Just in case the question was “how much faster am I on the aero bars vs. riding sitting up on the bullhorns”. I did two identical 80 mile rides with, as measured by HR, very comparable efforts and conditions, one where I had to sit up the whole way as I had a wound on my forearm and then one where I could stay on the bars and that was the differential in average speed. Thought it was interesting, though not surprising.
Next time, Chung it! 
When I plug an arbitrary set of data into the ‘formula’, which for arguments sake is:
200 watts
1% avg grade
175 lbs
I get the following:
Bar Tops: 16.5 mph
Hoods: 17 mph
Drops: 18.2 mph
Aerobars: 19.3 mph
So that seems somewhat consistent with your results.
Funny in all the years riding, when I switch my position from the top of bars to drops I do not automatically go 2mph faster. Also in the race I did today, the is no big jumps in speed when from hoods to drops,
Lots of variables though. Wind, heat, HR is inconsistent from day to day.
Repeat 20 times and get back to us.
Include error bars in your graphs.
Lots of variables though. Wind, heat, HR is inconsistent from day to day.
Repeat 20 times and get back to us.
Include error bars in your graphs.
+1
I’ve got about 50 rides over the same 74mile loop probably 60/40 road/tri bike. If you want to do the work, I’m happy to send you the files.
Isn’‘t the increase in speed dependent on the speed you’‘re comparing it to? What I’'m trying to say is that a 2mph jump from 16 to 18 takes less energy (or less difference in aerodynamics?) than a difference in say a 2 mile jump from 24 to 26 mph. Or am I simply confusing rolling resistance with aerodynamics here? Just curious to know.
Lots of variables though. Wind, heat, HR is inconsistent from day to day.
Repeat 20 times and get back to us.
Include error bars in your graphs.
Agreed but as I said, as I was there, conditions from the standpoint of heat and wind were very similar. Fatigue of the athlete was also comparable. My HR is NOT inconsistent day to day as per many years of training this way, so that’s not even on the table, I can assure you. The only time I see cardiac drift or meaningful differences in my HR on the bike are due to extreme heat or a lot of fatigue. And the duration of the ride I think lends more credence to the results. Oh, also I did this with 15min intervals, 15min below IM effort, 15min at IM effort, 15min above IM effort, 15min at IM effort, repeat until 80 miles. I used the same target HR for each, 134,142, and 150. Here’s the actual data:
Riding sitting up:
http://connect.garmin.com/activity/196655334
Down on the bars, although I did a lot of climbing and a most of that was sitting up:
http://connect.garmin.com/activity/201521580
My HR is NOT inconsistent day to day as per many years of training this way, so that’s not even on the table,Without a power measurement I don’t see how you can take it off the table. How would you know if your HR to power ratio is within 5%, 10% or 20% from one ride to another?
My HR is NOT inconsistent day to day as per many years of training this way, so that’s not even on the table,Without a power measurement I don’t see how you can take it off the table. How would you know if your HR to power ratio is within 5%, 10% or 20% from one ride to another?
+1
Isn’‘t the increase in speed dependent on the speed you’‘re comparing it to? What I’'m trying to say is that a 2mph jump from 16 to 18 takes less energy (or less difference in aerodynamics?) than a difference in say a 2 mile jump from 24 to 26 mph. Or am I simply confusing rolling resistance with aerodynamics here? Just curious to know.
Based solely on real world experience looking at my speeds on my bike computer and my times over the years riding the same loops, my impression is that being aero matters much more at speeds of 25 mph and up, somewhat at 20-24 mph, and virtually not at all below 20 mph. I know many will argue this but that’s just my conclusion based on riding aero bars since 1987 when they first came out. Also, if you look at virtually any graph of aero effects, they are ALL based on 30 mph in a wind tunnel, probably because if they did the tests at 20 mph the difference between aero and non-aero would be negligible and then you wouldn’t buy their expensive new wheels, bike, or whatever:))))
Just in case the question was “how much faster am I on the aero bars vs. riding sitting up on the bullhorns”. I did two identical 80 mile rides with, as measured by HR, very comparable efforts and conditions, one where I had to sit up the whole way as I had a wound on my forearm and then one where I could stay on the bars and that was the differential in average speed. Thought it was interesting, though not surprising.
Bryan,
I like your anecdotal post. Unfortunately, maybe should have put it in pink, as w/ true ST fashion, people are starting to “nuke the shit out of it” and trying to overanalyze things.
