Road Cycling ďIt is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.Ē -- Ernest Hemingway

The aerobar syndrome

Old 04-18-12, 07:19 PM
  #251  
vandalarchitect
Vandalized since 2002
 
vandalarchitect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Pullman, WA
Posts: 600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by AdelaaR View Post
Going slow on aerobars isn't very stable ... but then going slow on any bike, ever, isn't very stable.
So one could assume (given the aero benefit they were gaining from the bars) that if they had been on the hoods or in the drops they would have been going too slow to stay upright.
vandalarchitect is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 07:33 PM
  #252  
hhnngg1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bob Dopolina View Post
^^^ Your numbers show a decrease in wattage for a similar effort as they should. This was never in question.

Now decrease the effort and see how little saving there actually is.

This was the point of the OP as in 'why do people who derive so little benefit from aerobars use them when the only thing they do achieve is in becoming an MUP menace.'

For fast guys at endurance events they are fast because they are fast, not because they use aero equipment. That was pretty much my point.
I stated this before, but you didn't believe me - if you doubt me, go post it on Slowtwitch.com where a lot of very knowledgable professionals and bike experts like Rchung hang out and they'll set you straight.

Slower riders actually derive equal if not MORE total time savings from using aerobars or other aero gear, because they're on the course longer. I'll leave it for them to explain it, but it's well accepted across the board, and is the reason why even slow-$$$ Ironman racers who are averaging like 15-16mph for 112miles (give 'em a break - they still have to run a friggin 'marathon after!) are using aerobars and aerowheels, usually the whole shebang. It's not just so they save a few seconds or a few minutes over a 6 hour bike leg - the savings add up to like 10-15 minutes or more for most of them.

I don't have the math to back it up unfortunately, but go over on slowtwitch.com and post it in your title thread "I don't believe aerobars give any significant benefit for slower riders like <20mph" and watch the responses against you roll in. I'll leave it to those experts to explain why.

For what it's worth, I DO 100% agree with you that fast guys at endurance events are fast because they're fast, but that doesn't disprove anything about the aerobars. THey'll give like 0.5-1mph max advantage, so someone rocketing along at 26mph with aerobars will still be a speed demon at 25.5mph without them. It's mostly training, but 0.5mph is a big deal for any racer save the most rookie beginners. It would take me like a whole year of hardcore bike training to possibly add 0.5mph to my race speed over 40k from my PR (if it's even possible for me).
hhnngg1 is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 07:59 PM
  #253  
Bob Dopolina 
Mr. Dopolina
 
Bob Dopolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,116

Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by hhnngg1 View Post
I stated this before, but you didn't believe me - if you doubt me, go post it on Slowtwitch.com where a lot of very knowledgable professionals and bike experts like Rchung hang out and they'll set you straight.

Slower riders actually derive equal if not MORE total time savings from using aerobars or other aero gear, because they're on the course longer.
Rubbish.

TIME is not the correct metric for aero equipment. Drag and Power are. Time is a false metric and any statistical tricks involving time are reasoned from a false premise. This is a byproduct of decades of marketing hype filled with impossible to calculate time savings as AD COPY.

BTW, RChang already tried to wow me with his 'knowledge' of the effects or wider rims on rolling resistance but he forgot that tires were involved...Not impressed.
__________________
BDop Cycling Company Ltd.: bdopcycling.com, facebook

BDop DEALERS Site: dealers-bdopcycling.com
Bob Dopolina is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 08:05 PM
  #254  
hhnngg1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bob Dopolina View Post
Rubbish.

TIME is not the correct metric for aero equipment. Drag and Power are. Time is a false metric and any statistical tricks involving time are reasoned from a false premise. This is a byproduct of decades of marketing hype filled with impossible to calculate time savings as AD COPY.

BTW, RChang already tried to wow me with his 'knowledge' of the effects or wider rims on rolling resistance but he forgot that tires were involved...Not impressed.
You're making the classic mistake of Mr. Know it All.

Face it, you don't. All the arguments you make against are along the lines of "I don't care, I know it all."

Just because you were a strong rider doesn't make you the expert in all things aero - not even close.

And for what it's worth, Rchung is by far a more recognized authority on aero things than you will ever be - your stance of thinking what he says is rubbish says tons about you and your close-minded approach to cycling knowledge (and likely other things.)
hhnngg1 is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 09:19 PM
  #255  
Bob Dopolina 
Mr. Dopolina
 
Bob Dopolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,116

Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by hhnngg1 View Post
You're making the classic mistake of Mr. Know it All.

