Aerodynamics are only important if you wish to, and are able to, sustain speeds of >40km/h for long periods, and have already perfected your riding position. I think that few cyclists are in this category. Comfort and fit reign supreme.dm69 said:
Cervelo Team Soloist
- Thread starter Dave80
- Start date
What about cycling at 20k/h with a 15 k/h headwind? Plenty of that and more in Perth.
I was surprised today to see that at least one of the Team CSC fellers in the TDU is on the Soloist Team. I thought by now they'd all be on the carbon models. Must be a good thang...
Also, Stuie's on the Soloist Carbon not the SLC-SL. If the Soloist Carbon's already at the UCI weight limit there's no point going to the SLC-SL at 200g lighter... unless you want to add some ballast beneath the BB to change the centre of gravity. Anyone tried this?
Matt Goss - http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2007/jan07/tdu07/index.php?id=/photos/2007/jan07/tdu07/tdu071/5
Stuie - http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2007/jan07/tdu07/index.php?id=/photos/2007/jan07/tdu07/tdu072/DSC_5848
I have to say this is a great thread and this is exactly the bike (Soloist TEAM) that I am looking at.
But...there is always a but...I am now quite tempted by the Look 555 which is available for $2500 with a 105 group.
I need to get a bike really soon as I've just sold mine and am getting withdrawls already!!!
Thanks
But...there is always a but...I am now quite tempted by the Look 555 which is available for $2500 with a 105 group.
I need to get a bike really soon as I've just sold mine and am getting withdrawls already!!!
Thanks
Sorry, I hadn't seen this question.azdroptop said:
Drag starts as soon as any airflow begins over the bike/rider unit (unless it's from behind, in which case it is thrust). I'm no engineer, but I believe that drag has an effect that is exponential with the airflow. Realistically, this means that aerodynamic gains are minimal until the backward airflow gets to 35-40km/h. The rider's position is always the most important, by far. I understand that wheels are more important than frame. What this means is that a Cervelo-type frame is only meaningfully advantageous once you can hold >35-40km/h on the flat , have perfected your aero position and already have deep section rims. And even then it would only be a handful of seconds over 40km.
I have 2 years of workout data that proves aerodynamics are important at even 17 mph speeds - the speeds I work out on when I do my 83 to 87% MHR fat burning workouts. I have 4 bikes with precisely calibrated Polar power Meters --
2002 Giant TCR Aero 2 R540 wheels (aero bike frame)
2004 Cervelo Soloist Team HED 3 wheels (aero bike frame)
2005 Kestrel Talon Campy Eurus Wheels (aero bike frame)
2006 Raleigh Prestige Ritchey Protocol wheels (round tube bike frame)
I measure the wind speed of my workouts on Lake Shore Drive with a Kestrel 4000 anemometer.
Well, according to my training data, my Cervelo with HED 3s gives the fastest avg speed per avg watt outputs. My Kestrel is second, my TCR old data not used since I don't like training on it anymore. Raleigh Prestige - last place.
Heres some data --
Cervelo HED 3 - avg speed 18.4 mph 13.9 miles 3-10mph N wind gusts 80F 167 W avg (my weight 142 lbs) hands on hoods
Cervelo HED 3 - avg speed 18.9 mph 13.9 miles 3-10mph N wind gusts 80F 173 W avg (my weight 142 lbs) hands on hoods
Kestrel Talon Eurus - avg speed 17.2 mph 27.9 miles Steady 5 mph S wind gusts 80F 86% H 167 W avg 172 W avg (my weight 143.6 lbs) hands on top
Kestrel Talon Eurus - avg speed 17.6 mph 27.8 miles 1.6 to 7 mph N wind gusts 70F 167 W avg 163 W avg (my weight 144.4 lbs) hands on top or hoods
2006 Raleigh Prestige - avg speed 17.5 mph 27.9 miles 2.4 to 5.5 mph NW wind 78F 171 W avg (my weight 143.8 lbs) hands on hoods
This is all done on the same bike path - Lake Shore Drive. 13.9 miles = 2 laps, 27.8 miles = 4 laps. Laps go into wind one way and reverse the other lap.
Well, my data may be unscientific, but it seems to prove an AL Soloist with HED 3s proves beneficial at 18 mph speeds too.
Wait until I do several workouts on my CF Soloist with Zipp 404 and an ergomo! But my ergomo seems to give different numbers from the Polar because it's upstream of the chain. So maybe I can't compare it to the Polar bikes.