BTW, keep up the great KONA training:) Back door brag for you!
Its also very specific to ones position. Its possible that people in more aggressive positions to have a lesser differential.
I had a much bigger difference because my position on the basebar sucked out loud. So it can go all ways.
Isn’‘t the increase in speed dependent on the speed you’‘re comparing it to? What I’'m trying to say is that a 2mph jump from 16 to 18 takes less energy (or less difference in aerodynamics?) than a difference in say a 2 mile jump from 24 to 26 mph. Or am I simply confusing rolling resistance with aerodynamics here? Just curious to know.
Based solely on real world experience looking at my speeds on my bike computer and my times over the years riding the same loops, my impression is that being aero matters much more at speeds of 25 mph and up, somewhat at 20-24 mph, and virtually not at all below 20 mph. I know many will argue this but that’s just my conclusion based on riding aero bars since 1987 when they first came out. Also, if you look at virtually any graph of aero effects, they are ALL based on 30 mph in a wind tunnel, probably because if they did the tests at 20 mph the difference between aero and non-aero would be negligible and then you wouldn’t buy their expensive new wheels, bike, or whatever:))))
That’s not correct, read this thread where the guy who decided to test at 30pm (John Cobb) explains why 30mph was choosen.
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?post=2144001;
Just in case the question was “how much faster am I on the aero bars vs. riding sitting up on the bullhorns”. I did two identical 80 mile rides with, as measured by HR, very comparable efforts and conditions, one where I had to sit up the whole way as I had a wound on my forearm and then one where I could stay on the bars and that was the differential in average speed. Thought it was interesting, though not surprising.
I’ve found the same difference riding road bike vs TT bike and have the power numbers to show it (if “they” still need convincing).
Just in case the question was “how much faster am I on the aero bars vs. riding sitting up on the bullhorns”. I did two identical 80 mile rides with, as measured by HR, very comparable efforts and conditions, one where I had to sit up the whole way as I had a wound on my forearm and then one where I could stay on the bars and that was the differential in average speed. Thought it was interesting, though not surprising.
I’ve found the same difference riding road bike vs TT bike and have the power numbers to show it (if “they” still need convincing).
I just though it was a fun little observation. I figured the power Nazi’s would opine and make it as complicated as landing a man on the Moon. Amazing anyone was capable of successfully training for bike races or Ironman before power meters. 
Just in case the question was “how much faster am I on the aero bars vs. riding sitting up on the bullhorns”. I did two identical 80 mile rides with, as measured by HR, very comparable efforts and conditions, one where I had to sit up the whole way as I had a wound on my forearm and then one where I could stay on the bars and that was the differential in average speed. Thought it was interesting, though not surprising.
I’ve found the same difference riding road bike vs TT bike and have the power numbers to show it (if “they” still need convincing).
I just though it was a fun little observation. I figured the power Nazi’s would opine and make it as complicated as landing a man on the Moon. Amazing anyone was capable of successfully training for bike races or Ironman before power meters.
Don’t worry, before that, I’m sure they hyperanalyzed HR. Before that, hyperanalyzed PRE. Before that, hyperanalyzed speed.
Isn’‘t the increase in speed dependent on the speed you’‘re comparing it to? What I’'m trying to say is that a 2mph jump from 16 to 18 takes less energy (or less difference in aerodynamics?) than a difference in say a 2 mile jump from 24 to 26 mph. Or am I simply confusing rolling resistance with aerodynamics here? Just curious to know.
Based solely on real world experience looking at my speeds on my bike computer and my times over the years riding the same loops, my impression is that being aero matters much more at speeds of 25 mph and up, somewhat at 20-24 mph, and virtually not at all below 20 mph. I know many will argue this but that’s just my conclusion based on riding aero bars since 1987 when they first came out. Also, if you look at virtually any graph of aero effects, they are ALL based on 30 mph in a wind tunnel, probably because if they did the tests at 20 mph the difference between aero and non-aero would be negligible and then you wouldn’t buy their expensive new wheels, bike, or whatever:))))
That’s not correct, read this thread where the guy who decided to test at 30mph (John Cobb) explains why 30mph was chosen.
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...um.cgi?post=2144001;
Ya, I’ve read this before. I’m actually an engineer myself and I’ve read a bunch on all this aero stuff but still, based on my experience, I stand by my original statement. I’m not going to get in a big debate about it, and normally I don’t even post in any of these aero discussions.