timtak

Basically, yes. Spot on (in so far as " the entire top end of the industry" is ignoring him -- please see below)

Well, as I thought I had said before, the current pro tour uses Robbie style and more, back positioning, narrow at the front, body suits, you name it, when riding solo, but for the most part they are riding (1) in teams in an aero line, (2) in a peloton, where the importance of aerodynamics is radically (50-70%) reduced. Riding in the peloton is like riding with a typhoon to your back. Even at the front of the peloton there is apparently a 20% reduction in drag. This radically offsets the trade-off between ability to put out watts (somewhat reduced in a tuck) and the reduction of drag for the individual rider, and MAY even put a premium on having a greater frontal area so as to provide drafting for team members behind.

The fact that the pro tour rides their road bikes not like Robbie, but like they are dragging a parachute, is I think due to the effect of the peloton.

When there was less intrateam (within team) cooperation (no radios for instance) and more breakaways (such as I think Merxx is doing in the first of Koala's photos but not the second), and when e.g. when Greg LeMond won the final time trial and TDF on a road bike, he was coached on how to do so by none other than Robbie's mentor, John Cobb.

I still ride entirely without a team and entirely without a peloton always, every day, every time I get on my bike, in a time trial. That is why I ride like Robbie. I often use my bars (near the steering post) but I always aim for a flat back. It does not bother me at all, now that I have the glasses :-)

The only time I have come close to a team aero line (is that what they were called, they were taking turns at the front) is when I overtook my university's cycling club at age 54 three years ago. The fastest 21 year old got away from me.

tomato coupe and WhyFi Both Greg LeMond and Lance Armstrong did put John Cobb on their payroll. Go on, say, "Oh, sorry Tim!"

WhyFi

I guess he's got me, there - there's no such thing as breakaways or solos, so you can have your chest in the wind (to sell more bikes that make people fat), and Lance was famous for his extreme position, with huge saddle-to-bar drop and closed hip angle, because of his proclivity for super short head tubes, and long, radically downward stems.

big john

Some people pay thousands of dollars for bikes because they want those bikes and they like those bikes, not because they are looking for a 3% reduction in drag.
Some ride for enjoyment and are not looking for every scrap of speed they can find.
Some (like me) have had back injuries and have had to raise the bars as years have gone by.

tomato coupe

I wasn't referring to Cobb -- I was referring to some random idiot on the internet.

Even with Cobb's input, Armstrong and Lemond did not have their bikes set up like yours. But, what do they know?

smd4

So we're taking lessons from Lance Armstrong now?

livedarklions

Break out the needles--party time!

Mojo31

Could have used them today.

Herzlos

Do you not find it suspicious that the people who'd have the biggest gain from following him, and the most investment, are also choosing to ignore him? Is there maybe something their R&D teams know that we don't?

I don't buy the idea that a rider in training would use a different, more efficient set up during training than in the races. I'd assume that if they were going to use different equipment, they'd be keen to make it harder for them rather than easier, to provide the biggest race day advantage. You wouldn't ride a track bike on a velodrome to train for a cyclocross race, would you?

Kapusta

OK, so please show us an example of one of their bikes that is set up like yours, and looks any different from road racing bikes sold today.

3alarmer 

.
...I have refrained from joining in this timtak festival thus far, because I really enjoyed watching the various near death experience videos he used to post in the road forum. I use that term "enjoyed" in the same way I enjoy watching car chases/ crashes in the movies. And there is the occasional Dukes of Hazzard rerun. I do not doubt for one minute that you can go faster on a bicycle if you flatten your position. I even think that with a return to a more formal yoga practice, I might be able to ride in that position.

I just don't get the visibility thing ? I just returned from one of my regular rides through downtown Sacramento, and even with the reduced traffic levels, I needed my head on a swivel to avoid all the various car encounters and intersectional misunderstandings. I enjoy the whole mirror prism glasses thing immensely, but in my environment here, I need a full field of vision, including peripheral, so I don't get killed...or maybe just maimed. I know that time trials stages are run differently from criterium stages for various reasons, but drafting is not the only one. If you showed up for a Cat 4 crit race here with aero bars on your bike, they wouldn't let you race, and it's not because the position is an unfair advantage due to aero efficiency. It's because you're dangerous to the other riders.

