Originally Posted by
hueyhoolihan
.. they are designed for dynamics important to objects that are moving at such speeds relative to the air that there is no real comparison to that between a bike and ground level air.
Apparently they are designed for both scenarios.
Originally Posted by
hueyhoolihan
laminar air flow tests and it's optimization is a science of hundred and thousand MPH discrepancies not 10-30 MPH.
Laminar air flow tests are very useful for low speed air flows. This is an important point, one which I believe another poster has overlooked when he opined that only the frontal area should matter for aerodynamics.
Originally Posted by
hueyhoolihan
they aren't even comparable.
Well they are comparable I think, although at extremely high Reynolds numbers (high speed) flows are more turbulent.
Originally Posted by
hueyhoolihan
the wind tunnels don't even begin to address real-world issues like ground-level 5-20 MPH turbulence.
...
I think that you're postulating a ubiquitous turbulent condition at ground level along the roads. I'd agree that wind tunnels do not simulate that kind of environment - but IS there really such a phenomenon? I'd expect something like the normal pressure gradient and associated flows resulting from surface adhesion.