Face it, you don't. All the arguments you make against are along the lines of "I don't care, I know it all."

Just because you were a strong rider doesn't make you the expert in all things aero - not even close.

And for what it's worth, Rchung is by far a more recognized authority on aero things than you will ever be - your stance of thinking what he says is rubbish says tons about you and your close-minded approach to cycling knowledge (and likely other things.)
Are we getting personal?

I will make my point clear once again - Time is a false metric for measuring the effectiveness of aero equipment - it is marketing speak.

Following this logic, if I get off my bike and push it I would be gaining the biggest benefit of all, non? If this is not true ask yourself why not? Could there really be an error in the logic?

The statistic is mathematically correct if we assume that time savings are just something you can add up and the person who saved the most time in the end gained the greatest benefit and I also think we disagree over what 'greatest benefit' means.

Here is what I believe:

For slower riders the aero effects are lower because speeds are lower. So at lower speeds the reduction in drag is less therefore aero equipment is of less benefit to slower riders.

Increases in speed are not linear in terms of the power required, they are exponential. So at lower speeds the amount of watts saved using aero equipment are, in fact, less therefore aero equipment is of less benefit to slower riders.

In terms of competition, for slower riders the difference between riders within their category will be pretty large so aero equipment will effect their overall placings somewhat. So, for instance, a rider may finish 10th out of 100 riders in an age category vs 20th for the same group by using aero equipment.

For elite riders the range of ability withing the group is much, much closer and each position gained in terms of results is much harder to achieve. So, if a rider in this situation gains a few placings by a better use of aero equipment who derived the most benefit?

This, I believe, is subjective.

And for what it's worth I was involved in a thread with RChung regarding wider rims and rolling resistance. He immediately resorted to insults and questioning my knowledge and talked like he was indeed the expert on all things areo as you claim that is until I mentioned that tires mount on those rims and begun asking how the interplay between the rim, wider contact patch and tire construction might play out in the real world.../thread.
__________________
BDop Cycling Company Ltd.: bdopcycling.com, facebook

BDop DEALERS Site: dealers-bdopcycling.com
Bob Dopolina is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 09:36 PM
  #256  
hhnngg1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Here's one source of info saying that time savings are in fact likely greater for the slower rider for aero-gear.

"You will save more time but fewer watts at slower speeds with these improvements. The constants are the percentage aero drag savings."
http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/articl...is-aero-19273/

The aero savings cited in that article's ministudy are actually pretty consistent with what others have been getting. I'd believe their data way before I believe what's coming from you.

And another less scientific, but with math explaining how this would work:
http://triathlonbikesonline.com/tria...ave-more-time/


I lastly don't know how you would avoid TIME as a crucial piece of data in timetrialing. You can give all the fancy power and Cda numbers you want, but if the real-world race-TIMEs in TTs don't pan out, neither does the efficacy of your gear. Aerobars have proven that they work - and not just for fast riders, despite what you claim.
hhnngg1 is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 09:53 PM
  #257  
emveezee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cupid, draw back your bow, and let your aero go.
emveezee is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 10:01 PM
  #258  
RecceDG
Token Canadian
 
RecceDG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Gagetown, New Brunswick
Posts: 1,555

Bikes: Cervelo S1, Norco Faze 1 SL, Surly Big Dummy, Moose Fatbike

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 200 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Time is a false metric and any statistical tricks involving time are reasoned from a false premise.
Well... yes and no.

You are quite correct that expressing benefit in terms of time, not watts, is marketing speak, but it's not so much that it is a false premise as it is a way of expressing units in a way the customer can understand.

Strictly speaking, any aero improvement should be expressed as either a percentage change or an absolute reduction in drag, in newtons, at a given reference airspeed. That's the most accurate quantification of what is really happening. But nobody aside from aero engineers speaks newtons.

You can also express the same data in terms of the reduction in power required to maintain the same airspeed, in Watts. That's a little better; some people speak Watts.

Or you can assume a standard, flat course and a standard athlete over a standard distance (and with standard drag) and convert the increased energy efficiency into time saved - and EVERYBODY speaks "seconds".

That is perfectly legitimate, given the initial assumptions (all the standardized stuff) and can actually be a useful way to wrap your head around just how much difference the drag reduction makes.

Where those assumptions go out the window, however, is the second that any of those "standardized assumptions" differ from ground truth - and for most customers, the likelihood that any of the "standard" assumptions match ground truth on the day of competition (never mind all of them) approaches zero. So you are also quite correct to say that anyone buying aerobars (or aero whatever) can then assume that their time will drop by the precise amount specified in the ad copy is sorely mistaken - and the difference between theory and reality is of a similar order as the difference between the standardized assumptions and ground truth.

