going to switch to v-brakes on my cross bike. anyone have experience with the Paul minimotos? worth the premium over TRP 8.4s? I'm sure the TRP are great, but the hipster in me wants to pony up for the Pauls.

A little more on the bePro from my interview with Kal - coach.
At lower (<200) they don't seem to give very accurate results and if you pedal very smoothly they may not as easily but he said at 300W they seem pretty accurate. He says when he stomps they give pretty accurate numbers.

To do - this week (he's been sick), is run Power Tap as the rear and compare to the pedals.

I know zilch about the Pauls, but built my cross bike with the 8.4s and those things are damned strong. Less clearance than canti brakes, but the one time I used them in mud, all was well.

So this just happened to my bike.

https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...ca&oe=57062EBE

You've been running, and now you ride on an Adamo tri saddle. What's next, the pool?

A teammate runs the minimotos and loves them. They are definitely effective. Very little clearance though. He likes big tires, I think he has 36s on there now, with maybe 2mm of clearance to the brake cable. He says the clearance hasn't been a problem because it's just a cable so junk doesn't really get jammed in there.

Heh.

One of my fit things was to try the saddle. I was thinking of the set back rule, which I violate by a wide margin (I had 4mm, not cm, setback after moving the saddle back 1 or 2 cm). The whole "letter of the rule" kind of guilt thing. I know I don't fall under UCI auspices because I don't race at an elite level but still, I'd like to bring my bike to some kind of spec. The bar height relative to the front tire is my other big thing, probably have to get a higher BB frame, but I can't do that right now.

Bought one off eBay, had to wait for the choices to sort of "reload" (anyone who is looking for a specific item on eBay knows what I mean). Tried it last night, was invisible to me. I think I'm at 4.5 cm set back, that's what I'd expect from the fit measurement stuff.

I feel a lot more stable on the saddle now, between the insoles and the wider support saddle.

Sleeveless jerseys.

those saddles are horrifically wide to me. If anyone wants one I have an adamo I will send to you for shipping.

Yea, it takes technology...Custom Energy & Protein Bars You Design Yourself - Youbars - Buildabar

Dude. My spare bike.

http://www.besttoiletguide.net/wp-co...let-Seat-1.jpg


it makes sense.

lol

Hahaha

too slow. it is already in the mail. I'll tell that person to send it forward if he doesn't like it.

How wide of saddle do you normally ride? I usually like 143 and the adamo chewed the **** out of my thighs. It's like an inch too wide.

Turns out that the local dealer had an Evo fork that they just gave me! Sweet. Mismatched but that is okay.

My just-before-the-Adamo saddle was the SLR. No idea of width, but it's one size.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zy9ChW-79Z...0/DSC_0677.JPG

Hey CDR any interest in getting rid of the SLR saddle I would like to try one. Got a Bontrager hilo right now but just aint working for me.

I'm in the market for new handlebars, and I'm considering aero road bars. It seems that it's a no brainer since such a significant portion of wind resistance from the bike comes from the bars; the big downside is cost.

Zipp
Enve

I'm curious what y'all think about aero bars, and why they're not more widely used, since most of the advantages of an aero frame can be had by simply using aero bars...

Thoughts?

PS - I get that the most important thing about aero is body position on the bike, and I'm working on that...

3T has some as well. Do aero bars really make as big a difference as an aero frame? Interesting, if true. My main concern with them is they introduce constraints on hand position, which could be a big deal for comfort. These aren't as extreme as the 3T aero bars.

I think the Enve bar is probably the better bet because the design places more emphasis on body position. They've got a steep flare that makes the hoods substantially narrower than the drops. The reasoning appears to be that the most aero position is hands on hoods, forearms flat along ramps, elbows at 90 degrees, and of course narrower = better. But that you want more width in the drops for control. For what it's worth, the 3T Ergonova has a similar flared design, though the flare is shallower. The hoods on that bar are about 2.5 cm narrower than the drops. I switched back to them after riding Rotundos for a couple years precisely because I wanted the aerodynamic benefits of the narrower bar. It can feel at first that you have less leverage when sprinting or attacking, especially if you're on the hoods, but after a while you get used to it and I don't think it has a significant effect on actual sprint power.

