TOUR MAG AERO TEST 2016

[GT56]

cool, but would have been truly perfect with the 404's in the caynon

[nathanong87]

words

boxed rims vs zipp 404s doe.

[knukkeltje]

cool, but would have been truly perfect with the 404's in the caynon

Yep. I just wanted to do this test on both ends of the spectrum of the bikes, but indeed it'd be a nice experiment to isolate the influence of the 404's.
I'm sure I'll give that a try the next few weeks.

[MRM]

Thanks for the effort and data, knukkeltje. Chapeau!

[bm0p700f]

I take it you positions are identical on the three bikes because if they are not then that could be the 10% right there. I know on my new aero road bike my position is a bit lower so the pace increase I noticed today could be down to that bit I am sure the bike has a part to play how much though I cant say for certain.

[53x12]

Can you list the bikes tested

Read the thread. First page.

[RyanH]

What speed was the drag calculated at? The wattage seems too low for 40kph.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[kgt]

@ knukkeltje
Although position, wheels etc. are important, as others have said, this is practically a 6km, flat, individual tt. No one doubts that tts need tt bikes.
We are discussing the benefit of an aero frame in an actual road race with many kms, climbing, teams, tactics etc (not to mention a multiple day event like a Tour).
@ Frankie - b
Sorry but if you believe that all others except me are adding 'valuable data' I' d like to hear it. Unless by 'vauable data' you mean data that supports the sales of aero components. No, that I won't add.

[jekyll man]

At the end of the day, in a road race, you dont need to "smash" the opposition, just be in front of them

For the majority, where you are not racing, including you kgt, a more aero frame will enable you to do the rides you do, faster/ for less energy used. Are you so blinkered you dont want to even see that? Thats what the tests show.

@knukkeltje- you'd really need a few runs on each variant to make sure you're getting consitent data.

[knukkeltje]

@ knukkeltje
Although position, wheels etc. are important, as others have said, this is practically a 6km, flat, individual tt. No one doubts that tts need tt bikes.
We are discussing the benefit of an aero frame in an actual road race with many kms, climbing, teams, tactics etc (not to mention a multiple day event like a Tour).

Another data point:

Last Saturday I did an old man’s crit on the Canyon. We race on a small 1.5km circuit which has ~8 corners (some wide, some 90deg). Racing distance is approx. 38km.

- This race went with an average of 37.2 km/h. I'm not really in shape yet, so I stayed hidden in the peloton most of the time. Weighted Average power was 220W
- Same crit last year (on the Venge) where I was in better shape, did my work in the front and tried to break away a couple of times. Average speed was 37.2km/h and the weighted average power was 256W
(Strava and Trainingpeaks data available)

Obviously, the data shows what everybody knows… If you stay hidden in the peloton, you need less power, about 35W in this particular case
So combining the races and yesterday’s experiment, I am 100% sure that I would have used a lot more power, had I ridden last year’s race on the Canyon.
Also, for sure I would have used less power this Saturday’s race, had I ridden on the Venge.
You cannot just ignore these numbers.

That said, I cannot imagine any type of riding/racing where the Canyon would be the faster bike for me.
It’s cheaper if I crash, but will never be faster than the Venge (it’s also less comfortable btw).

So why would a CG rider still ride a non aero frame? There may be a (small) differences in vertical compliance, stiffness or weight, but I do not believe the advantage (if at all) of these parameters is bigger than the actual aero benefits. So I guess he rides it because he is protected ALL the time and only has to make a difference during steep climbs and TT’s (for which he pays a lot of attention to aero details). Also, you cannot underestimate the psychological effect of parting from a trusted bike on which one already has won many races.

I believe that aero always matters.

Just my 2 cts

[knukkeltje]

@knukkeltje- you'd really need a few runs on each variant to make sure you're getting consitent data.

Yes, I probably will expand it a bit, but the main objective was to measure the current crit setup against the Venge.
The numbers confirmed my feeling on the bikes.