So, for example, if the aero whatzit is claimed to save 60 seconds over a 40 km TT where the "before" condition was a 40 km/h airspeed, and the customer struggles to maintain 30 km/h over that distance, the customer is unlikely to see his time improve by 60 seconds. And adding the benefit of several improvements only compounds the error (helmet is 60 seconds, aero wheels is 60 seconds, aero frame is 60 seconds, shoe covers 60 seconds - I'll be 4 minutes faster!) FALSE!

Agreed.

However, none of this changes the fact that the aero improvements will actually make improvements and they have to potential to be significant, especially once the athlete is moving at a speed where aero effects dominate over other effects - and that speed is fairly slow, all things considered, for reasons discussed above.

Increases in speed are not linear in terms of the power required, they are exponential. So at lower speeds the amount of watts saved using aero equipment are, in fact, less therefore aero equipment is of less benefit to slower riders.
Ah, but why is the slower rider slow? It it because he is deficient on the "consumption" end, or the "production" end?

It is probably because he is making less wattage; he is deficient on the production end.

This means that watts saved on the consumption end make a larger proportion of the production end for a slower rider than a faster one - meaning that (pulling numbers out of my ass) a 10W savings in drag is a much bigger deal to a guy whose FTP is 100W than it is to a guy with 400W.

Also on top of this is the fact that aero drag is exponential, meaning that the power required to overcome aero drag increases exponentially. Again, pulling numbers clean out of my ass, a 10W savings at 40 km/h (meaning you have 10 more watts to use) might result in a new top speed of 40.1 km/h. But a 5W savings at 30 km/h (slower speed, less savings) might be a new top speed of 33 km/h.

In terms of TIME improvements, the slower rider sees a bigger improvement. He is still, in absolute terms, slower than the faster rider - the bigger engine makes the real difference - but in terms relative to himself, he sees a nice improvement via the aero improvement.

DG

Last edited by RecceDG; 04-18-12 at 10:10 PM.
RecceDG is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 10:10 PM
  #259  
Bob Dopolina 
Mr. Dopolina
 
Bob Dopolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,116

Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
@hhnngg1:

If the only metric we have to discuss the effectiveness of aero equipment is 'time savings' there is no discussion we can have because I believe it is a false metric.

I believe it is IMPOSSIBLE to say with any accuracy how much time any piece of equipment saves anyone because there are far too many variables in the real world.

You can measure power and drag in a wind tunnel and then, given a known rider, a known course and pretty accurate info about conditions you can make a very rough guess about time. But that requires a ton of info so how can anyone make a claim about how much time any product will save 'a rider' if they don't have this info?

Siting links that continue to push this marketing speak doesn't change these facts.

Regarding the bikeradar link their outdoor tests were in ideal conditions. How would that apply to what most people experience in the real world? Also their data is at speeds of 40kph. I don't think people on the MUP with Nikes and a fanny pack are experiencing those speeds.

The other link just makes the point I've already said I though was fallacious. Also, you have yet to comment on my assertion that pushing my bike on a TT course would yield the greatest 'time savings' of all. Agree or disagree with this statement? Why?

And please stop making this personal. I have a different view and am stating it. If you'd like to comment on this view, great.
__________________
BDop Cycling Company Ltd.: bdopcycling.com, facebook

BDop DEALERS Site: dealers-bdopcycling.com

Last edited by Bob Dopolina; 04-18-12 at 10:17 PM.
Bob Dopolina is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 10:12 PM
  #260  
Bob Dopolina 
Mr. Dopolina
 
Bob Dopolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,116

Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by emveezee View Post
Cupid, draw back your bow, and let your aero go.
That I don't get.
__________________
BDop Cycling Company Ltd.: bdopcycling.com, facebook

BDop DEALERS Site: dealers-bdopcycling.com
Bob Dopolina is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 10:14 PM
  #261  
Bob Dopolina 
Mr. Dopolina
 
Bob Dopolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,116

Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
@RecceDG

You have clarified my point beautifully and I +1 your conclusion.
__________________
BDop Cycling Company Ltd.: bdopcycling.com, facebook

