aero wheels

[etu]

interesting video
not necessarily scientific since it is only one rider and one trial, but a rider at 25mph was able to last @ 30 minutes longer at this speed on a zipp 808 vs a low profile rim. would be nice if GCN put more effort into these interesting trials with more repetitions, more riders, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUdC3mrHcc8

[echappist]

interesting video
not necessarily scientific since it is only one rider and one trial, but a rider at 25mph was able to last @ 30 minutes longer at this speed on a zipp 808 vs a low profile rim. would be nice if GCN put more effort into these interesting trials with more repetitions, more riders, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUdC3mrHcc8

complete BS. Garbage in, Garbage out.

those pseudo-scientific speed tests are quite misleading. 9% (380 to 345) in savings due to wheels alone at 41kph when wheels usually save ~18W at 30 mph (and more like 13W at 41 kph)? I'm calling BS here

we have no idea if wind changed significantly or if he held his position substantially the same for both trials. There's a chance that wind was particularly high that day, thus increasing the yaw angle and magnifying the savings from the aero wheels, but if that were the case, why wasn't the prevailing wind direction reported?

[tuscanyswe]

Those types of videos feels like comercials to me. Just the possing of the wheels at the start of the video alone, not to mention the results..

[beeatnik]

Only cats who get paid to ride benefit from aero deep profile carbon wheels. Oh, and tri-dorks.

[Cicli]

They do have a "look cool" benefit. ;)

[beeatnik]

They do have a "look cool" benefit. ;)

Tru dat

[spacemen3]

NSW -- New Sucker Wheels? :). The fact remains that I'm too poor to find out for myself if there is a significant difference, and I'm OK with that.

[Ralph]

My problem with reports like that is that few folks still ride the old style low profile hi spoke count aluminum rims of the past that are always compared to. So sure....some of those latest greatest wheels are probably faster than those old wheels at 25 MPH.

But most of us ride more modern wheels now, and few of us can ride 25 MPH very long on a level road. So for most of us......just how much better are the latest greatest wheels compared to say.....some Campy Zonda's or Eurus or Shamils.....popular aluminum wheels lots of us ride?

And.....some of these latest greatest wheels show their advantage in a tubular design......not the more popular clincher designs most of us ride. And....I rode tubulars for more than 30 years.....never going back. I'm very satisfied with Campy Zonda's for every day riding.

[EDS]

Aero wheel advantages are real and they are spectacular.

[velomonkey]

Aero wheels work and that was a decent honest review - there is a huge but in there, though.

First, anyone who rides with power knows there is a big difference in effort at 30 watts. At some point a 30 watt difference means 20 minute or it means high tempo. So no surprise there.

Second, anyone who is fast and rides aero knows that aero wheels don't really kick in till around 20mph - the faster you go the more they are gonna help continent your not in a big pack.

So basically what did GCN did was took zipp 808 wheels and used them in their best setting possible - flat roads to show their biggest effect - i.e., look I could only hold this speed for 20 minutes with regular wheels but with 808s it was a lot longer. Really no surprise.

You'd think "wow, 35 free watts and like 3 mph more - for free, I should get these wheels. Why isn't everyone riding them."

One word: hills.

Take that same test and use a set of, say, 35mm bora wheels against 808 wheels and have them go up a 20 minute climb and then decent. The gains of the 808 would quickly be reversed.

You got a flat TT or crit - sure, the 808 is "fast" wheel, throw a hill in there and that "fast" badge quickly gets re-examined.

[Shortsocks]

Aero wheels work and that was a decent honest review - there is a huge but in there, though.

First, anyone who rides with power knows there is a big difference in effort at 30 watts. At some point a 30 watt difference means 20 minute or it means high tempo. So no surprise there.

Second, anyone who is fast and rides aero knows that aero wheels don't really kick in till around 20mph - the faster you go the more they are gonna help continent your not in a big pack.