But oof, that price tag. If that's an issue, the Ergonova Pro (alloy version) goes down to 38, which would be something like 35.5 at the hoods. That would get you most of the benefits of the Enve bar for less than a quarter of the price. The downside is that they would still be quite narrow in the drops. The 40, which I ride, might be a better choice in that case.

We have the Ritchey one piece bar stem and the ENVE SES (the one you show). Very different, my son loves both. No Zipp bar experience.

First my opinion is Ritchey is a very good bar / stem company and looking at their aero options now (today). I like removing the bar/stem connection from the equation. I am looking at this WCS Carbon Solostreem Integrated Bar/Stem | Ritchey

Round bars offer a better hand hold if you are going to be on the tops much / do long hill climbs. Our fitter prefers round bars.
THE SES has a 3-4mm hole for plugs. So if you want to stick things like a mirror in there - you can't.
The SES and the Ritchey will not take a bar mount Garmin like clamp that goes on the bar. The SES flairs too close to where the stem joins.

The SES has a radical bend - like the 70s bars on some Schwinn bikes. They are 44cm on the drops and 39 on the hoods - roughly. My son loves them for sprinting. The front profile has the brakes angled a bit. He does lots of forearm on the tops riding in the USA, so these are his favorite bars. I hope to test the Ritchey soon.
My son likes this bend particularly for back riding as he can be on the hoods and a bit more narrow and make some slots that would be tougher with wider bars. The drops are of course wide, but he sprints elbows out, so not a factor.


http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=498112
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=498115
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=498114

I think Doge's son will say anything to get some time out of the hypoxic tent or get out of Dodge.:D:p

I have found that equipment selection is one of the biggest depends in cycling. I have stuff that my buddies told me was great and it turned out to be not so great for me. I tried narrower bars on my road bike and did not like them and went back to wider bars to match the width of my shoulders.

I have found leverage makes a lot of difference but it depends on the race. For a standing start, wider bars start faster. I have the 3T Scatto bars for team sprint at the track. They are narrow, aero and theoretically fast. I do not like the way they perform on the start and riding on the top hurts my hands due to the sharp aero edge. Obviously, I do not ride on the top when racing.

So if I am using drop bars for training, I do not use the 3T and use a standard round bar.

It is easy to borrow a set of bars and put them on a track bike to try or change out bars for specific racing and training requirements. Not so easy on a road bike. If possible, I would suggest trying some bars before buying and reworking your road bike.

I got a pair of Giant's aero roadbars for a steal. My first comment to anyone that asks about them is how comfortable riding on the tops is compared to round bars.

I've read over the last couple of years (too lazy to look back) that body is about 70% of wind drag, frame/wheels 30%. Of the portion allocated to the frame (not including the wheels), 30% of the drag is from the handlebar, explainable because it's leading, because it's fat (esp with fat tap), and because it has things dangling all over (brifters, wires, computers).

These percentages are from memory. Because there are many variables (speed, rider size, position, etc), I don't care much about precision; my take away is that handlebars are pretty significant. Kamm foils and lowered seat stays all matter, but handlebar is essential, I think, for making a bike aero. (Including no exposed wires). For anecdotal evidence look at the bars of every aero bike out there...

Anyway, aero bars might be heavier, more/less comfortable, more or less rigid, more expensive etc. I don't know, I've never had any; I'm just surprised they're not more commonplace, and that's why I'm asking.

Aerodynamics - Cervélo - 80ish % is the rider
Updated - EB14: Cervelo Ups the Aero Road Ante Again with a New S5, plus Updated RCA - Bikerumor - 30ish % of the 20% that is the bike, is the bar.

Let's pretend the above linked data is gospel. Relative to the full rider/bike system you get the following drag percentages:
Bars: 6%
Front Wheel: 3.2%
Frame: 3.2%
Fork, Bottle, Drivetrain: 1.8% each
...etc...