Aerodynamics is a lot like statistics, you can make it say anything you want it to
I guess I get what you are saying, but that’s just using selective data…not “making aerodynamics say anything you want”.
Aero science isn’t twisted or anything to make you believe physics that doesnt exist. Aero is about reducing flow separation on the trailing edge way more than it is about frontal area. Not to say frontal area isnt a factor, but we can negate that by reducing/removing a low pressure pocket behind due to boundary layer flow separation through the use of air foil shapes. Without the pressure for behind, theres no pressure differential to create a drag force. If you remove that force, why limit the design width when there are other benefits to width?
Using selective data IS making aerodynamics say whatever you want.
No, you cannot “negate” frontal area and just make things wider. Think about it, you could just make it narrower with the same flow.
You are not getting it…wider is not less aero, if the trailing shape makes the entire airfoil more aerodynamic. Did you see how wide the leading edge is on a 787 Dreamliner? It is just a matter of moving the air apart and keeping it laminar so it can reattach with the least turbulence. So yes, you CAN “negate” frontal area. In the dimensions of a bicycle wheel/bicycle wheel+rider complex, rules and handling there are limitations on what is possible. That is the systems engineering tradeoff. Finally aero is not the only thing. The bike designer is trying to limit retarding forces that combine air resistance and rolling resistance in a variety of conditions.