I'm certainly no mathematician, but those are interesting results!!

Yeah, and it sure beats the hell out of riding the trainer.

just ride like you normally do, just with more suffering.

That is one benefit of riding with a powermeter. You pay attention to power output and not speed and the wind effect doesn't make any difference. In fact sometimes it is the exact opposite. I used to hate headwinds but now sometimes I hate tailwinds because it is impossible to hold the desired power level. It does change your mentality.

Thanks for that link. Useful stuff there.

My morning training rides are often into the wind almost all the way as I pick up the old woman's car
and she rides her bike home from work. Many times these rides just feel like #$%^ but when I get
home and d/l the power I find that I have done an exceptional effort and my whole attitude changes.
Riding with power just adds a whole new reality.

The problem is in the assumptions. You spend more time for a given distance into The headwind. Thus the time advantage favors go g harder on the in to the wind segment.

I thick you'll be hard pressed to find any successful time trialer or coach that reccpomends laying off into the wind

This. Get aero on the drops, find a comfortable gear, and don't look at your computer.

I found it to be very comfortable and efficient to have my elbows bent at around 90 degrees while on top of the handlebars and the whole posture is a bit scrunched.

Technique: your approach works for me. Finding a comfortable gear to spin at a higher cadence is better than crunching in the 80's.

Effort: Depends on what part of the ride and the direction of the wind. If there's a headwind near the beginning of the ride and I'm still fresh, I'll probably push harder into it and enjoy the tailwind on the return as much as possible. If the tailwind is on the way out and headwind on the return, I try to save a little in the tank knowing it might be a tough haul. In a strong headwind I'm very happy to see a group pass by to latch onto. Doesn't happy very often.

Grit your teeth. Treat it like an endless hill.

It's hard to do that because of wind variations. It can give you extra climb or downhill and you can't even see it coming.

I like the relaxed method - but I vary hitting it hard with picking up the cadence and an easier gear. Seems like if I mix it up keeps me from getting fatigued. I try to have a positive attitude get through the headwind as quick as possible and stay relaxed - don't want to waste any energy on negative thoughts or tightening up while fighting the wind.

I don't see a single "best" way here, just what works for individuals and their respective goals. Actually, this ain't a bad thing.

The last time I rode into a strong wind (15-20 mph), I initially tried to keep my speed up for the first seven miles. Then I looked at my HR - way above my LT. I essentially kicked my own butt...I was doing a longish (for me) ride, total 47.6 miles, and did the last 40 in recovery mode, with about the last ten in the tail-between-my-legs mode. Now, if I'm going on an "endurance pace" ride, I watch my HR and let the speed be what it is. If I'm doing VO2 max intervals, I don't care about the wind. On both, I spend most of the time in the drops at a relatively high cadence.

i totally agree with you. i hate headwinds! i would rather ride in a rain storm than in a headwind any day. yesterday my ride was just demoralizing going out since there was a strong headwind. comming back home on the other hand was crazy fun. todays ride was about the same but the wind wasnt as strong and the gusts would not last as long. normally on windy days like yesterday i will hit the mountains instead.

Power-wise a strong headwind is similar to a climb so I do the same thing. Get low and stay in my climbing power zone. The difference though is that aero wheels can help.

Wind is fluid. It's like swimming upstream. Ride at a pace that's comfortable to you, but keep cadence north of 50 rpm or efficiency will drop off the cliff. Drop down to a lower gear if needed. Most important is to reduce air drag by reducing the footprint that's exposed to the wind.

All the time, provided one owns a powermeter.

I am an airline pilot and can tell you that Raptor is correct. Our climb speeds and cruise speeds, therefore fuel flows, are higher when flying into a headwind. Our Flight Management Computer automatically uploads flight data from our dispatchers who build the flight plan. Fuel efficiency, a.k.a. dollars, is everything so going faster into the wind minimizes fuel burn. On the 737, we cruise .79-.80 mach westbound and .74-.76 mach eastbound, give or take a little depending on flight length.

There is both good data, and the opinions of some pretty knowledgable folks, to back up the assertion that going harderd into the headwind will decrease your time trial time as opposed to constant power pacing, and certainly dropping power into a headwind.

Basically, you want to maintain constant power through a time trial that is flat and windless. But you want to raise your power a bit above threshold (typically 5%) uphill, or into a headwind, and then reduce it 5% downhill or downwind. This results in a faster average speed, and a lower total time because you're going slower uphill or into the wind and losing more time.



It's not just me saying this, see, e.g.;

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11083127

https://www.trainingbible.com/joesblo...on-pacing.html
https://www.beatyourpb.com/profiles/b...may-not-always
https://www.nencycling.org/node/1267
https://www.informaworld.com/smpp/con...3~jumptype=rss
Thus a strategy of easing up when the wind stiffens may be a reasonable pacing strategy for enduring a long ride, it is going to make you slower not faster.

Just get on my wheel, duh.

Let's debunk this myth about flying into head-wind to improve efficiency. Air is a fluid. Higher speed through the fluid = higher drag. If the fluid has a velocity vector that's opposite of your direction of travel, then there will also be more drag on the vehicle. To improve fuel mileage, one can reduce the mass, reduce the speed, or lower the drag coefficient of the object.

Flying a heavier airplane from point A to point B (same head wind and tail wind) will use more fuel due to the increase in mass. The main selling point of the new Boeing 787 is better fuel mileage due to mass reduction via the use of composites.

So why do pilots throttle-up when flying against the wind? Simple answer is marketing. People may not like to fly if it takes +20% longer to go the other way. Climbing to a much higher altitude will reduce air drag due to thinner air, but then the engine must be optimized for high altitude operation.

Finally, lowering the drag coefficient of the vehicle will dramatically improve fuel mileage, especially at higher speed. Advancement in the wing's design will reduce drag and improve fuel mileage.

In summary, putting out more power to maintain the same linear velocity against a head wind does not translate to higher efficiency. Shorter time trial...yes. Higher efficiency...no.

Agreed, but now you have me riding at over 100% of threshold (since the argument I always hear is that you spend more time climbing or into the wind). OK, I'm splitting hairs, but the actual math is too much for me to think about.

Anyway, if I put out 105% into the wind and put out 94% (or whatever to get 100% normalized power), I still think it's more complex than that.

The real world (chuck norris) answer is "HTFU and ride at 105% into the wind and 105% with the wind". That guy will be faster for sure.

I would think it would depend on your course. If you are doing a 30-40 mi loop, you might want to power through a headwind knowing that you will turn at some point and can recover with a tailwind. If you are on day 1 of a 3 day trip and your whole day will be 75mi into the wind without a break, I think you would approach things a little differently.

Could a fourth grader do it?!