Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [tessar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tessar wrote:
Same comment as I left on your Insta, this P4 is just begging for a 1x setup. Very curious to see the results.

Do this, whether it is an anomaly or whether the P4 was designed around a lack of front mech, with the T4 in mind. But taking the front mech off the P4 is huge, comparatively, compared to other bikes. Its also more sensitive to disc types than other frames, it likes a flat one (with a max 23mm tyre) which would make sense, as air is pulled over the water bottle area.

I would also definitely tidy this area up a bit if you can.
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [TriByran] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would love to have the new SRAM AXS 165mm crank and power meter with a 1x gruppo but can’t drop the cash.

Interesting about the P4 and front derailleur... would love to see some data or other anecdotes about that. Maybe I add a run where I remove the FD.

TriByran wrote:
tessar wrote:
Same comment as I left on your Insta, this P4 is just begging for a 1x setup. Very curious to see the results.

Do this, whether it is an anomaly or whether the P4 was designed around a lack of front mech, with the T4 in mind. But taking the front mech off the P4 is huge, comparatively, compared to other bikes. Its also more sensitive to disc types than other frames, it likes a flat one (with a max 23mm tyre) which would make sense, as air is pulled over the water bottle area.

I would also definitely tidy this area up a bit if you can.

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I can’t give you the actual data as it’s not mine to give and with NDAs etc.
But I can tell you the number was between 6 and 8 for the p4, versus around 2-3w for the other 10 plus bikes we tested.
This was tested on 4 p4s, all the same and over 100 runs.
Add this to a flat disc and 21mm tyre and is aero city.
23mm tyre is better overall due to RR though
25mm kills a p4.
Basically take off the front mech, tidy the bottle area up and you have almost t4 aeroness. Which at low yaw is stunning.

Based on what I’ve seen the p4 will beat the p5 between +5 and -5 yaw either side of that and the p5 excels.

Hence why p4 is not a kona bike, or for anyone going slower than say 25mph. Over 30mph and the p4 is sensational

No wonder Ryder fought to stay on it at the Giro
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericMPro wrote:
weird they show up for me... Google Chrome.

.. your pics are locked behind a google account ..

*
___/\___/\___/\___
the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [sausskross] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks I’ll fix tonight

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm curious for [the] edit: more details ;-)

*
___/\___/\___/\___
the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>
Last edited by: sausskross: Feb 10, 19 7:28
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [sausskross] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
are you not seeing just the bike pics or are you not seeing the bike pics and the Zipp Vuka Wing hack pics?

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The pics in your first post are locked only ..

*
___/\___/\___/\___
the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Here is one data point for 1X
"1.0" Tactical 1X Drivetrain Setup vs Baseline
The "1.0" Tactical is designed to have both a traditional 2X Drivetrain chain ring setup, and a 1X Drivetrain chain ring setup. The small chain ring, front derailleur, and front derailleur mount were all removed for this test.



Drag in Grams @ 30mph
Angle
Premier "1.0" Tactical 2X
Premier "1.0" Tactical 1X
Differential
-15
429
371
58
-12.5
464
417
47
-10
510
472
38
-7.5
551
527
24
-5
606
595
11
-2.5
647
640
7
0
656
641
15
2.5
654
637
17
5
607
593
14
7.5
523
515
8
10
462
460
2
12.5
402
384
18
15
364
363
1
There is limited data publicly available for the aerodynamic differences a 1X Drivetrain offers over a traditional 2X Drivetrain. To be clear, a 1X Drivetrain setup is referring to a single chainring on the drive side crank arm with no front derailleur on the bike; a 2X Drivetrain is a traditional double chainring on the drive side with a front derailleur. The results are interesting as there’s a small reduction in drag at yaw angles below 7.5, but quite clearly a significant reduction in drag on the non-drive side of the bike at higher yaw angles. It’s speculative, but not overly so, to presume this reduction at higher yaw is due to the missing smaller chainring, as it’s exposure is significant on the non-drive side at higher yaw angles. More tests on different bike models and drivetrain setups would be warranted to come to a more decisive conclusion. Also, it should be noted a rider would likely influence these numbers as the movement of legs, crank, shoes, pedals, etc. would all alter the airflow through the drivetrain area. Still, the results are worthy of further discussion and testing.

Dan Kennison

facebook: @triPremierBike
http://www.PremierBike.com
http://www.PositionOneSports.com
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [dkennison] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the data .. was it measured with (some dummy legs) pedaling ore the bike only without a rider ??

*
___/\___/\___/\___
the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [sausskross] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This particular run was without rider. We make a bit of a disclaimer in the last paragraph about leg movement.