Anyway, I you timtak , and would never say anything mean to you. But I do worry about your personal safety sometimes. Maybe you are more fortunate over there in Japan, and the drivers care more about your well being. But if I tried to ride like that here, someone would flatten my ass pretty quickly.

timtak

I am not sure what input Cobb gave Armstrong and LeMond but apparently he was paid to advise them. I guess it may have been more time trial stuff where the aerodymics matters more than in the Peloton where drag is reduced drastically and therefore
peloton bikes are a very poor model for the solo rider.


I am a big fan. I recently bought his bike, with a "7" on it.

As I just mentioned, both Greg LeMond and Lance Armstrong paid him for his advice. Greg LeMond rode in a style not dissimilar to that of Robbie

Here is once of Greg Lemond's famous bikes. I was thinking of purchasing one like this recently but it did not have so many gears. Nice geometry and great colour though.

Greg LeMong's XLV aluminium butted carbon bike

Here is Greg LeMond and the man he beat Laurent Fignon

Here they are from a different angle


Drops not far about the front wheel, back pretty flat.
More pictures of John Cobb advised Greg LeMond here on these forums.
Does anyone have pics of Greg Lemond riding a non-time trial steel Bottecchia?

As far as I am aware the first bikes that I rode when I was at high school, and the ones I have gradually rediscovered and now ride again tend to put the riders back horizontal to the road, because in the days when the pro tour riders rode more like amateur riders (because there were MORE breakaways) that geometry was and remains fast, comfortable, and beautiful too.

Eddy Merxx bike (1970's?)


Moser 1970's

Pantini's aluminium bike with brifters.

The sweet spot for me (my look KG 386 and Madone 5.2) is the early 2000's when there were still short headtubes, horizontal top tubes and 10 speed brifters. I tend to need a higher seat because my belly is not as small as Robbie's and these pros. But as I get older and weaker, the desire for good aerodynamics increases.

I was not talking about training but time trials, which is generally only time that pros ride solo. (Hour records?)

Pros are a poor model for the amateur solo rider because when they ride solo they do so on cordoned off roads on specialist bikes ("Time trial bikes") that would be too dangerous in most on-road (with cars) situations. When they ride their "road bikes" they ride in times in pelotons so again they are a poor model for the amateur rider. But something between the two --- flat back with road bike bars -- as recommended by John Cobb would seem to be appropriate.

Why look any further than Robbie's bike which I have already shown you?

No chest parachute at all.
Cobb says "What causes this, the need to have a stem like this with this downward slop is because most of the companies nowdays make the bikes with real tall headtubes to make the bikes more comfortable. But what we find is for aggressive riding, and it doesn't have to be just racing, but when you are right and you want to ride a little harder, as you go down further it keeps taking weight off the seat and offf your hands. "

Thank you very much for your concern. You are 100% right.

The major drawback of flattening your position is that it reduces ones field of view, unless you crick your neck up.

I will try and keep my head up in town. I have some great straight wide country roads (google street view) to ride fast on. I will take some more video too.

Tim
m(._.)m

Herzlos

I'm pretty sure you mentioned training, but OK.

The bike goals for pros and amateur riders are completely different. Amateurs are largely riding for fun so generally favor comfort. No-one is going to do any riding if it's torture. As has been mentioned; the reason that most road bikes are more comfort oriented now is that's because that's what the buying public (i.e. amateur riders) want to buy. Sure, some could save a few watts by getting into a super uncomfortable aero position, but unless you are competing most people don't care.

No amateur needs to take a more aero stance than a pro rider.

timtak

My ride is comfortable, apart from a having to hold my neck up more than I would like from time to time.

I think that you underestimate how much we would like to go fast. That is why people pay so much money for the bikes are pros are riding (not because they think the pros are riding comfortable bikes).

You keep saying my position is uncomfortable. Why? Cobb says it is comfortable. Robbie looks comfortable. I feel comfortable. Lemond and Fignon don't look uncomfortable to me.

Where do you get this from? I suggest a correction
No amateur needs to a take a more aero stance than a pro rider when they are riding in a similar style, specifically
1) When I am riding on my own I do not need to be more aero dynamic than a pro on their own, in a time trial, with a lozenge shaped helmet, a body suit, hands about 12cm apart on bars that do not have brakes. Using a bike like that would be overdoing it for the solo amateur rider (unless they are doing a triathlon or on other roads with very little traffic).
2) When I am rding in a group (which I never do) I do not need to be more aero than a pro rider riding in a group.
But
3) When I am on my own I DO need/want to be more aerodynamic than a pro rider riding in a group because riding in a group drastically reduces the effect of aerodynamics, reducing wind resistance so much that they "hardly need to pedal to keep up" because their drag is commonly less than 20 % of a solo rider, and

“a cyclist situated in the belly of the peloton hardly has to pedal to move with the peloton and will have extremely low energy expenditure”

njkayaker

????