2002 Giant TCR Aero 2 R540 wheels (aero bike frame)
2004 Cervelo Soloist Team HED 3 wheels (aero bike frame)
2005 Kestrel Talon Campy Eurus Wheels (aero bike frame)
2006 Raleigh Prestige Ritchey Protocol wheels (round tube bike frame)
I measure the wind speed of my workouts on Lake Shore Drive with a Kestrel 4000 anemometer.
Well, according to my training data, my Cervelo with HED 3s gives the fastest avg speed per avg watt outputs. My Kestrel is second, my TCR old data not used since I don't like training on it anymore. Raleigh Prestige - last place.
Heres some data --
Cervelo HED 3 - avg speed 18.4 mph 13.9 miles 3-10mph N wind gusts 80F 167 W avg (my weight 142 lbs) hands on hoods
Cervelo HED 3 - avg speed 18.9 mph 13.9 miles 3-10mph N wind gusts 80F 173 W avg (my weight 142 lbs) hands on hoods
Kestrel Talon Eurus - avg speed 17.2 mph 27.9 miles Steady 5 mph S wind gusts 80F 86% H 167 W avg 172 W avg (my weight 143.6 lbs) hands on top
Kestrel Talon Eurus - avg speed 17.6 mph 27.8 miles 1.6 to 7 mph N wind gusts 70F 167 W avg 163 W avg (my weight 144.4 lbs) hands on top or hoods
2006 Raleigh Prestige - avg speed 17.5 mph 27.9 miles 2.4 to 5.5 mph NW wind 78F 171 W avg (my weight 143.8 lbs) hands on hoods
This is all done on the same bike path - Lake Shore Drive. 13.9 miles = 2 laps, 27.8 miles = 4 laps. Laps go into wind one way and reverse the other lap.
Well, my data may be unscientific, but it seems to prove an AL Soloist with HED 3s proves beneficial at 18 mph speeds too.
Wait until I do several workouts on my CF Soloist with Zipp 404 and an ergomo! But my ergomo seems to give different numbers from the Polar because it's upstream of the chain. So maybe I can't compare it to the Polar bikes.
I guess to be more scientific I should use the same wheels and tires for all my bikes but what a hassle!
My ergomo CF Soloist numbers don't seem to compare, because it's a different powermeter?
CF Soloist Campy Eurus - 16.6 avg mph 42.3 miles (6 laps) 1.8 to 8.9 mph N NE E Winds 69.4 - 75F 164 W avg (my weight 145.8 lbs)
My ergomo CF Soloist numbers don't seem to compare, because it's a different powermeter?
CF Soloist Campy Eurus - 16.6 avg mph 42.3 miles (6 laps) 1.8 to 8.9 mph N NE E Winds 69.4 - 75F 164 W avg (my weight 145.8 lbs)
There are some good presentations of the aero savings and aero vs. weight issues on the Cervelo web site.artemidorus said:
http://www.cervelo.com/content.aspx?m=Engineering&i=WhitePapers#3
According to the "Aero savings" presentation the savings can be significant even for the slower riders.
Of course it is part of their marketing, I understand that. But I suppose it does not change the facts illustrated in the presentation.sogood said:Heavens, that's as unobjective as you can get. What else would Cervelo be telling its potential customer base?
Their definition of "slow" riders is not exactly slow at 30kph, a speed that's widely recognized where air resistance becomes significant. Further, there's no differentiation b/n aero effect from rider position vs Cervelo's "aero" frame advantage. In other words, it's just a marketing spill that plays with numbers.xtrainer said:
Its and excellent bike and I would love to have one, but don't get too hung up about the aero, as most of the air resistance is against the rider, so by improving your riding postion, which for many will require increased flexibility, you can make significant aero advantages on your existing bike. Like many aspects of cycling, its taking care of the nut behind the handlebars that will give you your best results.xtrainer said:
I'd say it would be a more-than-reasonable time trial frame. According to these numbers taken from a Tour Magazine article and put on this thread, a Cervelo TT frame was 17 watts more aerodynamically efficient that a 'normal' bike with the same stuff on it.El Loto said:
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=261523
I'd say a Soloist is more aero than the average 'normal' frame, so, on the Soloist, you might be at about a 12 to 14 watt disadvantage over a $4000 Cervelo P3, at or around 45 kph.
According to the Kreuzotter calculator, being 13 watts less efficient at 45 kph would slow you down by about 0.5 kph.
http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
El Loto said:
Yis. Used it in at least 6 TT's. Mavic K weels, Carbon Cervelo seatpost in Forward position with clip ons. Very comfortable and only took a few adjustments to feel "right" on the bike. The angles aren't completely comparable to a true TT bike, but with the aero frame, internal cables and adjustable seat post it's a great alternative. I'm in much better shape this year but improved my time to under an hour for a 40 K TT.
Similar threads
