pyrahna wrote:
If you take out the aero helmet and the drops -> aero bars that test shows ~ 20 watts different, not the 60 required for 5min.
Quote:
I think it is possible that you can skew the protocol to suit the outcome desired for a given test.
Selecting a data point instead of publishing all data is not an uncommon method of promotion in this and other industries.
I could not agree more, and have horror stories of my own that involve 'creative' tests to get the numbers your boss wants in a wind tunnel.
I'm most impressed by your desire to see/hear more. I think that speaks volumes both about you (in a very positive way) and what Specialized has done here. I just hope the marketing people don't muck it up with over-reaching factitious claims, and let the 'honest' numbers and the hard work that obviously went into sweating the details speak for themselves.
I'm an admitted aero nerd and trim my shoe straps, remove my valve extenders, and align my quick release handles when I'm competing.
If a billion dollar bike brand invests in making aero road bikes and convinces the public at large they are a performance advantage that helps Felt.
Not everyone wants the same shade of red on their bikes. Clearly slower aero road bikes like the Madone, Foil, Propel, S3, and Venge are selling today. If the new Venge is more aerodynamic than the current AR it won't halt the sales of Felt's bike. Some people will still want Shimano brakes. Some people will still want the AR geo. Some people just prefer to zig vs. zag; our shade of red so-to-speak.
I've got a few friends at Specialized that have spent time on this project. As they're my friends, I hope they're successful.
As for the marketing people and claims, that's secondary as we'll have the ability to generate our own "honest" numbers once the bike is available for sale or we can get our hands on one. If the bar has been raised, it'll just mean the next generation AR might take an extra 6 months or year or two to be released.
-SD