Originally Posted by
tomato coupe
1. An oval tube is more aerodynamic than a round tube.
In the real world with a rider? Who knows!
Originally Posted by
tomato coupe
2. The above is a small effect.
You called a "real" effect, with no indication at all what you mean by that.
Most people are going to interpret "real" as being measurable.
Instead of being uselessly ambiguous, you need to indicate the watts that are being saved.
It appears an aero
frame saves about 5-20 watts at 45 kph. It seems likely that the seat post is going to be a very small fraction of that.
Narrower handlebars appear to save about 5 watts.
https://na.rule28.com/blogs/r-d/the-...ly-in-upgrades
It seems likely the main reason the post is "oval" (they aren't actually
oval) is to fit the non-round seat tube.
Originally Posted by
tomato coupe
By putting "real" in quotes, I can only guess you're using your own definition for the word. I'm not interested in debating someone that redefines words.
This is just dumb. No one has any idea what you mean by "real" and you don't provide any indication of what group of people it would be real
for.