wheel aerodynamic advantage

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:16:01 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Do you disagree that aerodynamic benefits are greatly reduced when
riding in a pack, or in a draft?

It's reduced in terms of total cost to energy output, but it is still
very important.


the problem is, it is the same for all other competitors

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:26:25 GMT, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:41:54 -0700, wrote:

I'm sorry, did you ask a question about wheel aerodynamics, in between
spewing insults?

In between spewing insults I asked you a question about your bona
fides to give advice about fast cycling and particularly racing.
Several times. You've asked me many questions that I've answered but
are so pathetic you can't even answer simple one's about yourself.

Typical passive agressive chicken stuff.

Cluck, cluck, cluck typical for you.

cheers deear er

Dear John,

Again, did you ask a question about wheel aerodynamics?

Or are you ranting and flailing and spewing insults?

Here's an example of addressing the question--why did you recommend
that a woman making $200,000 per year spend as much as she could
afford on wheels?

Do you just blindly assume that more expensive wheels go faster? Or do
you have some specifics that you didn't include in your rambling posts
about how to coach by income-level?

The original poster was thinking about some $200 wheels versus some
$900 wheels and wondering what either wheelset would do for him as he
tried to stay above 20.0 miles per hour on the flats.

You recommended the $900 wheels (or even more expensive ones)--why?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

On Nov 22, 9:37*am, M-gineering wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:

I'm not saying

the road racing advantage of more aero wheels is zero. *I'm saying
it's smaller than typical "tests" will claim, because those wheels
don't see the full force of wind during the vast majority of a race.
And I'm saying that even the reduced advantage very rarely determines
placing in a race.

This is where I think you are treading on thin ice. Riding in a pack
isn't a friendly parade, it is a brutal fight to keep position. You try
to recover, you loose your position and you find yourself fighting the
wind to reach a spot where you can shelter again. Anything which reduces
your resistance will be worthwhile, the more so if you're not very good
at this

People tell me that there is no serious penalty from using aero wheels
in a cross wind. If there is no penalty, then you would always want
an aero wheel --- assuming it is not boat anchor heavy or ridiculously
expensive or frail. At least for a race day wheel.

The deal with road racing is that there is usually a crunch time when
the pack breaks up -- often in an upwind section or on a climb. So
theoretically (and depending on the course), you should pick a wheel
that does those things well. IMO, it is the rare (and generally
negative) amateur road race where everyone huddles together until the
finishing sprint.

With that said, the guy who wins the race probably would have won
regardless of whether he was on aero wheels or 36 spoke OpenPros. You
know the guy -- he wins or places all the time until he gets a job or
a family. Then he goes away for ten years, gets back on the bike,
trains for a month and kicks your ass again. No magical wheels can
protect you against that guy. -- Jay Beattie.

"Jay Beattie" wrote in message
...
On Nov 22, 9:37 am, M-gineering wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:

I'm not saying

the road racing advantage of more aero wheels is zero. I'm saying
it's smaller than typical "tests" will claim, because those wheels
don't see the full force of wind during the vast majority of a race.
And I'm saying that even the reduced advantage very rarely determines
placing in a race.

This is where I think you are treading on thin ice. Riding in a pack
isn't a friendly parade, it is a brutal fight to keep position. You try
to recover, you loose your position and you find yourself fighting the
wind to reach a spot where you can shelter again. Anything which reduces
your resistance will be worthwhile, the more so if you're not very good
at this

People tell me that there is no serious penalty from using aero wheels
in a cross wind. If there is no penalty, then you would always want
an aero wheel --- assuming it is not boat anchor heavy or ridiculously
expensive or frail. At least for a race day wheel.

The deal with road racing is that there is usually a crunch time when
the pack breaks up -- often in an upwind section or on a climb. So
theoretically (and depending on the course), you should pick a wheel
that does those things well. IMO, it is the rare (and generally
negative) amateur road race where everyone huddles together until the
finishing sprint.

With that said, the guy who wins the race probably would have won
regardless of whether he was on aero wheels or 36 spoke OpenPros. You
know the guy -- he wins or places all the time until he gets a job or
a family. Then he goes away for ten years, gets back on the bike,
trains for a month and kicks your ass again. No magical wheels can
protect you against that guy. -- Jay Beattie.

One clear situation that just about begs aero wheels, during a race, is when
you face a good gap to the leaders and wish to bridge it. Such efforts can
last 15 seconds or 15 minutes, and one has no benefit at all from the pack,
which is distant. Then, if you can manage to join the leaders, the aero
advantage may give just enough % respite to conserve a modicum of energy.
Krygowski just hasn't the experience of racing, wanting to place higher than
last, so this all means little to him.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:26:25 GMT, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:41:54 -0700, wrote:

I'm sorry, did you ask a question about wheel aerodynamics, in between
spewing insults?

In between spewing insults I asked you a question about your bona
fides to give advice about fast cycling and particularly racing.
Several times. You've asked me many questions that I've answered but
are so pathetic you can't even answer simple one's about yourself.

Typical passive agressive chicken stuff.

Cluck, cluck, cluck typical for you.

cheers deear er

Dear John,

Again, did you ask a question about wheel aerodynamics?

Or are you ranting and flailing and spewing insults?

Here's an example of addressing the question--why did you recommend
that a woman making $200,000 per year spend as much as she could
afford on wheels?

Do you just blindly assume that more expensive wheels go faster? Or do
you have some specifics that you didn't include in your rambling posts
about how to coach by income-level?

The original poster was thinking about some $200 wheels versus some
$900 wheels and wondering what either wheelset would do for him as he
tried to stay above 20.0 miles per hour on the flats.

You recommended the $900 wheels (or even more expensive ones)--why?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

I don't think JT ranted, flailed or spewed. He did, however, insult you.
Well deserved insults, when you pretend to know something you simply don't
understand.

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Nov 22, 12:37 pm, M-gineering wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:

I'm not saying

the road racing advantage of more aero wheels is zero. I'm saying
it's smaller than typical "tests" will claim, because those wheels
don't see the full force of wind during the vast majority of a race.
And I'm saying that even the reduced advantage very rarely determines
placing in a race.
This is where I think you are treading on thin ice. Riding in a pack
isn't a friendly parade, it is a brutal fight to keep position.

Well, sometimes it is. But I get your point.

You try
to recover, you loose your position and you find yourself fighting the
wind to reach a spot where you can shelter again. Anything which reduces
your resistance will be worthwhile, the more so if you're not very good
at this

I understand (and remember) that you sometimes have to jump to stay
with the pack. I'm trying to quantify things.

Think of it this way: During a typical race, what percentage of the
time would you guess you're in that mode, trying to bridge a gap or
otherwise get back into some shelter from the wind? If you're doing
that even 10% of the time, you're either out of your league VOmax-
wise, or your riding strategy is terrible. 1% is more likely. The
rest of the time, the aero benefit is much less than what's
advertised.


for a racer the percentages are immaterial: stop pedalling for 10
seconds at the wrong time in a 6 hour race and you're a DNF


If fancy wheels benefit you 2% during even 10% of the time, but
because of others' draft your wheels benefit you only 1% the rest of
the time, the overall benefit is a lot closer to 1% than to 2%.

And if you really want to pay attention only to the time you're trying
to bridge a gap, how often have you failed to bridge a gap by that
small of a margin? Think about that... "Oh, I've almost got his
wheel... just three more feet... just two more... rats, I can't make
that last two feet!"

I think that's rare.

Define rare. For most racers it will be less rare than winning!

And I think that if you _did_ bridge like that,
he's still very, very likely to beat you in the sprint.

I's say you've never met sprinters. Draw a line somewhere and even the
dead ones will find reserves to outsprint the non-sprinters!

And a purely technical test is worthless, as you'd be ignoring the
psychology!

I'll definitely admit that psychology is something else. Placebos are
damned powerful!

That's why I suggested hiring a college student advertising major to
feed you convincing ads for cheap stuff.

Let's see: Teflon-enriched wax for your spokes, to reduce friction
drag through the air. $5 per bottle. Believe!

at best you'll make $5. How about ceramic bearings
--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

On Nov 22, 10:28*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Nov 22, 12:37*pm, M-gineering wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

I'm not saying

the road racing advantage of more aero wheels is zero. *I'm saying
it's smaller than typical "tests" will claim, because those wheels
don't see the full force of wind during the vast majority of a race.
And I'm saying that even the reduced advantage very rarely determines
placing in a race.

This is where I think you are treading on thin ice. Riding in a pack
isn't a friendly parade, it is a brutal fight to keep position.

Well, sometimes it is. *But I get your point.