So basically what did GCN did was took zipp 808 wheels and used them in their best setting possible - flat roads to show their biggest effect - i.e., look I could only hold this speed for 20 minutes with regular wheels but with 808s it was a lot longer. Really no surprise.

You'd think "wow, 35 free watts and like 3 mph more - for free, I should get these wheels. Why isn't everyone riding them."

One word: hills.

Take that same test and use a set of, say, 35mm bora wheels against 808 wheels and have them go up a 20 minute climb and then decent. The gains of the 808 would quickly be reversed.

You got a flat TT or crit - sure, the 808 is "fast" wheel, throw a hill in there and that "fast" badge quickly gets re-examined.

I agree with you 100%. The benefit for me on a super deep wheel is void because of my weight. At 132-35, anything deeper than a 50mm causes me to become a death trap. Crosswinds jitters. I hate it. I ride a 38mm and love it. And yes, it's benifits really come in at 21mph++. But Aero for me is deff effective, and anything above a 38mm sucks for climbing.

[echappist]

Aero wheel advantages are real and they are spectacular.

define spectacular. how much decrease in CdA are we talking about, or if you prefer, how many watts at 30 mph? Look at any wind tunnel testing, and you'll see that from -5 to 5 deg yaw, the savings are minimal, around 15W at 30 mph (the savings vary with cube of speed)

no one says it isn't real, but there's a good reason why aero wheels are so far down the lines of consideration when optimizing TT positions

Aero wheels work and that was a decent honest review - there is a huge but in there, though.

honest, i can give you that; decent? unlikely

First, anyone who rides with power knows there is a big difference in effort at 30 watts. At some point a 30 watt difference means 20 minute or it means high tempo. So no surprise there.

no one is doubting that. i am doubting a 30 watt saving at 41 kph though, coming from aero wheels, alone. (or 48 Watt at 30 mph). that's beyond fantastical

Second, anyone who is fast and rides aero knows that aero wheels don't really kick in till around 20mph - the faster you go the more they are gonna help continent your not in a big pack.

please cite any credible source saying that aero advantage doesn't kick in until 20 mph. you may not feel it, but the advantage is there. the advantage is there once you are moving. the issue is how much is the saving

also, 20 mph relative to what?

So basically what did GCN did was took zipp 808 wheels and used them in their best setting possible - flat roads to show their biggest effect - i.e., look I could only hold this speed for 20 minutes with regular wheels but with 808s it was a lot longer. Really no surprise.

You'd think "wow, 35 free watts and like 3 mph more - for free, I should get these wheels. Why isn't everyone riding them."

people should ride aero wheels, but not because of the faulty reasoning you just provided, and certainly not because of some hack experiment GCN performed

One word: hills.

Take that same test and use a set of, say, 35mm bora wheels against 808 wheels and have them go up a 20 minute climb and then decent. The gains of the 808 would quickly be reversed.

You got a flat TT or crit - sure, the 808 is "fast" wheel, throw a hill in there and that "fast" badge quickly gets re-examined.

again just very very wrong. it depends on the slope of the hill and how much power you can generate. you yourself just said that higher the speed, higher the gains. usually the tradeoff comes at ~12mph.

there's so much incorrect assertions here that i doubt you know how aerodynamics works even in layman's terms

[Shortsocks]

define spectacular. how much decrease in CdA are we talking about, or if you prefer, how many watts at 30 mph? Look at any wind tunnel testing, and you'll see that from -5 to 5 deg yaw, the savings are minimal, around 15W at 30 mph (the savings vary with cube of speed)

no one says it isn't real, but there's a good reason why aero wheels are so far down the lines of consideration when optimizing TT positions


honest, i can give you that; decent? unlikely

no one is doubting that. i am doubting a 30 watt saving at 41 kph though, coming from aero wheels, alone. (or 48 Watt at 30 mph). that's beyond fantastical

please cite any credible source saying that aero advantage doesn't kick in until 20 mph. you may not feel it, but the advantage is there. the advantage is there once you are moving. the issue is how much is the saving

also, 20 mph relative to what?

people should ride aero wheels, but not because of the faulty reasoning you just provided, and certainly not because of some hack experiment GCN performed


again just very very wrong. it depends on the slope of the hill and how much power you can generate. you yourself just said that higher the speed, higher the gains. usually the tradeoff comes at ~12mph.

there's so much incorrect assertions here that i doubt you know how aerodynamics works even in layman's terms

Wow. That's a lot of In depth quoting & In depth responses! Wowsers buddy. I think you forgot to put in footnotes and Citations. I think you may be the Travis Tygart of Paceline! :banana:

[nm87710]

there's so much incorrect assertions here that i doubt you know how aerodynamics works even in layman's terms

+1

Caveat Lector - Many of the technical, scientific and performance oriented posts 'round here unintentionally misinform. The rest are quite good. Figuring out which is which...priceless.

[Joachim]

+1

Caveat Lector - Many of the technical, scientific and performance oriented posts 'round here unintentionally misinform. The rest are quite good. Figuring out which is which...priceless.

Finally someone says it.

[thegunner]

thanks jim, for being the science nerd cyclist friend i need to have :)

Second, anyone who is fast and rides aero knows that aero wheels don't really kick in till around 20mph - the faster you go the more they are gonna help continent your not in a big pack.

drag doesn't work this way. drag is universal, it doesn't go away unless you're not moving and there's no wind.

[beeatnik]

Would former US Masters Road and Crit Champion Nick Sorenson (Brandt-Sorenson) have 50 pages of KOMs (instead of 39) if he rode deep carbon? A Strava KOM is a TT right?

https://www.strava.com/athletes/1799223


https://instagram.com/p/7TE7n1q0hG/?taken-by=thorfinnsassquatch
https://instagram.com/p/6skLxpK0rk/?taken-by=thorfinnsassquatch

At least he rides Campy....
https://instagram.com/p/mdeYMGK0qF/?taken-by=thorfinnsassquatch

[Bstone]

Not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone here.

But, the trouble with the science that surrounds cycling is always wrapped up in and fairly hard to distinguish from marketing.

Companies release "data" that supports their products. Even the word data is incorrect in this context.

Usually, within the context of science, data is understood to mean numbers or information that derives from a controlled and peer reviewed experiment.

If you really look hard for information that meets this standard, you will find very little.

But there are several reasons why the toroidal, aero wheel should work (yes I have a pair).

[Uncle Jam's Army]

^ I have a paunch that could generously be described as toroidal. Does that make my torso more aero than the skinny SOB's on the Pro Tour?

[thegunner]

^ I have a paunch that could generously be described as toroidal. Does that make my torso more aero than the skinny SOB's on the Pro Tour?

better in the crosswinds :)

[Shortsocks]

better in the crosswinds :)

100% right. Its better in Crosswinds...Anyone want to volunteer some of those
toroidal Stomachs to me? :eek:

[ultraman6970]

Isn't Nick Sorenson the guy that when out for doping a few years back?

[shovelhd]

My crit wheels are Zipp 606. Super fast, but not light. For races with high wind or where weight matters I use HED Stinger 3. Very fast and light. I am not paid to race but that's a stupid metric to judge what racers want to race with.

[beeatnik]

^You get paid when you win...socks, primes and all.

[54ny77]

What's more pathetic than 50 pages of Strava whatever's?

A busted masters doper.

What an f'ing loser.

Would former US Masters Road and Crit Champion Nick Sorenson (Brandt-Sorenson) have 50 pages of KOMs (instead of 39) if he rode deep carbon? A Strava KOM is a TT right?

https://www.strava.com/athletes/1799223


https://instagram.com/p/7TE7n1q0hG/?taken-by=thorfinnsassquatch
https://instagram.com/p/6skLxpK0rk/?taken-by=thorfinnsassquatch

At least he rides Campy....
https://instagram.com/p/mdeYMGK0qF/?taken-by=thorfinnsassquatch

[cv1966]

No scientific evidence to quote but I am definitely faster riding my HED Stinger 50's than my Ardennes. Yes the stingers are lighter but that doesn't really help much on the flats when trying to close a gap.

[oldpotatoe]

Aero wheels work and that was a decent honest review - there is a huge but in there, though.

First, anyone who rides with power knows there is a big difference in effort at 30 watts. At some point a 30 watt difference means 20 minute or it means high tempo. So no surprise there.

Second, anyone who is fast and rides aero knows that aero wheels don't really kick in till around 20mph - the faster you go the more they are gonna help continent your not in a big pack.

So basically what did GCN did was took zipp 808 wheels and used them in their best setting possible - flat roads to show their biggest effect - i.e., look I could only hold this speed for 20 minutes with regular wheels but with 808s it was a lot longer. Really no surprise.

You'd think "wow, 35 free watts and like 3 mph more - for free, I should get these wheels. Why isn't everyone riding them."

One word: hills.

Take that same test and use a set of, say, 35mm bora wheels against 808 wheels and have them go up a 20 minute climb and then decent. The gains of the 808 would quickly be reversed.

You got a flat TT or crit - sure, the 808 is "fast" wheel, throw a hill in there and that "fast" badge quickly gets re-examined.

Reality, what a concept. BUT the marketeers hate you.

[Cicli]

Isn't Nick Sorenson the guy that when out for doping a few years back?

Yep.

http://www.usacycling.org/masters-cyclist-sorenson-accepts-anti-doping-sanction.htm

[earlfoss]

Deep aero wheels are a great choice for flat to rolling terrain. They are lousy to spin up but if you get out in a 3-6 man breakaway and keep the pace steady and high, you've got an actual advantage. I did a few rr's with a set and could definitely tell a difference. There are disadvantages like weight if the course has any steeper climbs, and handling them in strong crosswinds can be a challenge in a pack situation. They are a great tool but if you choose to race with them, get lots of miles on them solo and in group ride settings so that you aren't learning those things on race day!

[velomonkey]

there's so much incorrect assertions here that i doubt you know how aerodynamics works even in layman's terms

blah, blah, blah, blah

Drag depends on the properties the size, shape, and speed of the object - or to phrase it another way - it doesn't really kick in till around 20mph.

Bro, put some wheels on your bike and go for a ride and ease off. Let me get this straight - you didn't like video, but my response isn't harsh or technical enough????

Whatever, man.

[Wesley37]

Aero wheel advantages are real and they are spectacular.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/06/cf/18/06cf18dd8759e60bb1e42d311d5b8e52.jpg

[thirdgenbird]

I've had a rough morning, but that^^^^ went a long ways to make it better.

[velomonkey]

drag doesn't work this way. drag is universal, it doesn't go away unless you're not moving and there's no wind.

Another one that can't read: where, anywhere, did I say there is NO aero advantage. I didn't. You just hopped on with your bro and acted all blippedy blip - I only said the faster you go the more benefit you get - the 20mph reference point was that the advantage under 20mph is negligible - not that it isn't there - since I don't ride my bike in a wind tunnel it's not linear - you might ride your bike in a wind tunnel, that I can totally see, but I don't. I go outside and ride with people and sometimes I strap on a number and try to get my bike across the line before the other people with numbers strapped to them.

Let me put it to you this way - I've never had a physics class in my life - I will bet my real donuts to your real dollars that I my understanding of the real world use of aero wheels is better than yours (cue banana) :banana:

[Joachim]

puberty and mid life crisis = same thing on a bike forum?

[redir]

I honestly could never tell a difference when riding my aero wheels then my box section wheels but they do sound cool on the road. I'm guessing they don't matter too much when you are wheel sucking in a field anyway but off the front is another story on paper anyway. I can't tell.

BTW as much as I have loved that show I missed the Seinfeld reference?

[thegunner]

I only said the faster you go the more benefit you get - the 20mph reference point was that the advantage under 20mph is negligible

that's simply not true though. you gain less as a fraction of overall drag force, but because you're going slower and spending more time covering the same distance, the time you gain might as well be equivalent. sure, if you're plodding along at 12 mph, i would certainly believe that cRR plays a larger part in the amount of energy expenditure, but at 15? i'm still going to say that aero isn't negligible even to the guy who only goes out on weekends.

blanket statements are bad, science is good.

[velomonkey]

i'm still going to say that aero isn't negligible even to the guy who only goes out on weekends.


"isn't negligible" so aero is not not significant to the the guy who only goes out on weekends.

Yea, science is good. You know what else is good? Words.

So if you and I do a TT - me on box rims and you on aero wheels - and I beat you - does that make you Not Not Slow or does that make me Not Not Fast?

[velomonkey]

Aero in the real world as it relates to bikes as by Bike Snob

"Sucking at riding bikes is not measured in seconds, or even minutes. It's measured in an overall lack of accomplishment and an overarching narrative of suckitude that runs through your cycling career. Saying you suck less than some other sucky Fred because you finished a race a few seconds sooner than he did is like saying you're richer than your neighbor because you both have the same car but yours has those moronic stick-on air vents on it."

[nm87710]

puberty and mid life crisis = same thing on a bike forum?

:)

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." - Mark Twain

[echappist]

blah, blah, blah, blah

Drag depends on the properties the size, shape, and speed of the object
not going to engage you on the merits of discussion (not as if there is any here) until you define how you use the term drag.

are you talking about intrinsic drag properties or the drag force encountered by an object? when you mention size, shape, and then speed, two of these don't belong in the same list as the other


- or to phrase it another way - it doesn't really kick in till around 20mph.

Define 20 mph. we talking absolute ground speed or relative speed to air?

What about wind condition? is this 20 mph in a vacuum or with wind?

At last, define "doesn't really kick in." What doesn't really kick in? The aero savings? Your perception of aero savings? Or something else?

And how does it not really kick in? We talking step function where if you are at 19 mph it doesn't kick in, but after some magical number, it does?

You yourself said words are good. If so, it behooves you to choose your words carefully so that we know what you mean rather than you using phrases with vague meanings so you can hide behind whatever definition you feel convenient to your argument.


Bro, put some wheels on your bike and go for a ride and ease off.

do please keep hurling ad hominems

Let me get this straight - you didn't like video, but my response isn't harsh or technical enough????

no, your response was deeply lacking in critical thinking and failed to spot the fundamental flaws in both the set-up and the result produced.

I'm not arguing against the benefit of wheels, but am I saying that they grossly overemphasized the gains from it, that's how i got in the thread. You seem to want to say aero wheels are good for aerodynamics, which no one is arguing with you. But you kept mentioning 30W savings or 35W savings when it is nearly impossible for the wheels to produce that level of saving at the speed they are going. So it behooves anyone with a basic knowledge of aerodynamics and some critical thinking skills to ask what are they not disclosing that allows the wheel to be 35W faster at 41kph (or 50W faster at 48kph). The failure to address those, namely wind conditions, how the course is set up, and changes in riding positions throws in enough variables to render any conclusion from the video moot.

harsh has nothing to do with it when there are glaringly obvious oversights that they either failed to address or do not want to address.

I could have done the same test except when the camera is no longer following me, I would be doing the sphinx position (forearms parallel to the ground) while riding the shallow wheels and just a very relaxed position on the hoods while riding the aero wheels. The video will not show these parts, but i'll come back with a conclusion that aerowheels didn't make me faster. Would you buy that conclusion?


Whatever, man.

right, whatever. you want to show that you are so blasé and nonchalant about it, so you know, whatever man, despite actually taking the time to engage

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For anyone else interested, this is what the drag vs yaw (effective wind angle) chart looks like for zipp 808. Zero yaw means wind that is parallel to your direction of travel, while a 10 degree yaw (which does not mean wind is coming at the ~2'o clock position) represent the maximum wind angle people would see in normal conditions.

http://www.aeroweenie.com/assets/img/data/zipp808newvsold.gif

Speed is at 30 mph (all wheel testing at this speed unless otherwise specified). Drag force is in grams, which at 30 mph is 7.3 watts per 50 grams. At 0 degrees, the old 808 saves ~7.3 watts compared to a 30mm zipp 101, and the zipp 101 is a bit more aero than say a set of Kinlin XR300 as the drag curves on those stays pretty much parallel to x-axis. At 41kph, this saving is 7.3 * (41/48.27)^3 = 4.5 watt. The wheel saves you more drag at high yaw situations, so on a blustery day (say 7.5 deg yaw), the 808 saves ~70grams or ~10W vs 101 and probably ~100 grams or ~15W vs something really unaero (assuming it's still ~210 grams at 7.5 deg). The savings are for front wheel only, with the rear providing ~50% the benefit of the front. So the wheelset saving of a 808 vs XR300 on a particularly windy day would be about 22W at 30 mph or 13W at 41kph (speed in the video).

Zipp claims a further saving of 3-4 W for the new 808 vs the old, but neglects to say if this is an average saving across yaw angles or savings at high yaw. For arguments' sake, let's say it's an average, and that the further savings is 7-8 W at high yaw angle (this really is more than what can be reasonably expected), so we have single wheel saving of 18W vs Zipp 101 and 23W vs XR300 at 30 mph, with wheelset savings of 27W and 34W respectively, at 30mph. At 41kph (speed in the video), the savings get trimmed down to 21W for the wheelset, which is about 2/3rd the number of what the video claims, despite giving a very generous estimate of what the new wheel could do and a very generous assumption of wind conditions. 21W (from what can be reasonably expected) and 34W (50% more than what can be reasonably expected) is vastly different, thus making anyone with critical thinking abilities and some sense of aerodynamics doubt just how GCN came up with their results.

This is why i'm highly skeptical of the video. It has nothing to do with me being a luddite (i have 2 sets of deep wheels and 2 SRM and can appreciate watt savings just fine) or any other argument that does not address the aerodynamic facts available and instead rely upon some hand-wavy explanation of "really doesn't"

[spartanKid]

Did they use the same tires in each trial? Same inflation pressures? That could also account for a significant portion of the difference in wattage.

The difference between training clinchers at 100 psi (Gatorskins (http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/road-bike-reviews/continental-gatorskin-2015)) and nicer racing tires (GP4000 (http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/road-bike-reviews/continental-grand-prix-4000s-ii-2014)II) is ~7 watts per wheel at 18 mph.

[echappist]

thanks jim, for being the science nerd cyclist friend i need to have :)

I'm flattered, and you are welcome ;)

we still need to do a tour of the Jersey Hinterlands some time during the winter
puberty and mid life crisis = same thing on a bike forum?

well, discourse seen here is par for the course on bikeforum.net, which incidentally is comprised of many middle-aged riders on their first bikes.

[echappist]

Did they use the same tires in each trial? Same inflation pressures? That could also account for a significant portion of the difference in wattage.

The difference between training clinchers at 100 psi (Gatorskins (http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/road-bike-reviews/continental-gatorskin-2015)) and nicer racing tires (GP4000 (http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/road-bike-reviews/continental-grand-prix-4000s-ii-2014)II) is ~7 watts per wheel at 18 mph.

good point, i didn't even think of that

but hey, why you being to critical of GCN, bro? ;)

[velomonkey]

I'm not arguing against the benefit of wheels, but am I saying that they grossly overemphasized the gains from it, that's how i got in the thread. You seem to want to say aero wheels are good for aerodynamics, which no one is arguing with you. But you kept mentioning 30W savings or 35W savings when it is nearly impossible for the wheels to produce that level of saving at the speed they are going. So it behooves anyone with a basic knowledge of aerodynamics and some critical thinking skills to ask what are they not disclosing that allows the wheel to be 35W faster at 41kph (or 50W faster at 48kph).

blah, Blah, Blah, Blah (you even played the victim card).

First, the 30W to 35W savings that I "kept" mentioning - I only mentioned once not as it relates to wheels, but as it relates to effort and my basis for it was the dang video. He posted his average speed and average wattage. I can only presume it's true - I then went and said that 30 watts is the difference between 20 minute efforts and a tempo effort that one can keep for an hour. That's it. You got a problem with the actual savings of the wattage take it up with them - not me. For you and anyone else who needs this specific of detail: I never claimed 808 wheels gave a rider 30 watts, I am only saying 30 watts is the point at which some athletes can do 20 minute or 1 hour efforts. If I said those wheels ever gave a rider 30 watts I would love, love, love to see that. At this point your whole argument with me is negated.

I say 20mph and you go and get all "speed to wind blah blah" - bro, do you even lift? I'm just laying out a scenario where aero wheels do help - namely a day without much wind - put your nose to the wind on a flat surface and there will be an advantage - how much? Depends on a number of variables.

I say hills - you say "how steep" - at this point I'm done.

So you're basically saying "yea, you're right but it depends on blah, blah, blah, blah."

At this point, I don't even know what you're discussing. Seriously - what are you saying? That everyone should ride 80mm wheels ALL the time in EVERY situation. Or they should NEVER ride 80mm EVER.

Cause unless it's either of those I fail to see where, exactly, we differ.

Feel free to respond: clearly you put a lot of time into this, not that it made any sense to me, but then again, what do I know I'm either full of hormonal pubic testosterone or lacking in it due to mid age.

[echappist]

blah, Blah, Blah, Blah (you even played the victim card).

First, the 30W to 35W savings that I "kept" mentioning - I only mentioned once not as it relates to wheels, but as it relates to effort and my basis for it was the dang video. He posted his average speed and average wattage. I can only presume it's true - I then went and said that 30 watts is the difference between 20 minute efforts and a tempo effort that one can keep for an hour. That's it. You got a problem with the actual savings of the wattage take it up with them - not me. For you and anyone else who needs this specific of detail: I never claimed 808 wheels gave a rider 30 watts, I am only saying 30 watts is the point at which some athletes can do 20 minute or 1 hour efforts. If I said those wheels ever gave a rider 30 watts I would love, love, love to see that. At this point your whole argument with me is negated.

I say 20mph and you go and get all "speed to wind blah blah" - bro, do you even lift? I'm just laying out a scenario where aero wheels do help - namely a day without much wind - put your nose to the wind on a flat surface and there will be an advantage - how much? Depends on a number of variables.

I say hills - you say "how steep" - at this point I'm done.

So you're basically saying "yea, you're right but it depends on blah, blah, blah, blah."

At this point, I don't even know what you're discussing. Seriously - what are you saying? That everyone should ride 80mm wheels ALL the time in EVERY situation. Or they should NEVER ride 80mm EVER.

Cause unless it's either of those I fail to see where, exactly, we differ.

Feel free to respond: clearly you put a lot of time into this, not that it made any sense to me, but then again, what do I know I'm either full of hormonal pubic testosterone or lacking in it due to mid age.

Funny, the points of contentions are characterized as blah blah blah by you. So yeah, otherwise there isn't much disagreement, except the main points you debased as "blah blah blah"

This is what you originally wrote:

So basically what did GCN did was took zipp 808 wheels and used them in their best setting possible - flat roads to show their biggest effect - i.e., look I could only hold this speed for 20 minutes with regular wheels but with 808s it was a lot longer. Really no surprise.

You'd think "wow, 35 free watts and like 3 mph more - for free, I should get these wheels. Why isn't everyone riding them."

One word: hills.


So above you say you didn't claim 808 gave a rider 30 watts, yet in your first post you say it allows one to go a lot longer, which necessarily means it saves a lot of energy. There's nothing above indicating that you don't agree with the conclusion drawn from the poorly-conducted aero test.

[velomonkey]

So above you say you didn't claim 808 gave a rider 30 watts, yet in your first post you say it allows one to go a lot longer, which necessarily means it saves a lot of energy. There's nothing above indicating that you don't agree with the conclusion drawn from the poorly-conducted aero test.

Now you're just digging (so all my summaries into blah blah blah were proven to be just that, noise - but good for you, you got your count post up).

Again, "no surprise" if one effort is 379 watts for 20 minutes and the other is 344 watts for 51 minutes. How, possibly, is that a complete and total endorsement of the 808 wheels being the sole factor for the savings in wattage? Let me answer for you: it's not an endorsement, again, it's claim of no surprise in effort and how long each effort can last.

My biggest reason or agreeing or not agreeing with them is that it's not a real world test, it's a best case scenario. Honestly if I only ever rode flat roads I might get the 808s, or Mavic 80s or Bora 80s - but I don't only ride flat roads. Maybe it was the wheels, maybe it was wind, maybe it was position, maybe it was the grit of the paper on the saddle and his taint got all torn up, maybe he lied (I doubt it, but possible). I dunno, I don't care I aint gonna buy the wheels and I said why and yet somehow you can extrapolate that I endorsed them???????

Thanks for the posts, you gave me something to do while I'm sick and without you and your graphs we never would have made it to 4 pages. Shall we go for 5?

[redir]

Did they use the same tires in each trial? Same inflation pressures? That could also account for a significant portion of the difference in wattage.

The difference between training clinchers at 100 psi (Gatorskins (http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/road-bike-reviews/continental-gatorskin-2015)) and nicer racing tires (GP4000 (http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/road-bike-reviews/continental-grand-prix-4000s-ii-2014)II) is ~7 watts per wheel at 18 mph.

They did use the same cassette and I found that amusing :D

[Mark McM]

blah, blah, blah, blah

Drag depends on the properties the size, shape, and speed of the object - or to phrase it another way - it doesn't really kick in till around 20mph.

Bro, put some wheels on your bike and go for a ride and ease off. Let me get this straight - you didn't like video, but my response isn't harsh or technical enough????

Whatever, man.

You still haven't defined what you mean by aero "kicking in". Do you mean speed increase (at a given power)? Time savings?

This posting on the Flo Wheels web site shows how speed and time are affected by wheel aerodynamics (http://flocycling.blogspot.com/2012/11/flo-cycling-cycling-wheel-aerodynamics.html). As can be seen in the table at the end of the post, for a given power output, speed is increased with aero wheels at any power output/nominal speed. And more importantly, the slower you go, the greater the time savings with aero wheels. This means that if you nominally ride at 15 mph, you actually save more time with aero wheels than you would if you nominally ride at 25 mph. From this perspective, your claim that aero wheels don't "kick in" until 20 mph is actually totally backward.

[velomonkey]

You still haven't defined what you mean by aero "kicking in". Do you mean speed increase (at a given power)? Time savings?


I thought we let this die, guess not. So how can I define aero kicking in? What is real? How do you define 'real'? If you're talking about what you can feel, what you can smell, what you can taste and see, then 'real' is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain.

Look man, I said I felt the effect of aero wheels more at 20mph than at less. Deal with it, OK.

That work?

[gasman]

I think we've gone long enough on this subject and it isn't productive to continue.