On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 5:42:20 AM UTC+2, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 11:14:20 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/17/2019 12:57 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

A 22 lb bike and a 190 lb lard-assed rider makes that 2 lb difference only 0.01% difference in weight and the truth is that lifting that weight up the climbs is far overshadowed by the high speed frictional drag of the body. I could more than off-set that difference by riding on the drops downhill and on the flats if it wasn't so uncomfortable to an old broken down body.


I agree. The effect of a couple pounds of weight is tiny.

...

What these numbers tell to me is that the only real advantage of the carbon fiber bikes is that they are more aero and so you can hold a higher speed into a headwind.

I think the same logic applies to the aerodynamics of the bike frame.
Yes, there are bikes that are designed to be more aerodynamic. But the
great bulk of the air drag comes from the rider. It makes no sense to
measure the reduced drag of the frame alone, any more than to compare a
20 pound bike with an 18 pound bike and say "It's 10% lighter, I should
go 10% faster!"

Aero wheels will be a bit faster, but colossally expensive. And I expect
their advantage could be swamped by the effect of wearing a jersey that
flaps a bit because it's a little too loose in the shoulders.


--
- Frank Krygowski

I often wonder just how much of the aero advantages offered by many components actually is when coupled with t he churned up air created by the bicyclist. My guess is that if the bicyclist is NOT pedaling then the aerodynamic benefits of many things might be a bit greater than if pedaling is occurring.

Cheers

TOUR magazine measures aero drag with a dummy pedalling on the tested bike.

Lou