It’s not about the bike dude…
And, it’s not about the bike frame. Our discussion appears to be done, there is no appreciable aero difference between one TT frame and another, - and there’s no data that states that there is. And, (in a case like Cervelo), - the very slight aero differences would translate into no appreciable performance benefits, - that aren’t mitigated by other factors, - for any rider. But, more dramatically, - to the average Slowtwitcher who is bamboozled and seduced by a false “tech” prophet; a crutch that causes them to focus on “toys,” - preventing them from doing the REAL WORK that’s needed to go out and make REAL improvements out on the course… Marketing that “we’re more aero” certainly has brought Cervelo a lot of success, - even if it is a bunch of hooey… If you don’t believe that buying a Giro aero helmet can actually make you faster than the very slight difference between BMC’s aero frame and Cervelo’s aero frame while riding with a POS IRONMAN helmet, - than you have the wrong data or a very skewed view of it, - because it’s the rider’s position and clothing that account for 85% of one’s aerodynamics.
(All bike manufacturers want to sell you on the fact that this year’s super cool, super tech, super aero, super light 15 pound bike is technologically superior to last year’s super cool, super tech, super aero, super light 15 pound bike. There are a lot of factors that go into making a “great bike” for any ONE GIVEN PERSON: not to mention fit. If a rider fits better on Pinarello’s Montello 56 cm frame but doesn’t fit on Cervelo’s P3 in either a 54 or a 56, - then she is going to be faster on the Pinarello. There’s also ride quality, stability, smoothness; all factors that are significant, - some MORE significant than the very slight aero difference between a very aero Pinarello Montello and a slightly more aero Cervelo).
If the aero frame of the Cervelo made as much of a speed difference as you say, - the pro teams would not stand for not riding Cervelos. They would rework their contracts with their equipment suppliers and at least use Cervelo frames with their bike suppliers paint and decals. (Maybe that happened with Giant and Colnago and Rabobank: but that’s not the point).
The fact that this DOES NOT HAPPEN with Cervelo’s slightly more aero TT frame; - is just one more marble on the side of “not so much.”
I can only speak for myself when I say that I’m not really interested in your idiosyncratic speculations…
If you like, you can substitute Colnago for Giant, for Pinarello, - if you want to keep going sideways…
This guy’s funny. He truly believes he knows everything. Sort of reminds me of the moonenites from ATHF (for many of you, that will be totally lost on you). I can just picture toenail as a teacher: “Does anyone have any questions? And remember, there are no stupid questions.” Student raises hand. Toenail calls on him, “Yes, you, the F______ dumbass with the stupid f_____ question.”
it’s not about the bike frame. Our discussion appears to be done, there is no appreciable aero difference between one TT frame and another, - and there’s no data that states that there is.
On the contrary, there is: just go look at any of the three sources that I mentioned above.
the pro teams would not stand for not riding Cervelos. They would rework their contracts with their equipment suppliers and at least use Cervelo frames
unless they think like you and don’t believe the data…
g
Give me a break yo…
What are you on about? I’m stating my opinion as I see it, based on my knowledge and experience. If you have something to add to the argument, - other than some speculation about who I am, or how I feel, or how I perceive myself, - please jump in and enlighten me and the rest of us.
Would my credentials help to increase the validity of my arguments? Or, - are only certain posters in the Slowtwitch clique correct?
There is so much, of so many things that I do not know; it is my fond hope that I’m not perceived as one who claims to know something that I do not.
If I’m wrong, please correct me and show me where I am wrong, - and I promise that I’ll endeavor to admit it and stand corrected. But don’t charge me with arrogance without backing up what you have to say…
Cheers,
Wow…
So you’d go so far as to admit that Pro Teams are really stupid and not trying to do the best that they can to put their riders in the best position to win? Gosh, - I think that more than a few teams would really, really, take issue with that. It’d be interesting to see what Team Discovery would say about that, - considering that they are super big on “tech” and getting their riders every possible advantage…
Show me the data holmes…
Give me a break yo…
What are you on about? I’m stating my opinion as I see it, based on my knowledge and experience.
no you didn’t…
you didn’t say “I think it doesn’t matter”…
you said:
it’s not about the bike frame. Our discussion appears to be done, there is no appreciable aero difference between one TT frame and another, - and there’s no data that states that there is.
two entirely different things…
g
Thanks, - I did…
Still no luck… Want to quote a certain point? Let’s see it.