BDop DEALERS Site: dealers-bdopcycling.com
Bob Dopolina is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 10:33 PM
  #262  
fly:yes/land:no
abandoning
 
fly:yes/land:no's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bob Dopolina View Post
And please stop making this personal. I have a different view and am stating it. If you'd like to comment on this view, great.
cry me a river. there is nothing personal in those posts, but you have pretty clearly made known your oddly persistent disdain for triathletes throughout this thread as well as insinuating that other posters don't know what they are talking about because they are triathletes and not former cat 2's.
fly:yes/land:no is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 10:35 PM
  #263  
fly:yes/land:no
abandoning
 
fly:yes/land:no's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RecceDG View Post
So, for example, if the aero whatzit is claimed to save 60 seconds over a 40 km TT where the "before" condition was a 40 km/h airspeed, and the customer struggles to maintain 30 km/h over that distance, the customer is unlikely to see his time improve by 60 seconds.
assuming the change in CdA is the same for both riders, then you are right. he will actually save more than 60 seconds.
fly:yes/land:no is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 10:46 PM
  #264  
Bob Dopolina 
Mr. Dopolina
 
Bob Dopolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,116

Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fly:yes/land:no View Post
cry me a river.
That would be a lot of crying.

I'll pass. Thanks just the same.
__________________
BDop Cycling Company Ltd.: bdopcycling.com, facebook

BDop DEALERS Site: dealers-bdopcycling.com
Bob Dopolina is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 10:58 PM
  #265  
vandalarchitect
Vandalized since 2002
 
vandalarchitect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Pullman, WA
Posts: 600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
So take someone that does the same course on a consistent basis. They want to complete the course faster in terms of time. So far all they've done is talk about cycling on BikeForums.net and they've finished it in infinite hours.

If they get on their bike and use it as intended they can finish the course in 40 min.

They could buy aero equipment and save 4 min. at the same level of effort and finish it in 36 min.

They could not buy the aero gear and just train harder and finish it in 20 min.

After training they could buy the aero gear and finish it 3 min. faster in 17 min.

Finally, they could find a couple of friends that will ride with them, train together and then pace one another safely (no aero equipment) and finish it in 16.5 min.

By my calculations (which are completely made up) we should all just get on our bikes and ride because that saves us the most amount of time. However, if we want to complete the course in the fastest time possible we should stop being so snarky and just make a few friends.
vandalarchitect is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 11:09 PM
  #266  
Bob Dopolina 
Mr. Dopolina
 
Bob Dopolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,116

Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by vandalarchitect View Post
...if we want to complete the course in the fastest time possible we should stop being so snarky and just make a few friends.
Winner.

/Thread.
__________________
BDop Cycling Company Ltd.: bdopcycling.com, facebook

BDop DEALERS Site: dealers-bdopcycling.com
Bob Dopolina is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 11:20 PM
  #267  
jmX
Senior Member
 
jmX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orange, CA
Posts: 2,201

Bikes: Roubaix / Shiv

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by vandalarchitect View Post
However, if we want to complete the course in the fastest time possible we should stop being so snarky and just make a few friends.
I'm much more interested in what I can do solo than with a group. Riding in a pace line at 27mph is certainly fun, but there is no sense of accomplishment for me.

Constantly optimizing the engine, the bike, and, recently, starting on my CdA is much more of a satisfying endeavor for me.

Wonder if we'll hit 20 pages.
jmX is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 11:27 PM
  #268  
fly:yes/land:no
abandoning
 
fly:yes/land:no's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
meh, i am up late watching my recording of bayern munich real madrid (no spoilers for the next 40 minutes!) so here is some math backing up the "slower riders save more time" crowd:

P=Fd(v)=(.5p)(v^3)(CdA)

assume we have two riders, one that puts out 400 watts and one that puts out 250 watts. they have identical CdA (.205m^2), and both have the option to switch to an aerobar that reduces their CdA to .200m^2. let's see what happens on a 40k TT:

400w=.5(1.22)(.205)(v^3) : v=14.734m/s
400w=.5(1.22)(.200)(v^3) : v=14.856m/s
.122m/s difference

250w=.5(1.22)(.205)(v^3) : v=12.598m/s
250w=.5(1.22)(.200)(v^3) : v=12.702m/s
.104m/s difference

so, you can see the faster rider has a larger increase in speed by switching to the aerobars, BUT, look at what happens over a 40k course.

40000m/14.734m/s=2714.81s
40000m/14.856m/s=2692.51s
22.30s difference

40000m/12.598m/s=3175.11s
40000m/12.702m/s=3149.11s
26.00s difference

tada, the slower rider saves more time with the same decrease in CdA.
fly:yes/land:no is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 11:36 PM
  #269  
Bob Dopolina 
Mr. Dopolina
 
Bob Dopolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,116

Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
^^^Back to 'time' again?

