Tom A. wrote:
MITaerobike wrote:
John Cobb wrote:
I tested this leg hair question in '87 and again in 1995 at Texas A&M, I only tested one rider in each test situation but I recall that the hair amount was what we considered average. I do know we did full yaw sweeps but the gains were from zero to just a couple of seconds over the yaw range. I mean really? 70 seconds? 15 watts? I know a lot of things have changed with aero frames, positions and aero helmets used during the test but water bottle interference and calf shape and sizing will really effect the airflow shapes. Legs are just exposed cylinders to the air, so muscle shapes and leg lengths will matter. I'm glad Specialized is doing some testing and I know they are trying to be thorough but on road data with some power meters will be interesting to compare these results with.Not sure what to say. I can give you all the raw CdA's if you need them. We were so concerned about the data that we checked out balance cal the days of the first two tests. We wouldn't put this data out without a TON of data and a bit of statistical analysis. Even with Keith, the subject of the video, a t-stat for 99% would give us a 82 sec +/- 20 sec range (I need to verify this data for all). Note our data is ONLY head on in this case but we've been pretty real about how we're testing and the results are extremely consistent.
Mark
Speaking of that, where are your error bars on the graph?? ;-)
Plus, I'm asking again for "before" pics for the range of Chewbaccas tested...please? :-)
sorry got stacked at work today - give me a day and I'll give you both.
--
Mark Cote
MITAerobike
Specialized Bicycle Components