If the aero frame of the Cervelo made as much of a speed difference as you say, - the pro teams would not stand for not riding Cervelos. They would rework their contracts with their equipment suppliers and at least use Cervelo frames with their bike suppliers paint and decals.
Boy, you are out-of-the-loop on things, aren’t you?
-
Unlike, e.g., a baseball franchise, professional cycling teams are entirely dependent on sponsorship to fund their budgets. This means that they - and the riders they support - often have very little real choice in the equipment that they use. IOW, even if wind tunnel testing shows brand X to be faster than brand Y, teams will often go with brand Y because they’re the company offering the most $$. (For example, even the tech-savvy Australians use Mavic instead of Zipp wheels on the track because Mavic is willing to pay them to do so, whereas Zipp is not.)
-
Despite the above, “rebadging” of equipment by elite riders (but not usually entire squads) is quite common, and always has been. Perhaps the most relevant example of this stems from the Tour a few years ago, when Jalabert used an aluminum P3 TT bike that was labeled a Look.
-
Even given the above facts, teams are in fact reworking their contracts with suppliers to try to obtain the fastest equipment - and as Gerard described recently in one of his blogs, Cervelo is trying to use this desire to force them to adopt strict anti-doping regimens.
YAWN…
I haven’t seen any appreciable evidence to make me change my opinion… (Do you have some)?
Since you’re up my butt with a microscope, - see anything that I should worry about?
Thanks, - I did…
Still no luck…
Then you must be blind, because all three sources show significant differences between various bikes.
data that Dr. Coggan revealed here on Slowtwitch implies that the difference between a P2K-like frame and a P3C-like frame is on the order of .015-.020 m^2 of CdA WITH a rider on board.
“Implies” is probably the best way of putting it.
Wow…
So you’d go so far as to admit that Pro Teams are really stupid and not trying to do the best that they can to put their riders in the best position to win? Gosh, - I think that more than a few teams would really, really, take issue with that. It’d be interesting to see what Team Discovery would say about that, - considering that they are super big on “tech” and getting their riders every possible advantage…
Show me the data holmes…
that isn’t what I said…some pro teams are very smart and chose their tools wisely. some not so much. there are plenty of examples of pro teams riding rebadged/unbadged frames/wheels/etc.
your very example proves the opposite of what you are trying to show!
disco probably has as much or more time in the tunnel than any other team, like CSC, the defunct Phonak, etc. and I suspect (and don’t have the data to support it) that the ttx is probably within a 0.5s/km range of the p3c.
other teams are just happy to have free frames.
I have a team and we get stellar deals on bikes (nice bikes for sure) but I still chose to pay for what makes me fastest (and not use the “team” frame deal). fortunately, I am not at a level where I have to rebadge it.
g
Give me a break yo…
What are you on about? I’m stating my opinion as I see it, based on my knowledge and experience.
Which you have shown a couple of times is very limited. I would advise you to take the time to learn from this thread, as some relevant information is being shared here.
YAWN…
I haven’t seen any appreciable evidence to make me change my opinion… (Do you have some)?
Since you’re up my butt with a microscope, - see anything that I should worry about?
see the good doc’s and Tom’s suggestions above…
and I ain’t up your butt, your having an argument where you keep asking for proof and people keep offering you direction on where to find that proof but you chose not to listen to the advice you asked for…
I would be up your butt, but your head keeps blocking the way…
g
Thanks, - I did…
Still no luck… Want to quote a certain point? Let’s see it.
Really? You looked at all 3 of those sources Andy listed? Sure you did. I’ll just add that to your ever-growing list of lies/exaggerations 
BTW, I really LOVE the way your argument changes around…classic trolling at it’s finest.
What’s that old saying about “Wrestling with a pig in mud…”?
Is your name Joaquin by any chance? Just curious.
data that Dr. Coggan revealed here on Slowtwitch implies that the difference between a P2K-like frame and a P3C-like frame is on the order of .015-.020 m^2 of CdA WITH a rider on board.
“Implies” is probably the best way of putting it.
I’m glad you appreciate my careful selection of that verb
Really? You looked at all 3 of those sources Andy listed?
here is another one:
http://www.roadbikerider.com/cscd_page.htm - cycling science archive available for sale
g
Am I the only one who sees 15% of total drag as being a rather LARGE percentage? One object that is 15% of total drag seems like an excellent area to address and make improvements to me!
Any reduction in drag is an advantage. Bike races are won by a few seconds all the time.
I would be up your butt, but your head keeps blocking the way…
You know, I never saw the need for a sig line…but I just may have to borrow this one.
Thanks Greg! 