I don't think that was ever in dispute. Scroll back a few posts.

The semantics had rolled around to 'benefits most'.
__________________
BDop Cycling Company Ltd.: bdopcycling.com, facebook

BDop DEALERS Site: dealers-bdopcycling.com
Bob Dopolina is offline  
Old 04-18-12, 11:44 PM
  #270  
fly:yes/land:no
abandoning
 
fly:yes/land:no's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
from the recce quote you grafted:

"So, for example, if the aero whatzit is claimed to save 60 seconds over a 40 km TT where the "before" condition was a 40 km/h airspeed, and the customer struggles to maintain 30 km/h over that distance, the customer is unlikely to see his time improve by 60 seconds."

i quoted this earlier. it is actually the opposite of what he proposes. if we assume the same CdA reduction, the slower you are, the more difference in time saved over a set distance, no statistical tricks required.

also, i "scrolled back a few posts" and just retrieved this post of yours:

"What I was doing was illustrating the mentality that underlines the assurtion that slower riders actually have greater time savings from aero equipment than faster riders.

It's absurd and so completely misses the point that it deserves mocking."

Last edited by fly:yes/land:no; 04-18-12 at 11:52 PM.
fly:yes/land:no is offline  
Old 04-19-12, 12:01 AM
  #271  
Bob Dopolina 
Mr. Dopolina
 
Bob Dopolina's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,116

Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fly:yes/land:no View Post
also, i "scrolled back a few posts" and just retrieved this post of yours:

"What I was doing was illustrating the mentality that underlines the assurtion that slower riders actually have greater time savings from aero equipment than faster riders.

It's absurd and so completely misses the point that it deserves mocking."
Right. What I meant here isn't that there isn't a mathematical time saving but that the idea of using time saving as a metric for who benefits most from aero equipment was off the mark. RecceDG expanded on this.

I don't expect you to scroll back through several pages of back and forth. My position is that time is a false metric for determining 'benefit' and that it is much more subjective than statistical trickery indicates.
__________________
BDop Cycling Company Ltd.: bdopcycling.com, facebook

BDop DEALERS Site: dealers-bdopcycling.com
Bob Dopolina is offline  
Old 04-19-12, 01:00 AM
  #272  
AdelaaR
Senior Member
 
AdelaaR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vlaamse Ardennen, Belgium
Posts: 3,898
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by gazelle5333 View Post
Profile Design Jammer GTs..elbow pads are independently attached to the bar. Find them very easily customizable to the position I want
I have exactly those on my hybrid and love 'em
AdelaaR is offline  
Old 04-19-12, 01:00 AM
  #273  
AdelaaR
Senior Member
 
AdelaaR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vlaamse Ardennen, Belgium
Posts: 3,898
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by vandalarchitect View Post
So one could assume (given the aero benefit they were gaining from the bars) that if they had been on the hoods or in the drops they would have been going too slow to stay upright.
Aerobars saved the day
AdelaaR is offline  
Old 04-19-12, 01:12 AM
  #274  
AdelaaR
Senior Member
 
AdelaaR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vlaamse Ardennen, Belgium
Posts: 3,898
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by hhnngg1 View Post
Here's one source of info saying that time savings are in fact likely greater for the slower rider for aero-gear.
Don't you see that you are both correct here?

Bob is right ... aero equipment is more efficiŽnt at higher speeds.
You are right ... aero equipment saves more time at lower speeds ... but only because you go slower and so you take way more time.

But: should you measure "time saved" in just a number? Isn't that a typical example of how one cheats statistics to prove a point? Yes it is.
"Time saved" should be measured in relative terms to "total time taken", right?
If you would measure it correctly you would see that aero equipment is way more effective as you go faster ... a hyperbolic function in fact.

But when talking about an ironman triathlon bike leg ... or any time trial ... aero equipment is indeed a good way to go faster at any speed
AdelaaR is offline  
Old 04-19-12, 01:22 AM
  #275  
abstractform20
Senior Member
 
abstractform20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,884
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by jmX View Post
Alright guys, whatever, it's fredly. I give up.

When I Fred past you on my Fred cycle with my Fred bars, try not to give me too hard of a time ok?


This is my "comfort" aerobar position, which was benchmarked up above in the 2 garmin connect links. It's a Roubaix...tall head tube endurance bike. Wheels are in a transition period at the moment...cut some slack.
you should Fred your way to a UCI win. i will FRED my pants. until then, go FRED yourself.
abstractform20 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.