You keep implying that pro riders always ride in pelotons. That is, you keep implying that being aerodynamic isn't an advantage to a pro rider.

The pro riders actually trying to win the race have a strong incentive to be aerodynamic. They are also going faster than you are (meaning there's more benefit to being aerodynamic).

It makes no sense showing stuff about pelotons if you aren't talking about riding in a peloton.

(Not talking about time trials.)

timtak

I am not implying, but stating quite clearly, that aerodynamics is less important for those riding in group races, where riders often (not always) ride pelotons and sometimes (not never, not always, but far far less) ride in breakaways, than for myself because I am ALWAYS riding in a breakaway of ONE. I am always riding in a time trial.

Aerodynamics are important for a pro-rider riding in a peloton, but far, far less that an amateur rider who rides on their own.

The pro riders have strong incentive to be aerodynamic, and some of the ways that they achieve this is by using time trial bikes (and all the paraphernalia), getting a lead out train if they are sprinters, by riding in pace lines, in pelotons.

If you are not doing these (the above) things then you can pay a load of money for an aero bike, or you can lower your torso for 10 times the benefit of an ” aero bike" for next to no money.


It makes a lot of sense to show stuff about pelotons if you want to expose the fact that riding in a peloton is completely different from riding solo as most amateurs (that I am and see) do.

njkayaker

??? It can't be less important and more important at the same time. Anyway, you aren't racing (so, you aren't in a "breakaway" or a TT).

The cost and time necessary to be able to win a race says otherwise. An amateur rider is riding much slower. And it doesn't matter (it's not important) if they are a bit slower or not.

No one is arguing that riding in peloton is different. You aren't "exposing" anytthing.

GhostRider62

I can buy virtually any old "grail" bike in days. Nobody wants that old junk.

But try to find a 62 cm Dogma F within a year's wait. I hear top Trek bikes have similar waits.

Seems the market speaks.

ofajen

This is a perfect distillation of where you are stuck. This is clearly your opinion, but you state it as a fact. What is important to any particular amateur rider is for the rider to decide, and the vast majority simply don’t prioritize aerodynamics over all other considerations.

Otto

WhyFi

Humans evolved to become the undisputed kings of persistence hunting, wearing down prey that's otherwise physically superior. TimTak seems to be taking a page from that playbook with persistence ********ting; wearing down opposition from in a weak, unsupported position, with his sheer volume of unending nonsense. Kudos.

Kapusta

Persistence and stamina can get you far.

genejockey 

Interesting that the pros manage to accomplish flat backs with those tall "comfort bike" head tubes, and drops that don't put their hands at the level of the wheels, innit? I mean, if you look at Fignon and Lemond, you'll notice that their backs are pretty much level with their hands on the drops, but their forearms are angled downward. This is not as aerodynamic as level forearms, so the depth of their drops actually HINDERS them aerodynamically, compared to the shallower drops used today, on which, with the same HT length and stem, their forearms would be level. No need to go to anything as silly as that "Down Periscope" stem to achieve the flat level back.

And of course all the bikes he shows are small frames for little guys, so of course the bars are lower. But not a one of them has his silly downward-pointing castration device, either.

Sy Reene

Indeed, a nice article on the subject:
https://www.aero-coach.co.uk/uci-roa...n-aerodynamics

genejockey 

Mind you, the way they've foreshortened the Y axis on the bar chart exaggerates the improvement in CdA. But the key thing is that the difference in power at 30 kph (18 mph) is only about 10w vs 35w at 45kph (27 mph).

There's a 4 mile stretch of my usual route that is pretty much 2 miles up and 2 miles down a 2% gradient, with flattish bits on either side. When I'm going down those I'm usually in the drops, then I do aero hoods on the flats, because I'm usually going >25 mph. Going up, I'm usually on the hoods or the curve right behind, because I'm usually going more like 13-18 mph. The idea of doing the whole thing in the drops or aero hoods is simply nonsensical.

Kapusta

Because (unless I am mistaken) that is neither Greg LeMond nor Lance Armstrong.

tomato coupe

Yeah, why are we supposed to care what some local rider (i.e. Robbie) does with his setup?