Dan Kennison

facebook: @triPremierBike
http://www.PremierBike.com
http://www.PositionOneSports.com
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [dkennison] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yep .. thank you for the note and the collected data to share !!

*
___/\___/\___/\___
the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [dkennison] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
thanks Dan.

I've seen enough already to think that if I were to Optimize my P4 I'd go with a 1x drivetrain setup. That said I'm going to run test with the same 2x crankset, I just don't think I can afford the sweet new AXS 1x Power Meter ;)

Eric

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [sausskross] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
how about now...

sausskross wrote:
The pics in your first post are locked only ..

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericMPro wrote:
how about now...

sausskross wrote:
The pics in your first post are locked only ..


.. sorry, no .. following the placeholders now it links to apis.mail.yahoo.com .. numbers @ mailboxes ..

*
___/\___/\___/\___
the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>
Last edited by: sausskross: Feb 10, 19 7:53
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [TriByran] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for sharing this. I run a Flo90 with disc cover and ordered a GP5000 25c yesterday so will need to correct that.

Any data on front tire selection. I run a flo60 front and was going to put a gp5000 23c on it unless it would make sense to run 25 on front and 23 on back which seems counterintuitive?

_____________________________
David Gramer
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [dkennison] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dkennison wrote:
Here is one data point for 1X
"1.0" Tactical 1X Drivetrain Setup vs Baseline
The "1.0" Tactical is designed to have both a traditional 2X Drivetrain chain ring setup, and a 1X Drivetrain chain ring setup. The small chain ring, front derailleur, and front derailleur mount were all removed for this test.



Drag in Grams @ 30mph
Angle
Premier "1.0" Tactical 2X
Premier "1.0" Tactical 1X
Differential
-15
429
371
58
-12.5
464
417
47
-10
510
472
38
-7.5
551
527
24
-5
606
595
11
-2.5
647
640
7
0
656
641
15
2.5
654
637
17
5
607
593
14
7.5
523
515
8
10
462
460
2
12.5
402
384
18
15
364
363
1
There is limited data publicly available for the aerodynamic differences a 1X Drivetrain offers over a traditional 2X Drivetrain. To be clear, a 1X Drivetrain setup is referring to a single chainring on the drive side crank arm with no front derailleur on the bike; a 2X Drivetrain is a traditional double chainring on the drive side with a front derailleur. The results are interesting as there’s a small reduction in drag at yaw angles below 7.5, but quite clearly a significant reduction in drag on the non-drive side of the bike at higher yaw angles. It’s speculative, but not overly so, to presume this reduction at higher yaw is due to the missing smaller chainring, as it’s exposure is significant on the non-drive side at higher yaw angles. More tests on different bike models and drivetrain setups would be warranted to come to a more decisive conclusion. Also, it should be noted a rider would likely influence these numbers as the movement of legs, crank, shoes, pedals, etc. would all alter the airflow through the drivetrain area. Still, the results are worthy of further discussion and testing.
How does the drag compare when you need a gearing range on the 1x set up to match a 2x.
i.e, 1x with a med/long cage derailleur and a large cassette.
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [DeanV] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Short answer - I have not tested it.

Q factor, chain line factors, gear selection compensation - we ran out of time.

Dan Kennison

facebook: @triPremierBike
http://www.PremierBike.com
http://www.PositionOneSports.com
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yep .. the imgur pic links of the reposter work fine .. ;-)

*
___/\___/\___/\___
the s u r f b o a r d of the K u r p f a l z is the r o a d b i k e .. oSo >>
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [dkennison] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Q factor, did you test this?
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [dkennison] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Did you run the same size cassette for the 1x run vs 2x? I'd speculate the aero savings are vastly reduced if you put a 10-34 on there for the 1x test.
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [davews09] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But the front ring would be smaller, too. Could be a wash
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [davews09] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Same rear cassette, same front big ring. We did not adjust Q factor.

Dan Kennison

facebook: @triPremierBike
http://www.PremierBike.com
http://www.PositionOneSports.com
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [DGTri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Again, P4 was designed around a narrower wheel, the Flo60 isn't too wide, but the wider firecrests etc. were not good in it.
The fastest tested was an old 1080 with a 21mm tub IIRC.

On that flo I would put a 23mm Gp5000. It will not do well with a 25, although it will ride a little nicer.
Quote Reply
Re: Cervelo P4 vs. Cervelo P5: The Definitive Wind Tunnel Test [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericMPro wrote:
I've seen enough already to think that if I were to Optimize my P4 I'd go with a 1x drivetrain setup. That said I'm going to run test with the same 2x crankset, I just don't think I can afford the sweet new AXS 1x Power Meter ;)

Can't you just remove the small ring and derailleur?
Quote Reply

Prev Next