You try
to recover, you loose your position and you find yourself fighting the
wind to reach a spot where you can shelter again. Anything which reduces
your resistance will be worthwhile, the more so if you're not very good
at this

I understand (and remember) that you sometimes have to jump to stay
with the pack. *I'm trying to quantify things.

Think of it this way: *During a typical race, what percentage of the
time would you guess you're in that mode, trying to bridge a gap or
otherwise get back into some shelter from the wind? *If you're doing
that even 10% of the time, you're either out of your league VOmax-
wise, or your riding strategy is terrible. *1% is more likely. *The
rest of the time, the aero benefit is much less than what's
advertised.

If fancy wheels benefit you 2% during even 10% of the time, but
because of others' draft your wheels benefit you only 1% the rest of
the time, the overall benefit is a lot closer to 1% than to 2%.

It is true that measuring the benefit (if any) is hard or impossible,
but that 10% of the time that there is a potential benefit is the time
that matters. It is the wheat/chaff time. However, no magical wheels
will keep you in if you don't have the basic horsepower to go with the
move. If you do, then a lighter or more aero wheel may allow you to
stay with the move until it settles down -- maybe not. And if you are
there at the end, magical wheels may allow you to pass the anaerobic
guy next to you. You may win a tire or a water bottle -- or a dorky
medal. I once won a whole case of potato chips in a race sponsored by
Kettle Chips! My wife won a bunch of Nancy's Yoghurt that season,
too. We were living large! -- Jay Beattie.

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 11:50:49 -0700, wrote:

Again, did you ask a question about wheel aerodynamics?

Or are you ranting and flailing and spewing insults?

Here's an example of addressing the question--why did you recommend
that a woman making $200,000 per year spend as much as she could
afford on wheels?

Do you just blindly assume that more expensive wheels go faster? Or do
you have some specifics that you didn't include in your rambling posts
about how to coach by income-level?


The original poster was thinking about some $200 wheels versus some
$900 wheels and wondering what either wheelset would do for him as he
tried to stay above 20.0 miles per hour on the flats.

You recommended the $900 wheels (or even more expensive ones)--why?

Wow. You've just asked me at least six questions from you to me, most
or all of which I've already answered. I'll answer a couple more
below, but have to again point out your complete cowardice in not
answering any of my questions to you about your experience in
competive cycling as a participant or coach. You're a coward. A
passive aggresive coward. PS - calling you a douche is an insult.
Calling you a passive aggressive coward in the face of your persistent
questioning combined with your ignoring my questions is not really an
insult anymore -- it's just a description.

Or do
you have some specifics that you didn't include in your rambling posts
about how to coach by income-level?

I don't "coach by income level" whatever that means. But in giving
advice about what to spend money on the best advice has to take into
consideration ( or help the person receiving the advice take into
consideration) take into account costs and benefits.

So yeah, what I'd tell someone on a tight budge to spend money on and
what I'd tell somone on an unlimited budget to spend money on differ.

So how about it Carl. What basis do you have to make any sort of
judgements about bike racing equipment? Do you have any experinece of
any sort of success in bike racing as a coach or rider?

That's two questions. Can you answer them. I think I know the answer,
but woudl like to hear you say it.

Cluck cluck cluck dear er

Do you just blindly assume that more expensive wheels go faster?

No.

But deep rims are generally faster and the deep rims that are less
expensive (Neuvations and some less-known stuff) have less of a known
track record in terms of durability/strength so if someone can afford
it, in the absense of better info, the more well known brands like
Zipp is probably a better choice.

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 19:38:05 +0100, M-gineering
wrote:

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:16:01 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Do you disagree that aerodynamic benefits are greatly reduced when
riding in a pack, or in a draft?

It's reduced in terms of total cost to energy output, but it is still
very important.


the problem is, it is the same for all other competitors

Yeah. It's an arms race at times. Sometimes I think it would be good
if there were rules to keep stuff cheaper -- like only metal rims that
are not deep.....

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 19:38:05 +0100, M-gineering
wrote:

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:16:01 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Do you disagree that aerodynamic benefits are greatly reduced when
riding in a pack, or in a draft?
It's reduced in terms of total cost to energy output, but it is still
very important.

the problem is, it is the same for all other competitors

Yeah. It's an arms race at times. Sometimes I think it would be good
if there were rules to keep stuff cheaper -- like only metal rims that
are not deep.....

butbutbut, that goes against "Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday"!

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.