
Does that mean that each bike in the test (including the competitors) was tested with each bar? If so, again, what configuration does the plot represent?
In Reply To:
I left the drive train components alone meaning that if Brand X used Shimano Dura Ace and I spec'd Sram Red, it would remain the same.
I also used 23mm tires on all bikes.
Fair enough.
In Reply To:
The one issue is that you can NOT compare data from one tunnel test to another @ the same tunnel or from tunnel to tunnel. So what you see from a competitor's test will show differently.
Are you saying that the repeatability of the A2 tunnel in respect to CdA measurements isn't very good? Or...are you commenting on the drag values in grams?
In Reply To:
Hope that answers some questions.
It's a start ;-)
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/