So, we run into these threads every once in awhile regarding aerodynamics, testing, and various products. My question is "why can’t ST members (or any person who wants to be associated from other forums) put together a fundraiser for wind tunnel time, donate equipment (with specifically definited products), devise a protocol (hopefully generated with input from the manufacturers where we can make it as robust and complete as possible)? If other efforts that have been done in the past for various individuals can be duplicated, I don’t see any reason why we can’t settle some of these arguments (at least to the extent of ST - we might then have to battle weightweenies or others
Of course we’ll need riders to participate (probably not difficult to find here ;-), a location (San Diego or other), someone trustworthy to collect the funds, and others to help talk with manufacturers to discuss protocols. Then we need to limit the number of products tested (as we won’t have THAT much time). I’ll put my vote for products as:
Wheels-
HED
Zipp
Blackwell
Mavic
Any other generic wheel from Taiwan/China branded as something else
Frames-
Cervelo
Trek
Softride and/or Titanflex
Aegis (see guys, we can help you find out where your bikes stand)
Felt
QR
any other frames (possibly new Cannondale & Specialized might be a cheap way for them to get some universal feedback?).
My question would be who would be willing to throw enough money at it? I’m no aero genius but but it would seem to me that since the rider is the OVERWHELMING majority of drag that each individual would have to be run thru the tunnel in order to make the tests on teh other stuff mean anything.
Honestly if all components comprise of less than 20% of all the drag, then improving the drag of the rider by 12 or so percent would be a greater improvement than a 50% improvement in ALL of the other componants.
I guess my point is how much of a real world effect does a 5% improvement on a wheel have? And to make matters worse what kind or difference are we talking about from one decent wheel to another? Does it really matter if brand X is 1% better under perfect windtunnel conditions than brand Y?
Maybe I’m off base here but some of this stuff just doesn’t make any sense in the real world, although I’d be the first to admit it’s fun to argue about in “Theory”
Well, one thing I’d like to amend the protocol to include structural testing as well (we might have to rent a machine from a company - but I can work on some of these guys who don’t use their testing machines much anymore because they are doing virtual testing It is one thing to make a very aero wheel, it is another to make it structurally superior. I’m asking those those who COULD help evaluate these products (based on their knowledge, experience, etc.) to step up.
We’ll see what happens when Monday hits and these posts explode with viewers, but I have the sneaking suspicion that the whiners of the group will just prefer to rationalize why it doesn’t make sense to do this, why they won’t help, and just prefer to go with the status quo.
Of course, I’ll even make the offer known to the manufacturers, and see if they’d like to represent themselves (we will probably have to wait to test until the slow down of the season after Interbike/Eurobike, etc.).
manufacturers can only be allowed to help devise the protocol, as many of them have done wind tunnel testing, and with justification for their methodologies, we can determine which route is the best to go.
As far as them paying - absolutely not. What if Cervelo paid 30%, Zipp paid 30%, and nobody else paid? What do you think this forum would do with THOSE results (even though we have absolutely nothing to do with either of these companeis). It needs to be customer driven. I’m back in town today and have already spoken with a couple of aerospace companies that I work with to see what it would take to use their low speed tunnels
I like the idea a lot. I think the key is getting the manufacturers to pony up the goods to be tested, so that you only have to deal with the cost of the tunnel time.
I can’t add anything to this unfortunatly, unless you want some test entries out of the 650c quiver.
You’ll not get manufactures to join you because they have more to lose than gain. If people actually started to find out that the 2500$ wheelset make you go next to zero faster than the 500$ wheelset, who’s going to but the 2500$ other than those that buy to say “I have a 2500$ wheelset”. I’ve said this since I got into tri’s. Why Shimano or Campy or one of the big dawgs has next to zero info on actual performance of there groups makes no sense…unless there is so little difference that they would lose sales.
You’ll also not get many takers here for the same reason. I think it’s pretty easy to figure out that all the testing in the world isn’t going to make much of a real world difference. Maybe I’m wrong here, but honestly outside of a very few very elite pro’s most of these thing make very little difference. Especially compared to the difference a good fit for a rider makes.
