Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Are frames aero enough?
Quote | Reply
Had a weird thought last night and wondering about the middle of bikes. For wheels the current thought is to go deep or disc. What is done about the frames, not much a little tweaking of tubes to make more aero.

I don't clearly understand aero physics, but wouldn't a frame cover type of solution, similar to a wheel cover, offer aero benefits?

Just wondering. Anyone have any opinions? Obviously there would be more side wind problems. But doesn't at least a frame equivalent of a Zipp 808 make sense?
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [6oclock_low] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A frame cover inside of the triangle? It would work like a sail when the wind blows. I'm no expert but I would think that many bikes are close to the areo-extreme but with new technology comes new advantages so only time will tell what will come.
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [6oclock_low] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't have any actual numbers, but from what I've heard, once you put a rider on a frame, there is little difference between an aero frame and a round tube frame.
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [6oclock_low] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Do a search for Trimble aero bikes. You'll probably come up with something that is pretty close to your idea.

Greg.
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [6oclock_low] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
plus something like a "frame cover" would be considereed a fairing, which is illegal for tri or UCI races.

Fighting gravity on a daily basis
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [6oclock_low] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
About 70-80% of the drag comes from the rider. So getting as aero a position as possible is more important than getting the bike to be more aerodynamic.


Member of the Litespeed Factory Team
www.litespeed.com
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [6oclock_low] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There is only so much that can be done with a double diamond style frame. The bikes offered on the market now are probably close to aero maxed out already. The only way to get more aero is likely a return to non traditional frames like with the Cheetah, Lotus, etc.

An aero cover/fairing would probably be tough to handle in a strong cross wind.
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [Timemachine] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
thanks time machine.

2nd place in RAAM, that's impressive.
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [6oclock_low] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Are frames aero enough?

Not enough to compensate for the poor positioning that I routunly see with many triathletes. Not enough to overcome all of the doo-dads and gear that they decide to afix to their bikes. And not enough to help them after making poor choices on parachute like race clothing that they wear.

Fleck


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [paulgraham.ca] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]I don't have any actual numbers, but from what I've heard, once you put a rider on a frame, there is little difference between an aero frame and a round tube frame.[/reply]

You know a month ago I might have believed this but since I got a p2-sl I notice a huge difference between my old road bike.
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [6oclock_low] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've pretty much decided that my next tri bike will be (after the Dual retires)

1) titanium - lightweight, durable, stiff and strong

2) small round tubing for dealing with the constant crosswinds in my area

3) totally uncool.

Racing at speeds under 25mph, it makes little sense to me to carry a heavier "aero" frame that catches crosswinds like a spinnaker when handling and weight would improve dramatically keeping it small & round.

Tachyon maybe? Roark?

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [Fleck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think you forgot to add...Not enough to overcome the fact that I'm only training 2hrs a week....

~Matt
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [DualFuel] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've only ridden one Ti bike for a short period of time...and it was very comfy.

If I had the resources I'd like to have a Ti bike....and a carbon bike...mountain bike, road bike in carbon and ti.....I digress.

~Matt
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [MJuric] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Not enough to overcome the fact that I'm only training 2hrs a week...."

Indeed, that's an outstanding addition to the list.

I think there was a similar discussion/thread a while back and then someone posted up a picture of the guy( a Brit) who holds the World Record for the 100 mile ITT and he was (the horror!!) riding a round tubed steel bike!!

Fleck


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [Vinman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
plus something like a "frame cover" would be considereed a fairing, which is illegal for tri or UCI races.


How about this:





Or this (same bike):





(photo of Sandiway Fong's Ghisallo with custom made storage area, including drink bladder)
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [Fleck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
I think there was a similar discussion/thread a while back and then someone posted up a picture of the guy( a Brit) who holds the World Record for the 100 mile ITT and he was (the horror!!) riding a round tubed steel bike!!


Arrgh, matey:





(I suspect it is titanium, not steel)
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [DualFuel] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Check out this thread from a few days ago. I highly recommend the aerial.



http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...tring=aerial;#838868
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [Tri Fold] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:
plus something like a "frame cover" would be considereed a fairing, which is illegal for tri or UCI races.


How about this:





Or this (same bike):





(photo of Sandiway Fong's Ghisallo with custom made storage area, including drink bladder)


The above bikes are an extreme example of what Fleck was talking about:

Quote:


Are frames aero enough?

Not enough to compensate for the poor positioning that I routunly see with many triathletes. Not enough to overcome all of the doo-dads and gear that they decide to afix to their bikes. And not enough to help them after making poor choices on parachute like race clothing that they wear.

Fleck
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [konaby2008] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"The above bikes are an extreme example of what Fleck was talking about:"

I am speechless!

Fleck


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [Fleck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
"The above bikes are an extreme example of what Fleck was talking about:"

I am speechless!

Fleck
Mr. Fong does 600km brevets for fun. The one time I did the Hillier Than Thou century ride (>11,000' of climbing), he didn't stop once for fluids, carrying all he needed in his Camelbak. He finished first.
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [Tri Fold] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Mr. Fong does 600km brevets for fun"

As I said, I am speechless!

Fleck


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [DualFuel] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Alas- I have a friend!!! As a shameless plug for my sponsor, I can definitely vouch for Roark being a sweet bike. That aside, I'm all with you for going with ti (pretty, strong, won't rust) and keeping it simple. Horizontal dropouts are a pain. Internal cabling is a pain. Aero seatposts are a pain (good luck with a saddle bag or light or clip-on fender). Super deep tubing is a pain- you are often forced to make due with one bottle cage on the frame because so much of the main triangle is taken up by the aero downtube (think P3 carbon). Even worse in smaller sizes. If you really want a sweet bike, get S&S couplers too, and say goodbye to airline fees forever.
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [gregk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Greg,

I was riding with a guy last weekend who just bought a LOOK 565 and that was one of the reasons that he bought the LOOK - it was about the looks!!! It's a state of the art carbon fiber bike frame, but it uses for the most part, normal sized and shaped tube members in the main triangle. From 10 feet, it looks pretty normal, or the reverse these days with all the swoopy, woopty-doo carbon shaped frames and over-sized Aluminum frames, it actually stands out!

Fleck


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [Timemachine] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Do a search for Trimble aero bikes. You'll probably come up with something that is pretty close to your idea.

Greg.


Correct, but it doesn't really work. A fully filled-in frame is slower than one with the center "open".


Gerard Vroomen
3T.bike
OPEN cycle
Quote Reply
Re: Are frames aero enough? [Tri Fold] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes it is a Titanium Omega Stealth Frame that Michael Hutchison rides, Sean Yates also Used one last year and is presumably using one again this year.

Stuart Dangerfield who has often been been Hutchinson's nemisis on the UK time trial scene did use a round tube steel frame to win numerous time trial comps over here http://www.argoscycles.co.uk/history.htm . I think for the last Olympics he was given one of the BCF's Carbon bikes other wise he probably would have used one there. I believe in 2001 he broke the 10-miles competition record with a time of 18'19" (32.76 mph), which is quite useful as is his 25mile pb of 47.47.
Last edited by: boing: Jun 1, 06 15:09
Quote Reply

Prev Next