[53x12]

Sorry but if you believe that all others except me are adding 'valuable data' I' d like to hear it. Unless by 'vauable data' you mean data that supports the sales of aero components. No, that I won't add.

People are asking you to provide data the supports your opinion that aero components have no use and goes against their "support of sales." Give us some objective data, rather than rhetoric. You haven't provided anything of value to this subject.

[RyanH]

@kgt, if you're in general agreement that in an individual pursuit, these frames will be of benefit, then I'm confused why the course of conversation is what it is? Maybe it's because you don't race but I can provide clear examples of situations that come up and approximate a similar need as in an individual pursuit (we'll forget about the supposed benefits one is still to get in the peloton).

For example, if you're racing on a team, in let's say a crit, if your teammate is in a break, your jobs becomes to control the speed of the pack. So, if I'm working with two other people to keep the race at 45 kph or so, the claimed difference between efforts on my pulls is zone 5 (with aero) and zone 6 (without). One I can do for most of the crit and still be contest the pack finish, the other will zap me eventually.

Another example, if I want to bridge up in a road race to a break and I know I have to do about 48kph to catch, my frame choice is going to be the difference between being able to hold that power for 4 or 5 minutes or up to 10 with the aero frame.

Racing is not just sitting in the peloton the entire time. Further, almost no amateur gets to do a tour like race. If anything, I think you're being distracted by trying to view it as a whole with every variable without consideration that there are many use cases that most racers (ones that have a chance of winning) will encounter throughout a normal amateur race.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[kgt]

@53x12
After so many pages and you still cannot even read what I am writing. You do it on purpose I guess... My opinion is not that "aero components have no use" but that their use and advantage is very limited in races other than flat tts, track etc.
I don't have to prove something that becomes obvious in every single road race, from amateur to pro level (Sagan just lost a sprint on his venge btw). If some people need to be fed with 'data' in order not to use their brain that is their problem.

@RyanH
Although in theory you are right, in practice that is not the case. How many amateur riders that you know have lost a race because their frame was not aero enough? How many trainers that you know tell you "if you want to be faster you better buy an aero frame"?
What I am saying is that if your aero frame is not that comfortable, if it becomes tiring after x kms, if your frame's handling is not that great, if descending on it makes you feel nervous, if when climbing it feels more sluggish etc. etc. all these make you slower. So all this aero advantage can be lost in a few minutes. Even not liking your frame's 'feel' is something that can make you slower (subjective or not, psychology is extremely important in sports). I know a lot of cyclist competting at an amateur level that bough a Venge (the previous one) or an S5 (the previous one) and sold 'em after a few months because they could never feel nice on these bikes.
You may say that there are modern aero frames that do everything well. Sure there are. Contador may have chosen an Aeroad or a Madone if riding for another team. My main objection is that measuring the aero performance of a bike (which is something extremely complicated and questionable by itself) cannot tell you how fast a frame is on an actual race. Certainly the claims of several minutes gained in a 100km course are false IMO.

[RyanH]

Kgt, I agree with all of those points of concern. I had a chance to buy a Venge and passed it over because of the harsh ride. So yes, I absolutely agree with that. The question becomes, are any of these new wonder frames coming close to the comfort and handling of what traditional shaped frames offer currently offer? That's a fair question.

The best we can do is do a long demo with our own wheels. If we can't do that, we have to rely on the feedback of others and the bicycle rags. The magazines we have to read between the lines and the others we have to guage how sensitive they are to ride comfort and handling. I think there's quite a few on here that find the caad 10 comfortable.

I haven't ridden the new frames, and I suppose you haven't either. While it's important to keep those factors in mind, we can't carte blanche label them as not up to par based solely on intuition and then immediately discount the possible gains.

I'm a bit prissy when it comes to ride quality. Hopefully I'll get my hands on an S5 in a few months and can report back.


Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk