Home General Training Discussions

Non Scientific and Accidental Bike/Gear Test's

Like the title says it was very non scientific ,  but I thought worthy of mentioning due to the data I did get out of it.  I set out yesterday to do a 4.5hr bike ride on a 7 mile out an back road with one 90 degree bend I have trained on for the last 4 weeks.  Each day is different with winds, but the speeds tend to even out with the out and back and I have many other days/data training on this road. I know my FTP speeds, my HIM speeds, my IM speeds, and my dogging it training speeds on this road.  The only change I was making, was to use my race wheels FLO 60/Disc with race tires and latex tubes vs. my training wheels FLO 30/30 with gatorskins and butyl tubes.  

Test #1  The Planned but turned Unscientific One

Here is where it gets real un scientific.  Got all set to go and the Garmin died (I had charged it but left it on).  Since I know the exact distance of each leg I simply rode by feel and with a watch.  5 out and backs = 69.3 miles in 3:14:30 @ 21.4mph....  vs. the last 2 weeks on the same road with a 83mile and 73 mile ride averaging 20.7 and 20.9 mph with the other wheels... Besides the obvious lack of power and the change in wheel set up all other things were as equal as I could get them.

21.4mph with race wheels vs.  20.7-20.9mph with training wheels (no power comps)

My takeaway -  Even without power comps on the ride I believe Race wheels with race tires and latex tubes are worth at least 1/2 mph or more faster vs. smaller training wheels with butyl tubes and gatorskins.  This may seem obvious but since I always train with my race wheels which always have the tires/tubes from races on them ,its nice to finally observe it for myself.  Which kinda brings me to my next test of the day.

Test# 2  The  Unplanned Accidental Test

I was training with Heather and after my above 5 laps I was going to give her , her watch back and use her Garmin so she could do a brick run and I could ride 2 more loops.  She says why don't you just use my bike?  Hmmm OK.  Her bike is a Trek Speed Concept with Hed 40/60 wheels with race rubber/tube set up.  PM same as mine.  I have only ridden this bike 1-2 miles prior and the fit is close enough but far from perfect.  If I were to use this bike for longer than the intended 27.7 mile ride I would raise the seat 1/2", extend the reach 1", bring in the elbow cups 2", and lower the stack 1" ,  all which would probably improve the aero positioning for my fit.  Bottomline I rode 27.7 miles in 1:17:52 @ 159AP/160NP @ 21.4mph...

My bike Ventum w/ 60/Disc no power 21.4mph  vs.  Heather's bike 40/60  non optimal fit (I even had 2  round bottles on the frame) 21.4mph @159AP/160NP

My Take Away - To be perfectly fair I would have to guess that I rode Heathers bike a couple watts higher than I was riding my bike but its still quite amazing to me the speeds were exactly the same.  I have been to a wind tunnel, I have been to the Aerodrome, I have seen the cda numbers change via testing in these environments.... But the real world is quite different... On my FELT I changed the stem quite drastically due to test results and rode it for one year I never saw faster race times, and then I changed it back and never saw slower race times.... My new Ventum is NOT netting me faster times than my FELT was even though it supposedly tested 11watts faster than my exact bike, via Jim at ERO tested... Lemme tell you if it was 11 watts faster, a guy with my baby FTP would see it , that would be huge for me and I am just not seeing it... Then to be able to jump on Heather's non optimal fit , set up bike and ride exactly the same?

1. Its all about the MOTOR

2. FIT -  staying AERO - but small changes are almost imperceptible 

3. Wheels, Tires, Tubes really matter

4. Frame almost doesn't matter at all.

Just my very non-scientific thoughts coming from the real world.

 

Comments

  • Great post.

    My non-scientific response is that you have the priorities in the right order below with number 1 the most important being its all about the motor, and number two staying aero with an efficient fit.

    I see lots of peeps across the triathlon spectrum dropping big $$$ when they could easily overcome those micro improvements with a better engine and more efficient, disciplined fit/position.  This coming from a guy you rode a Light Speed Sabre for 12 years before upgrading.....and hasn't turned a better bike time since.....

    Keep leading......

    SS

     

  • Great stuff Tim. I think I sometimes prefer the non scientific, real world data vs all the other tested data that we buy in to. Especially for someone like me who didn't make the super-bike purchase image Did you use the same helmet for your tests? Same as what you race with, and how high on your chart would you stack this in terms of "free speed"? Also, which tires do you run for racing?
  • The engine is clearly the biggest factor, but the lack of perceptible difference between frames is quite interesting. So all those wind tunnel data points are just marketing fodder? Andrew Starykowicz put up some killer bike times on a frame that supposedly had much higher drag at every yaw angle tested.

    I'll add a corollary that frames matter between standard and aero - my bike times improved dramatically after upgrading from a standard-geometry frame to the IA10 - but I agree with your order of importance. I also think the helmet is part of the equation, but falls into the fit equation. I've seen some cool-looking helmets what just don't work with some people's bike positions.
  • Great post and that makes me wonder at which frequency we should re do the bike fit.

    I have the same bike fit since 2013 and since IMAZ, I've been wondering if that's something I should look at it this year.

    Also I wonder how the latex tubes which are inside the tires and have no external contact might have an impact ??

    Love those tir-geeks posts image
  • Regarding #4, Frame almost doesn't matter at all, I offer my experience riding the same frame for the past 17 year, a double diamond round tube titanium originally from Quinitana Roo. I seem to have done OK on it. I've kept it primarily because it saves me $1000 a year in airline fees, as well as $XXXX.XX I don't spend on a new frame.

    Now, the only things that are still the same as when I bought it April, 2000 are: seat tube, basebar ("bull horns") and the rear triangle. EVERYTHING else I've added/changed trying to improve (actually: slow down as little as possible). Zipp 404 wheels and an aero helmet seemed to have made the most difference, about ten years ago. Di2 and an ISM Attack saddle made my riding more comfortable. Periodic fits have convinced me that getting a new base bar (sleeker, lighter) might look cool, but would be problematic for my position.

    As to position, after getting a good fit (something one needs to spend $$$ and time on), the one thing which makes the most difference is where I put my head: getting my jaw at the level of my shoulders matters more than my exposed wires in front, for example.

    All the same, I am seriously thinking about a new bike next year, primarily to join the 700c world, as getting good stuff for my 650 is hopeless now. I'm getting an unexpected windfall from my former medical group. I'd like to spend 20% of it on getting high speed internet the last quarter mile into our house, and a 21st century time trial bike.

  • SS- Confirmed! .... This is the most likely scenario of an athlete that has been at this at least 3 years where all the low hanging fruit is picked.... Buying a new bike just isnt going to give you a windfall of time savings but they sure are cool.

    Brad- Yep same helmet my Rudy57. I tested my old Rudy Wingspan agains the P09 and a few others at the velodrome and Rudy tested the fastest for me which is very unusual. Which is another good point, when I switched to the untested Rudy57 again there was no noticeable differences. FWIW I really liked the P09 fit and feel and will consider that and or the Aerohead as my next purchase as long as I like the fit/feel and big one for me the vision. Hard to rate but again they are measurable in tests but how does it really relate to the real world on the road? Current tires are Continental TT's , been using Turbo Cotton's and Vittoria Corsa G's as well... I do not care for the Continental 4000s that everyone loves... I have had way too many sidewall failures on those.

    Paul - Well it doesn't take a genius to figure out that most of this is hype. If I added up all the watts I have saved from all my purchases my bike would practically ride itself. Funny you mention yaw , in my testing on the out and back there is a 90 degree turn , there is quite a bit of large gravel over this portion of the road, due to the lack of traffic this is normally not a factor and I can take it wide/aero/fast , but yesterday there was a huge cross wind thru here and I think for the first time ever I was actually a bit scared with my disc on a flat windy course when I got hit in those corners.

    Francis- "they say" latex tubes are worth a couple watts per tire... They have been tested extensively by many so I do believe it... Even though I can't personally measure it, I can say that I really like the way they feel... Maybe its in my head but I swear I can feel them!

    Al- Look no further than SS for comps since his old bike looked like yours. Robin had one of them old beasts too. Maybe he can chime in with a comp? But you sure will enjoy a nice new bike ! FIT that is good enough to stay in the AERO position is what matters the most. And yeah exposed wires/brakes etc? Again my old FELT has those.
  • My understanding is that latex tubes are more flexible and absorb all the little micro bumps better. Butyl is stiffer and bounces "slightly" more.
  • The rider is 70% of all drag and the law of diminishing marginal returns is fully at play on bike frames (race wheels too). I used my Jan 2010 Giant Advanced Trinity (now converted to 1x10 drive) at Miami Man fully believing that no bike was faster. With the FD and small chainring gone, what was already fast is marginally faster and I don't need another bike. That said, I'm may upgrade my BMC TM01 to the new model, not because I believe it is any faster, but because the way the new front end removes from the frame leaving all cables behind is sheer genius; and will make it much easier to pack.
Sign In or Register to comment.